Salary Cap: The Endless Speculation Edition

[The Old Master]

I feel like that group really fits how the Penguins need to play and 3 of those 4 guys are young with upside. You're not going to have them improve by not playing them, because "you could have someone better". I'm all for upgrading on JJ with someone like Dillon, but wanting to upgrade on a good group just because you want better is just greed.

You need to balance now with the future IMO. Just because you can upgrade on one of Marino, Pettersson or Riikola doesn't mean you should.

ok i'm greedy. the defense is our weakest part on this team and we should always be looking to get better. even if its only to add a top end prospect for the future. as of now we are lacking one.

 

[Empoleon8771]

ok i'm greedy. the defense is our weakest part on this team and we should always be looking to get better. even if its only to add a top end prospect for the future. as of now we are lacking one.

The Penguins have Dumoulin, Letang, Pettersson and Marino who look like top-4 D and are cost controlled long-term. They also have Addison, POJ, Almari and a couple of long-shot prospects (Phillips, Rielly, ect). I really don't see a need for a "top end D prospect" unless you plan on Letang retiring/leaving in the next 3 years.

 

[Peat]

I feel like that group really fits how the Penguins need to play and 3 of those 4 guys are young with upside. You're not going to have them improve by not playing them, because "you could have someone better". I'm all for upgrading on JJ with someone like Dillon, but wanting to upgrade on a good group just because you want better is just greed.

And what's wrong with greed, if its getting the right players?

This isn't just the defence, it seems more of a philosophical thing for you - why have Galchenyuk scoring 40 if McCann/Kahun can score 35? Why put a big price tag on Murray to get .919 if Markstrom can get .915 for cheaper? Why have possible better RD when you can have Marino and Riikola? I could get it if you were "I want to cheap out on one area of the team so I can be very strong elsewhere", but you seem happy to go with the lesser cheaper option*everywhere. That seems pretty unusual to me and I'm curious as to why you're seeing it this way.

The big connection I see behind the strands seems to be - and I say seem because I may be getting this wrong and don't want to put words in your mouth - "if we put a lot of faith in these young players, we could see big results in a year or two". Are you not worried about the window closing before the results come in? Or things going wrong, as things will? The team is very strong right now, but the core is at the age point where sudden crippling declines are possible. Or do you think the team's strong enough to overcome this?

Genuine curiousity. 90% of this thread* is people looking for that one killer acquisition to hopefully put us over the top. You seem to be mostly resisting that in favour of sticking what we've got. It seems to be a pretty big difference in terms of viewing the picture here.



*90% of that not talking about next summers contracts at least.

 

[The Old Master]

The Penguins have Dumoulin, Letang, Pettersson and Marino who look like top-4 D and are cost controlled long-term. They also have Addison, POJ, Almari and a couple of long-shot prospects (Phillips, Rielly, ect). I really don't see a need for a "top end D prospect" unless you plan on Letang retiring/leaving in the next 3 years.

i wouldn't include dum's and pett's in that. although they can serve as complementary players in that roll. as for tanger, his health scares me. .... we do have a few prospects but non are what i would call a top end prospect. not that they couldn't become one.

 

[HandshakeLine]

The Penguins have Dumoulin, Letang, Pettersson and Marino who look like top-4 D and are cost controlled long-term. They also have Addison, POJ, Almari and a couple of long-shot prospects (Phillips, Rielly, ect). I really don't see a need for a "top end D prospect" unless you plan on Letang retiring/leaving in the next 3 years.

Yeah, I wouldn't trade specifically for a top pairing D prospect. However, having a decent crop of top 4 blueliners and also our prospects, means that we can trade from a position of strength instead of need. So, if someone's offering, I wouldn't say no per se, especially since they take a while to develop.

 

[Empoleon8771]

And what's wrong with greed, if its getting the right players?

This isn't just the defence, it seems more of a philosophical thing for you - why have Galchenyuk scoring 40 if McCann/Kahun can score 35? Why put a big price tag on Murray to get .919 if Markstrom can get .915 for cheaper? Why have possible better RD when you can have Marino and Riikola? I could get it if you were "I want to cheap out on one area of the team so I can be very strong elsewhere", but you seem happy to go with the lesser cheaper option*everywhere. That seems pretty unusual to me and I'm curious as to why you're seeing it this way.

The big connection I see behind the strands seems to be - and I say seem because I may be getting this wrong and don't want to put words in your mouth - "if we put a lot of faith in these young players, we could see big results in a year or two". Are you not worried about the window closing before the results come in? Or things going wrong, as things will? The team is very strong right now, but the core is at the age point where sudden crippling declines are possible. Or do you think the team's strong enough to overcome this?

Genuine curiousity. 90% of this thread* is people looking for that one killer acquisition to hopefully put us over the top. You seem to be mostly resisting that in favour of sticking what we've got. It seems to be a pretty big difference in terms of viewing the picture here.



*90% of that not talking about next summers contracts at least.

Because you need to consider both now and in the future, where acquiring a defenseman right now may make sense now but won't make sense in a year or 2. Being greedy now is a shortsighted mindset to have, unless the player you're acquiring now is also going to be an important player in the future. I don't see a point in acquiring a moderate upgrade on defense when Marino and Pettersson can be a solid 2nd pair next year. I don't see a point in paying a huge price for a 40 ES point scorer when you can get 35 ES points out of McCann. It's just not efficient uses of cap space.

If you're going to justify going bigger, actually go bigger, not "let's get 5 points for $3 million more" or "let's get a .5% better save% for $4 million more". I want to go cheaper in areas you already have suitable players so you can go bigger in areas of need. The Penguins just don't have a lot of areas of need right now, but I think it's a bad idea to commit more money to marginal improvements now just because you can. I'd rather go cheaper in multiple areas so you can offer Taylor Hall $10 million, not acquire marginal upgrades for a bunch more money.

 

[Empoleon8771]

i wouldn't include dum's and pett's in that. although they can serve as complementary players in that roll. as for tanger, his health scares me. .... we do have a few prospects but non are what i would call a top end prospect. not that they couldn't become one.

Dumoulin and Pettersson are definitely top-4 D, though. I don't know how you shouldn't include them, they're both cost controlled and they're both legit top-4 D.

If you're concerned about Letang's future, it's valid to say they need a top pair D for the long run. But are you actually going to let Letang walk or get rid of Letang in the near future? I have really no problems with Letang, Dumoulin, Pettersson and Marino as their top-4 D for the long run. I haven't seen anything that makes me have an issue with that.

Yeah, I wouldn't trade specifically for a top pairing D prospect. However, having a decent crop of top 4 blueliners and also our prospects, means that we can trade from a position of strength instead of need. So, if someone's offering, I wouldn't say no per se, especially since they take a while to develop.

Yeah this is a fair stance to take. I think it's equally fair to just say that the Penguins should be trying to also acquire picks and prospects whenever they can, to just strengthen their prospect pool for the future. That doesn't mean "sell players", but that does mean that you should be trading expendable players for futures.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

I'm reluctant to fiddle with what seems to be working but I also absolutely think that they need more finish up front and could see room in the top six depending on how things shake out. It would be especially nice to have a righty who can rip the puck on that LHB of the powerplay. The idea of possibly dangling Schultz for such help is more intriguing every day, especially as guys like Riikola and Marino continue to look comfortable and offensively capable.

 

[Andy99]

I'm not sure Schultz is going to return what people think...he's a UFA and giving him a long term contract is going to be difficult for any trade partner because he'll likely want to test FA if the Pens are trading him...so we're only going to garner rental prices...at best a high draft pick or prospect...nothing that helps us now...I'd love to get Schultz for Ehlers but it's not happening...maybe we can turn him for a very good scoring winger who's also a FA but out need is someone like Hall and I doubt we get that back either...just don't see the great return to satisfy our needs this year...he should only go for a high level winger or if we're clearly not making the POs by the TDL...just don't see either happening though

 

[ownal]

What about Schultz and Bjugstad for Ehlers and Lowry. Trade Chucky for a top 4 LD to play with Marino?

 

[Randy Butternubs]

Just some thoughts of mine, in no particular order:

• Jack Johnson has been serviceable, so I'm fine with holding on to him this season. As long as he keeps up this level of play. Hopefully his bad games don't swing too wildly from what his average has been as of recent.
• It took Kahun about 10-games to find his "way", so I suggest people offer the same leeway for Galchenyuk. I think he had something like a 12-game goal drought last season.
• Bjugstad is serviceable as the 3C. He's usually, what I've been calling, "uninspiring" but lately he's been quite good. Hold on to him until Blueger and/or Lafferty prove to be a 3C. Then you send him out for futures or an upgrade on defense who is on an expiring contract. Or is cheaper.
• Schultz has got to be gone come next season. Nothing against him, I just think the Pens cannot afford him.
• I hope the Pens can keep all of their RFAs.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

I'm not sure Schultz is going to return what people think...he's a UFA and giving him a long term contract is going to be difficult for any trade partner because he'll likely want to test FA if the Pens are trading him...so we're only going to garner rental prices...at best a high draft pick or prospect...nothing that helps us now...I'd love to get Schultz for Ehlers but it's not happening...maybe we can turn him for a very good scoring winger who's also a FA but out need is someone like Hall and I doubt we get that back either...just don't see the great return to satisfy our needs this year...he should only go for a high level winger or if we're clearly not making the POs by the TDL...just don't see either happening though

Schultz I suspect has pretty high perceived value around the league being a two time cup winner in his prime.

He’s not bringing back Taylor Hall obviously, but there is no reason a top four blueliner, even a UFA, can’t bring back a pretty good top six fwd.

Teams can always work out a trade and sign as well.

Just a lot of options if JR is willing to stick to his trend of moving UFAs.

 

[Beauner]

What about Schultz and Bjugstad for Ehlers and Lowry. Trade Chucky for a top 4 LD to play with Marino?

Not a chance in hell the Jets take that

 

[Empoleon8771]

I don't think Schultz would bring back less than what Shattenkirk brought back, which was Sanford (young near NHL ready forward with middle-6 upside), a 1st and a conditional 2nd. You can leverage those assets to bring in a top-6 forward, which is exactly what the Blues did to acquire Schenn from Philly at the 2017 draft.

Doing that and then offering futures to Minnesota for Zucker seems like a damn good strategy to me. That's not me saying I'm in love with Zucker, but Zucker is probably one of the most realistic targets for that kind of package due to where Minnesota is at in their rebuild.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Who doesn't do this 3-way trade:

Penguins get Zucker
Ducks get Schultz with an extension
Wild get Kase

To me, this is a great 3-way deal that addresses needs for each team and it's super reasonable based on rumored past trades (Faulk for Kase and the Kessel-Zucker nixed deal).

 

[Gurglesons]

Who doesn't do this 3-way trade:

Penguins get Zucker
Ducks get Schultz with an extension
Wild get Kase

To me, this is a great 3-way deal that addresses needs for each team and it's super reasonable based on rumored past trades (Faulk for Kase and the Kessel-Zucker nixed deal).

Ducks won’t trade for Schultz given the history and I’d just take Kase instead of Zucker tbh. Dude is an insane talent and I could see him putting up 30 with Jake and Sid.

 

[Andy99]

I don't think Schultz would bring back less than what Shattenkirk brought back, which was Sanford (young near NHL ready forward with middle-6 upside), a 1st and a conditional 2nd. You can leverage those assets to bring in a top-6 forward, which is exactly what the Blues did to acquire Schenn from Philly at the 2017 draft.

Doing that and then offering futures to Minnesota for Zucker seems like a damn good strategy to me. That's not me saying I'm in love with Zucker, but Zucker is probably one of the most realistic targets for that kind of package due to where Minnesota is at in their rebuild.

Nothing against Zucker, but he doesn't really help us..we need a great finisher who can play with speed...I don't think tossing Schultz and getting another above average tweener is going to make us a better team...if we could get a better Schultz or a really top end winger, then great...just don't see it...someone like Hoffman, Palmieri even...a rental for rental...one of my problems with Zucker is being tied to term...we can't be doing that anymore for players who haven't played with the Pens and shown to be a great fit

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

And what's wrong with greed, if its getting the right players?

This isn't just the defence, it seems more of a philosophical thing for you - why have Galchenyuk scoring 40 if McCann/Kahun can score 35? Why put a big price tag on Murray to get .919 if Markstrom can get .915 for cheaper? Why have possible better RD when you can have Marino and Riikola? I could get it if you were "I want to cheap out on one area of the team so I can be very strong elsewhere", but you seem happy to go with the lesser cheaper option*everywhere. That seems pretty unusual to me and I'm curious as to why you're seeing it this way.

The big connection I see behind the strands seems to be - and I say seem because I may be getting this wrong and don't want to put words in your mouth - "if we put a lot of faith in these young players, we could see big results in a year or two". Are you not worried about the window closing before the results come in? Or things going wrong, as things will? The team is very strong right now, but the core is at the age point where sudden crippling declines are possible. Or do you think the team's strong enough to overcome this?

Genuine curiousity. 90% of this thread* is people looking for that one killer acquisition to hopefully put us over the top. You seem to be mostly resisting that in favour of sticking what we've got. It seems to be a pretty big difference in terms of viewing the picture here.



*90% of that not talking about next summers contracts at least.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Ducks won’t trade for Schultz given the history and I’d just take Kase instead of Zucker tbh. Dude is an insane talent and I could see him putting up 30 with Jake and Sid.

My thought is that you need a LW for Malkin more than you need a RW for Crosby, and I don't know if Kase can play LW. Now, if he can play LW, I think Schultz for Kase would be more realistic (if you ignore the probable bad blood between the Ducks and Schultz).

Schultz for Kase does make a good amount of sense if you're fine with acquiring a RWer for Crosby and are happy with McCann-Malkin-Rust. I'm just not sure if they're at that point yet.

 

[Gurglesons]

My thought is that you need a LW for Malkin more than you need a RW for Crosby, and I don't know if Kase can play LW. Now, if he can play LW, I think Schultz for Kase would be more realistic (if you ignore the probable bad blood between the Ducks and Schultz).

Schultz for Kase does make a good amount of sense if you're fine with acquiring a RWer for Crosby and are happy with McCann-Malkin-Rust. I'm just not sure if they're at that point yet.

Kase can and has played LW. To accommodate AHL talent Daniel Sprong funny enough.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

Kase is very good and I’d agree he’s better than Zucker in a vacuum, as well as having more upside, but his injuries really scare me.

Rather have Zucker all things considered.

 

[Tasty Biscuits]

but his injuries really scare me.

Again, he'd fit right in on the Pens.

 

[ChaosAgent]

We do need a right-handed forward that isn't Hornqvist (since he's net front) for PP1. For that reason, not interested in Zucker.

 

[SEALBound]

The Penguins have Dumoulin, Letang, Pettersson and Marino who look like top-4 D and are cost controlled long-term. They also have Addison, POJ, Almari and a couple of long-shot prospects (Phillips, Rielly, ect). I really don't see a need for a "top end D prospect" unless you plan on Letang retiring/leaving in the next 3 years.

Boy that's a tough position to be in to be honest. At first thought, I would absolutely take another high-end defensive prospect but when you put the pen to the paper and line it out, we are actually decent in that position. That assume Addison and POJ can legit push for time and develop (same with the others). I wouldn't hate another young, mobile dman. I think with the league trends, you can always use those as currency. Not to sound too much like Shero but a decent 1:1 down the road for a similar winger wouldn't be the worst thing.

What about Schultz and Bjugstad for Ehlers and Lowry. Trade Chucky for a top 4 LD to play with Marino?

I think I speak for several people when I say - we appreciate your enthusiasm but the "fairness" isn't always there. The trade would be Schultz for Ehlers and Bjugstad for Lowry and I believe Jets fans would turn both down as both are better players, both on ice and in value, than what we are offering. I'd love to acquire either...but we'd have to give more.

Just some thoughts of mine, in no particular order:

• Jack Johnson has been serviceable, so I'm fine with holding on to him this season. As long as he keeps up this level of play. Hopefully his bad games don't swing too wildly from what his average has been as of recent.

Johnson this year, to me, was like Hunwick. People bitched but I pointed out "He's a third pairing dman, making third pairing money, playing on the third pairing, and providing a third pairing level of play...what more do we want?"

I think Johnson has a bigger burden to bear with the posters here though. Other players of equal suck have an easier time getting out from under the stigma. The emergence of Marino has really helped him. He's looked a lot better with Marino on his pairing. I think that's certainly elevated his game so when he was put with Riikola, it's not like there was a big shift.

This all said, I would not hesitate one iota to upgrade on him for the playoffs.

I don't think Schultz would bring back less than what Shattenkirk brought back, which was Sanford (young near NHL ready forward with middle-6 upside), a 1st and a conditional 2nd. You can leverage those assets to bring in a top-6 forward, which is exactly what the Blues did to acquire Schenn from Philly at the 2017 draft.

Doing that and then offering futures to Minnesota for Zucker seems like a damn good strategy to me. That's not me saying I'm in love with Zucker, but Zucker is probably one of the most realistic targets for that kind of package due to where Minnesota is at in their rebuild.

I think Shatty had a little higher pedigree and was a better player, at that time. I don't think Schultz pulls that to be honest. Sanford+2nd, I could see. 1st+b prospects, I could see. But I agree with your idea that could easily send him out for assets and then flip the assets. At this point though, I'm just not entirely sure what the game plan would be in terms of "send A out to be a B in". We're...full...so to speak.

I'm at the same impasse with Galchenyuk. If you send him out...what do you even look for in return?

My thought is that you need a LW for Malkin more than you need a RW for Crosby, and I don't know if Kase can play LW. Now, if he can play LW, I think Schultz for Kase would be more realistic (if you ignore the probable bad blood between the Ducks and Schultz).

Schultz for Kase does make a good amount of sense if you're fine with acquiring a RWer for Crosby and are happy with McCann-Malkin-Rust. I'm just not sure if they're at that point yet.

I swear I'm not just quoting your posts, lol. If you send out Schultz for Kase, I think you have to look to send Galchenyuk out for a dman. Ideally a UFA dman. Something like Schultz for Kase, then Galchenyuk for Vatanen+a little something.

I think you'd first send Kase to Sid's wing until you see what McCann-Malkin-Rust really is. 3 goals in a period plus an OT winner isn't going to be the norm but if that line can plug along at a goal a game between the three...that's a solid 2nd line, especially if you can bolster the 1st line and have a hell of a 4th line...then all you have to do is build the 3rd line.

 

[Beauner]

just my .02 on this dicussion:

-We do need another top 6 winger who can score if Galchenyuk isn't going to work out. But I don't think that can be determined for sure until around New Year's.

-Kase's injuries scare me. Wouldn't deal Schultz for him

-I wonder what Ehlers' price would be, and if anything around an extended Schultz/Chucky/prospects/picks would work for him+a defenseman for salary/depth purposes. He's the exact type of guy we should be targeting.

-Getting Vatanen by any means (trade or UFA after this year) would be huge to replace Schultz. But I can't really see a trade happening, can't imagine NJ would be too enamored with what we could offer, and they could probably find a better deal anyway.

I'm at the same impasse with Galchenyuk. If you send him out...what do you even look for in return?

Probably a middle-pair Dman rental. My assumption is that Schultz can be traded as the centerpiece for a top-6 wing, then Galchenyuk can return depth that can take that middle-pairing spot.

Edit: This may sound ridiculous but I wonder if Goligoski cold be a potential fit.