Salary Cap: Salary Cap & Roster Building | Yeah, I got nuthin' ....

[PensandCaps]

If Reaves is blocking Sprong's chance, Sprong is a ****ing bust.

Sprong should be top 6 or WB/S. The bottom 6 here would be completely detrimental to his development.

But it doesn't just work like that. If he is in the top6 then someone is being pushed down, then it will push Reaves out the lineup. Which is why they probably won't give Sprong a chance.

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

Speaking of simple.....

Josh Archibald had 1 good NHL game.

In his other 14 NHl games he has 1 point.

Maybe we should pump the breaks on Josh a bit.

Christ he only paces 28 points per 82 games in the AHL.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Sheary - Kessel - Hornqvist - Reaves.

Are you playing Sprong above any of those three?

The Penguins can easily keep Sheary on LW and run with:

Guentzel-Crosby-Sprong
Rust-Malkin-Kessel
Sheary-4C-Hornqvist
Hagelin-Rowney-Reaves

They can also move a winger for a center, plus it's entirely possible a winger gets hurt.

 

[wej20]

If Reaves is blocking Sprong's chance, Sprong is a ****ing bust.

Sprong should be top 6 or WB/S. The bottom 6 here would be completely detrimental to his development.

I'm not a huge fan of the Reaves deal but he definitely wont be blocking Sprong. Sprong, ZAR and Johnson shouldn't be playing long term on 4th lines.

 

[FreeBobbyFarnham]

Do define metrics, por favor.

Are we talking square footage? Cost-per-click?

Good one. Google is your friend.

 

[Gurglesons]

The Penguins can easily keep Sheary on LW and run with:

Guentzel-Crosby-Sprong
Rust-Malkin-Kessel
Sheary-4C-Hornqvist
Hagelin-Rowney-Reaves

I honestly doubt the line-up looks like this at any point this season. Rust just looks better on the right side.

 

[HandshakeLine]

Sheary - Kessel - Hornqvist - Reaves.

Are you playing Sprong above any of those three?

No, because I'm not assuming a rookie is going to beat out anyone in the top 6 his first year in the pro leagues. He'll start the season in WB/S, getting top line minutes and learning there and if he starts tearing up the AHL, he'll get a call up should one of our other Top 6 RWs get injured.

IF Sprong is the real deal holy-**** Franchise Player that you're touting him as, Reaves is still a complete nothingburger because Sprong is not going to be competing with Reaves or Sundqvist or Kuhnhackl or Archibald for anything. He'll be forcing out Hornqvist or Kessel or Sheary.

 

[PensandCaps]

Exactly. Sprong is completely irrelevant in this discussion.

Something else I don't understand here, are people forgetting the Penguins also traded out Sundqvist in this deal, who had to be kept in the NHL due to his waiver status? People are saying bringing in Reaves meant that Archibald may be lost to waivers, but in reality, Archibald might be lost to waivers with or without that trade.



What assets did you waste here? 20 picks in a mediocre draft and a 4C potential center prospect?

Yep. Sundqvist was improving and falling back 20 spots just to do it isn't very smart either. Sundqvist would be a good option for 4C right now. Just to see what he has.

 

[SCPens]

Yep. Where does Reaves fit?

G-Sid-Hornqvist
Rust-Malkin-Kessel
Sheary-xxx-Sprong
Hags-xxx-Wilson

So if Sprong breaks out, you're sitting Reaves anyway and you just wasted assets for a guy in the press box. Which is why they probably won't give Sprong a chance. Hell if Sprong breaks out, archy and Kuhn along with Reaves are redundant anyway.

OR.....when a prospect shows well enough to make the move up to the big club it maaaaaaay give Rutherford more options to make a move or more. Hmmmm that's weird....logic.

 

[FreeBobbyFarnham]

Josh Archibald had 1 good NHL game.

In his other 14 NHl games he has 1 point.

Maybe we should pump the breaks on Josh a bit.

Christ he only paces 28 points per 82 games in the AHL.

Yeah that's just not true

 

[Empoleon8771]

I honestly doubt the line-up looks like this at any point this season. Rust just looks better on the right side.

Rust has looked no different to me on LW vs RW. Also, you not seeing the Penguins making that the lineup is irrelevant from the question you asked.

Yep. Sundqvist was improving and falling back 20 spots just to do it isn't very smart either. Sundqvist would be a good option for 4C right now. Just to see what he has.

Sundqvist is no better than any of Rowney, McKegg, Johnson or Blueger. He's a nothing piece. If you kept Sundqvist, you still very well could have to waive Archibald if you keep 8 D on the roster.

 

[PensandCaps]

No, because I'm not assuming a rookie is going to beat out anyone in the top 6 his first year in the pro leagues. He'll start the season in WB/S, getting top line minutes and learning there and if he starts tearing up the AHL, he'll get a call up should one of our other Top 6 RWs get injured.

IF Sprong is the real deal holy-**** Franchise Player that you're touting him as, Reaves is still a complete nothingburger because Sprong is not going to be competing with Reaves or Sundqvist or Kuhnhackl or Archibald for anything. He'll be forcing out Hornqvist or Kessel or Sheary.

So they're gonna sit Kessel,Sheary or Hornqvist over Reaves?

 

[Gurglesons]

No, because I'm not assuming a rookie is going to beat out anyone in the top 6 his first year in the pro leagues. He'll start the season in WB/S, getting top line minutes and learning there and if he starts tearing up the AHL, he'll get a call up should one of our other Top 6 RWs get injured.

IF Sprong is the real deal holy-**** Franchise Player that you're touting him as, Reaves is still a complete nothingburger because Sprong is not going to be competing with Reaves or Sundqvist or Kuhnhackl or Archibald for anything. He'll be forcing out Hornqvist or Kessel or Sheary.

I'm not touting Sprong as anything LOL.

I'm just saying if any of our RW prospects or fringe players impress they are pushed out of the line-up because of Reaves.

We had four capable NHL RWers and we made a move for another one. It is redundancy.

 

[FreeBobbyFarnham]

Yep. Sundqvist was improving and falling back 20 spots just to do it isn't very smart either. Sundqvist would be a good option for 4C right now. Just to see what he has.

I thought Sundqvist was garbage but he's got as much value as Reaves.

 

[PensandCaps]

Yeah that's just not true

Right he's looked fine in every game. I hadn't watch one game of his and think to my self he was costing us something on the ice. In fact, he was a spark plug in the finals. He's one of those players that can't really have that many bad games. Like Rust he is helping you even when he is not scoring.

 

[HandshakeLine]

Good one. Google is your friend.

No, no. I insist, oh ironically named poster. You tell me exactly what you're arguing about, because there's a lot of things that fall into metrics that contradict your claim.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Most of the arguments in here against Reaves are just nonsense, to be honest. Archibald has nothing to do with this, he was a threat to be waived with or without the trade. Sprong has nothing to do with this, bringing in a 4th line winger has no impact on when Sprong starts playing in the Penguins top-6. They didn't give up anything of serious value, the difference in picks between 31 and 51 isn't significant and Sundqvist was a waiver eligible forward who had 4 points in 28 career games. Reaves doesn't have a significant cap hit, it's less than league minimum above what guys like Archibald or Kuhnhackl make.

I can understand these complaints if the Penguins gave up solely picks for Reaves if he made $2 million and had a younger version of Reaves already on their team, but none of those 3 are true.

 

[PensandCaps]

Rust has looked no different to me on LW vs RW. Also, you not seeing the Penguins making that the lineup is irrelevant from the question you asked.



Sundqvist is no better than any of Rowney, McKegg, Johnson or Blueger. He's a nothing piece. If you kept Sundqvist, you still very well could have to waive Archibald if you keep 8 D on the roster.

Or just waive Rowney. IDK. Sundqvist is still young while Rowney is older and not really any better.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

It is simple. Also Reaves had the worst metrics on the Blues. But he's got enjoyable hits.

Reaves - 46.1 CF%, 74% DZone%
Kuhnhackl - 45.9 CF%, 70% DZone%
Archibald - 45.1 CF%, 50% DZone%

I mean, if you're going to talk about metrics to downplay Reaves, make sure the guys you're comparing him to have superior numbers first.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Or just waive Rowney. IDK. Sundqvist is still young while Rowney is older and not really any better.

Why would you waive Rowney to keep Sundqvist? And why does waiving Rowney mean nothing now? Why is it okay to lose Rowney for nothing but not okay to lose Archibald for nothing?

 

[HandshakeLine]

I'm not touting Sprong as anything LOL.

I'm just saying if any of our RW prospects or fringe players impress they are pushed out of the line-up because of Reaves.

We had four capable NHL RWers and we made a move for another one. It is redundancy.

That's still completely illogical. The only prospects that Reaves is pushing out of the lineup are bottom 6ers, and even then only really the 4th line. Reaves is not blocking anyone's development EXCEPT for players that have a ceiling of 4th liner and I have no idea why you'd think he'd inhibit Sprong's development.

Guentzel didn't work his way up from the 4th line. He came in and grabbed top 9 time because that's the kind of player he is and the coaching staff gets that.

 

[Allie Kitsune]

Most of the arguments in here against Reaves are just nonsense, to be honest. Archibald has nothing to do with this, he was a threat to be waived with or without the trade. Sprong has nothing to do with this, bringing in a 4th line winger has no impact on when Sprong starts playing in the Penguins top-6. They didn't give up anything of serious value, the difference in picks between 31 and 51 isn't significant and Sundqvist was a waiver eligible forward who had 4 points in 28 career games. Reaves doesn't have a significant cap hit, it's less than league minimum above what guys like Archibald or Kuhnhackl make.

But if we'd have drafted Kostin, not only would he win us 4 (more) consecutive cups, but also cure cancer and bring about peace in the Middle East!

 

[PensandCaps]

Most of the arguments in here against Reaves are just nonsense, to be honest. Archibald has nothing to do with this, he was a threat to be waived with or without the trade. Sprong has nothing to do with this, bringing in a 4th line winger has no impact on when Sprong starts playing in the Penguins top-6. They didn't give up anything of serious value, the difference in picks between 31 and 51 isn't significant and Sundqvist was a waiver eligible forward who had 4 points in 28 career games. Reaves doesn't have a significant cap hit, it's less than league minimum above what guys like Archibald or Kuhnhackl make.

I can understand these complaints if the Penguins gave up solely picks for Reaves if he made $2 million and had a younger version of Reaves already on their team, but none of those 3 are true.

Sprong does have something to do with this. Again the team might be hesitant to give Sprong a chance , if he does well, it pushes Reaves out the lineup and it makes their trade they made look bad. So they may just keep Sprong down in the AHL to keep Reaves in the lineup, so they can justify the trade.

 

[FreeBobbyFarnham]

No, no. I insist, oh ironically named poster. You tell me exactly what you're arguing about, because there's a lot of things that fall into metrics that contradict your claim.

His zone starts, corsi and fenwick are all weak. Please contradict my claims because all the metrics are the same on every website.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Sprong does have something to do with this. Again the team might be hesitant to give Sprong a chance , if he does well, it pushes Reaves out the lineup and it makes their trade they made look bad. So they may just keep Sprong down in the AHL to keep Reaves in the lineup, so they can justify the trade.

How would the trade look bad if Sprong is good enough to push Reaves out of the lineup? That's just nonsense, your entire theory is just nonsense. Do you really think the Penguins would keep a player like Sprong in the AHL just to make themselves look better by playing Reaves? Seriously?

Know what's a lot more likely? The Penguins trade one of Wilson or Hagelin for either picks or help on another area of the roster, Sprong immediately jumps into the top-6 and nothing else changes.