Salary Cap: The Salary Cap Thread | Trust me... nothing has changed.

[Gurglesons]

Nashville didn't score in the last two games so I would say that would suggest it had something to do with that. I mean really why would you even say that.

EDIT: Nashville couldn't score for the last 123 minutes of the Stanley Cup finals! That's good defense.

I think it is okay to feel that way.

Just, I completely disagree and think it is really silly we have one of the most expensive D's in the league which is perfectly fine for everyone, but Bonino making four million is something that would destroy our depth.

Especially after the hodge podge D of last year winning. Like I've said I think we won last year despite our D.

 

[Gurglesons]

Reading these arguments even closer makes me even more irritated I'm listening to this argument. Like Hjalmarsson is better than Dumoulin because Hjalmarsson from ages 20-25 (which would have been 2007-2008 to 2012-2013) had more goals than Dumoulin has so far? What the hell kind of **** logic is that? Why are player goal totals suddenly the criteria to judge defensive defensemen who can move the puck and skate? That's just finding a flaw in Dumoulin's game and clinging to it as evidence he's not good. Like why would you take Despres, who had 1 season of playing like a top pair defenseman (more accurately, like 20 games with the Ducks to end that season), over Dumoulin, who was a top pair defenseman for 2 straight cup runs? Like I can't even begin to understand the asinine claims in here on Dumoulin.

This is just a case of an argument being so bad that it's actually making me angry. Probably because I've wasted so much time discussing things if you think only looking at goal totals to judge defensive defensemen makes even a lick of sense.

I mean, you are bringing up comparable contracts and I'm telling you why Dumo is overpaid for what he brings which is literally no production playing top line minutes on the most offense oriented team in the league with the majority of his time spent with our best offensive defensemen.

 

[ColePens]

I mean, you are bringing up comparable contracts and I'm telling you why Dumo is overpaid for what he brings which is literally no production playing top line minutes on the most offense oriented team in the league with the majority of his time spent with our best offensive defensemen.

I think we need to define overpaid. Dumo gets that on the open market from many teams. Dumo gets more if he hits UFA. Especially with how many teams need a dman like Dumo.

So how is he overpaid again?

 

[Gurglesons]

I think we need to define overpaid. Dumo gets that on the open market from many teams. Dumo gets more if he hits UFA. Especially with how many teams need a dman like Dumo.

So how is he overpaid again?

Because his skill set and stats outside of playing with Letang, Crosby and Malkin do not paint him as a d-man that pushes play.

Look. It is semantics, but he is getting overpaid by like 500k. My point stands if you are going to sit and act like Bonino is overpaid it is very likely at 500k at most. Saying Bonino's contract is something we can't afford is much different than saying Bonino is overpaid since someone actually did give him that in UFA and that team is literally has the shrewdest management in the game today.

If Dumo isn't playing with Letang, he is a #3 at best. (I'd argue he is a firm #3 on his very best days now.) so he is basically in the same tier as Bones is in terms of their positions.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Overpaid implies other similar players are being paid less than Dumoulin is getting paid. That's just flat out not true. $3.75 million-$4.25 million is the going rate for young top-4 defensemen and Dumoulin produces no less than players like Hjalmarsson, Larsson and Pesce, who all make the same that he makes.

I know the exact problem here, you're criminally underrating Dumoulin. Calling him a #3 at best, especially after winning a second straight cup while playing 22 minutes a night, is just downright laughable. I don't know if you're trying to prop up Bonino by crapping all over Dumoulin or if you're just out to lunch on your evaluation of Dumoulin, but both are pretty awful arguments to be making. That doesn't touch on how crazy the idea that a #3 defenseman and a 3rd line center are somehow equal.

 

[SCPens]

Because his skill set and stats outside of playing with Letang, Crosby and Malkin do not paint him as a d-man that pushes play.

Look. It is semantics, but he is getting overpaid by like 500k. My point stands if you are going to sit and act like Bonino is overpaid it is very likely at 500k at most. Saying Bonino's contract is something we can't afford is much different than saying Bonino is overpaid since someone actually did give him that in UFA and that team is literally has the shrewdest management in the game today.

I think it's pretty clear the Pens wanted to move on from Bonino. Unless he was willing to sign a ridiculously low deal he was simply an afterthought. And he IS overpaid as far as the Pens are concerned, and that's all that matters.

 

[Gurglesons]

Overpaid implies other similar players are being paid less than Dumoulin is getting paid. That's just flat out not true. $3.75 million-$4.25 million is the going rate for young top-4 defensemen and Dumoulin produces no less than players like Hjalmarsson, Larsson and Pesce, who all make the same that he makes.

I know the exact problem here, you're criminally underrating Dumoulin. Calling him a #3 at best, especially after winning a second straight cup while playing 22 minutes a night, is just downright laughable. I don't know if you're trying to prop up Bonino by crapping all over Dumoulin or if you're just out to lunch on your evaluation of Dumoulin, but both are pretty awful arguments to be making. That doesn't touch on how crazy the idea that a #3 defenseman and a 3rd line center are somehow equal.

I could see Dumo's contract being seen exactly like Maatta's as soon as next year. At least Maatta is younger.

 

[Andy99]

Look. It is semantics, but he is getting overpaid by like 500k. My point stands if you are going to sit and act like Bonino is overpaid it is very likely at 500k at most. Saying Bonino's contract is something we can't afford is much different than saying Bonino is overpaid since someone actually did give him that in UFA and that team is literally has the shrewdest management in the game today.

The argument against Bonino is not that he's overpaid in some objective sense. It's more that, for what he brings for the Pens as a 3C, he is not worth 4x4. He is not a great fit for Sully's system; he's slow, he didn't mesh with Kessel last year and he's not good at generating offense for his line. A more offensive player is better for this team rolling three or four lines. I would say that I'm more than happy to pay Bozak the same salary because he's a better fit for this team. And if the Pens are not going to play that type of player and just get a defensive center who pks, we are better off spending less money for that person. That's a perfectly legit cap argument and one I support

 

[Jenkins]

I think it is okay to feel that way.

Just, I completely disagree and think it is really silly we have one of the most expensive D's in the league which is perfectly fine for everyone, but Bonino making four million is something that would destroy our depth.

Especially after the hodge podge D of last year winning. Like I've said I think we won last year despite our D.

That's fine to think that way. I just don't think Bonino is worth the contract. I think he is a good player but when taking into consideration his last year, age (meaning he's likely not getting better) and how he played during the season/playoffs I would not offer what he got. I think my absolute max would have been 3yrs @ 3.3mil.

Thinking about how we won (in 2017) with that D is a little flawed. For example if we played the 2016 playoffs over 10 times I think we'd win 10/10. We were just that good at that time of the year. It was the best playoff team I've ever seen (started watching hockey in 2008). With the 2017 team I think that drops to around 3/10 (that might be generous too). We played well but we had a bit more luck go our way (on the ice). We weren't as dominant but we did what we had too. We had to battle for everything we got. A real testament to Sully and the players resilience . I wouldn't rely on that scenario again.

Hunwick seems to be more of a situation where we know we probably can't sign Cole with the other contracts we need so to relieve some pressure and shore up our D we got Hunwick now. I think (hope) you'll be surprised how good he'll be. It's a short sample size but watch the Leafs/Caps series. He was very good.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I could see Dumo's contract being seen exactly like Maatta's as soon as next year. At least Maatta is young.

And I could see it looking the exact same as Adam Larsson, because Dumoulin is an extremely comparable player to Larsson and Larsson is a legit top pair defenseman who doesn't put up that many points.

Comparing Dumoulin to Maatta doesn't make sense because they aren't similar players beyond being puck movers. Dumoulin is a smooth skating defensive defenseman who can move the puck and is very good at suppressing shots, but he lacks an offensive game. Maatta is an inconsistent 2-way defenseman who can move the puck, but his skating is poor (last season was an anomaly, Maatta is a 25-30 point defenseman in the NHL). Unless Dumoulin's skating falls off, his contract isn't going to be like Maatta's. Maatta's contract right now can be viewed as a problem because he had 7 points in 55 games last year. Dumoulin's offensive game isn't going to fall off that much, it's more likely to improve than to worsen. In order for Dumoulin's contract to be like Maatta's contract, he needs to regress defensively or lose his skating ability.

Just making it overly simplistic, Maatta in the past was good offensively and defensively, but was a poor skater. Maatta lost that offensive ability last year for whatever reason, which made him good defensively, but a bad offensive player and a poor skater. Dumoulin is a good skater and is good defensively, but he's bad offensively. One of those two has to regress for him to be compared to Maatta, and I don't see either of those falling back. And even with Maatta, I think he gets his offensive game back this year too.

 

[Gurglesons]

That's fine to think that way. I just don't think Bonino is worth the contract. I think he is a good player but when taking into consideration his last year, age (meaning he's likely not getting better) and how he played during the season/playoffs I would not offer what he got. I think my absolute max would have been 3yrs @ 3.3mil.

Thinking about how we won (in 2017) with that D is a little flawed. For example if we played the 2016 playoffs over 10 times I think we'd win 10/10. We were just that good at that time of the year. It was the best playoff team I've ever seen (started watching hockey in 2008). With the 2017 team I think that drops to around 3/10. We played well but we had a bit more luck go our way (on the ice). We weren't as dominant but we did what we had too. We had to battle for everything we got. A real testament to Sully and the players resilience . I wouldn't rely on that scenario again.

Hunwick seems to be more of a situation where we know we probably can't sign Cole with the other contracts we need so to relieve some pressure and shore up our D we got Hunwick now. I think (hope) you'll be surprised how good he'll be. It's a short sample size but watch the Leafs/Caps series. He was very good.

I agree so much with this point, which is why I think it is pretty scary we just tied up the money we did in our D. I like Schultz's deal because the lack of term and I don't know how you get another player like that for cheaper.

In terms of Dumo, I take him to Arb and get the 3 mil two year deal every day of the week.

 

[ColePens]

So you let Dumo walk and try to replace him how? That is a bad bad bad move. Short term 1m save for a long term suffer. And probably big time overpayment for the rest of what Dumo's contract would have been.

 

[wej20]

I agree so much with this point, which is why I think it is pretty scary we just tied up the money we did in our D. I like Schultz's deal because the lack of term and I don't know how you get another player like that for cheaper.

In terms of Dumo, I take him to Abe and get the 3 mil two year deal every day of the week.

3 million for 1 year.

 

[ColePens]

If I'm not mistaken, in your scenario, you are for the 2 following things:

1) Don't re-sign Dumo past his UFA years. 2 years 3M, let him hit UFA.

2) Don't sign Hunwick.

So in 2 years what do we do?

 

[Empoleon8771]

If I'm not mistaken, in your scenario, you are for the 2 following things:

1) Don't re-sign Dumo past his UFA years. 2 years 3M, let him hit UFA.

2) Don't sign Hunwick.

So in 2 years what do we do?

Plus he's complaining about Maatta's contract be bad too, which makes me think he wouldn't be here in this case. I think he also has said in the past that Schultz was overpaid.

Basically, that poster just complains a lot and doesn't offer many solutions.

 

[brewski420]

Is it seriously being suggested that Bones contract is preferable to Dumoulins? And part of the argument is Dumoulin does not produce points? If we need to get point production from him than the Pens are in trouble.

 

[Gurglesons]

If I'm not mistaken, in your scenario, you are for the 2 following things:

1) Don't re-sign Dumo past his UFA years. 2 years 3M, let him hit UFA.

2) Don't sign Hunwick.

So in 2 years what do we do?

Have more of an idea what we have in Dumo and don't get blinded by a really solid 2016 cup run with Letang at Conn Smythe level.

Or a decent 2017 where we won despite our D.

I'd take the risk and use the money to bring in a legit 3C, because I want a dynasty and I could care less what happens after those two years.

 

[Peat]

If Rutherford can find a centre that does the job within budget for the next 2 years while we could have had Dumo for cheaper, he is winning every year for the next 4 when we have Dumo for cheaper than we'd be otherwise paying.

And as far as I can tell, its a lot easier to get another team to give you a guy like Bonino making about 2m than it is to get you a guy like Dumo... full stop.

 

[Jenkins]

I agree so much with this point, which is why I think it is pretty scary we just tied up the money we did in our D. I like Schultz's deal because the lack of term and I don't know how you get another player like that for cheaper.

In terms of Dumo, I take him to Abe and get the 3 mil two year deal every day of the week.

I didn't think Schultz would get that. Riptide was very adamant that he'd get something around that and he was spot on but we really didn't have much of a choice (unless we got Shatty). The term was what made it ok.

JR could have done what you suggested but then he's a UFA and would be more expensive than what we got him for. JR probably looked at our forwards we need to sign (or replace) in that time (Rust, Jake, Horny) and it makes sense to have our D sorted for the next few years.

For us its easier and more flexible to deal with filling out a forward roster than the D. For me its a good idea to have our D locked up for 3 yrs (except 1 bottom pair D if Cole walks). JR knows he'll have a good defense/goalie and can just focus on the forwards.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Bonino is suddenly going to be the difference between having a dynasty and not and what happens after 2 years doesn't matter? Okay, it's just getting funny now.

As far as I can tell, you're saying you would have rather had Dumoulin for 2 years at $3 million and Bonino at $4 million for 4 years and no Hunwick over Dumoulin for 6 years at $4.1 million, Hunwick for 3 years at $2.25 million and an undetermined 3C, and what happens in 2 years doesn't matter because "I want a dynasty"? Is that mostly correct? All I can say is damn, I'm really glad JR isn't as shortsighted as you are. I can't wait to see what the Penguins defense would look like after Dumoulin leaves though:

Maatta-Letang
Cole-Schultz
Pouliot-uh, Bengtsson?

That defense looks amazing, and that pretends the Penguins would actually re-sign Cole (which I'm pretty sure you said you wouldn't want to do in the past) and ignores Schultz is a UFA the year after.

 

[ColePens]

Have more of an idea what we have in Dumo and don't get blinded by a really solid 2016 cup run with Letang at Conn Smythe level.

Or a decent 2017 where we won despite our D.

I'd take the risk and use the money to bring in a legit 3C, because I want a dynasty and I could care less what happens after those two years.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Dumo, who was a huge part of TWO Stanley Cup runs was going to get paiiiiid in UFA by someone. That's what happens to Cup champs.

Now answer the question. WHat do we do in 2 years w/o Hunwick or Dumo. We will need to explore UFA and overpay? We will need to trade assets? I mean.. what do we do?

And dear lord don't tell me Derrick Pouliot.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Just to provide some context:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=134823877&postcount=387

Cole is walking next year unless we move out a defenseman. Absolutely no reason to resign him. Ian Cole is also a #5/#6 defenseman. I'd argue he is exactly what Scuderi was when he left here. A player we don't need to sign to anything beyond what he is making this year on a one or two year contract if he wants to stay.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=132444671&postcount=415

You sign Schultz to a one year deal and pray we can sign something worthwhile on the UFA market or trade one of our young wingers + a pick for a legitimate # 2. That will put all of our players into logical positions Maatta # 3 Dumo # 4 etc. Allowing us to move Schultz or let him walk.

So at this point, we have:

-Cole shouldn't be re-signed after this year
-Schultz should only get a 1 year deal, they should trade a young winger for a #2 defenseman and get rid of Schultz after that 1 year deal
-Dumoulin should only get a 2 year deal, possibly let him walk after that contract
-Hunwick shouldn't have been signed

Those are all within the last 3 months, so it's not like I'm pulling up stuff from November before Schultz broke out. I think this pretty much shows pixie's game here. It's just complaining to complain and not really offering any real solutions. It's the same game as Pens x.

 

[Gurglesons]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Dumo, who was a huge part of TWO Stanley Cup runs was going to get paiiiiid in UFA by someone. That's what happens to Cup champs.

Now answer the question. WHat do we do in 2 years w/o Hunwick or Dumo. We will need to explore UFA and overpay? We will need to trade assets? I mean.. what do we do?

And dear lord don't tell me Derrick Pouliot.

I don't care what we do in two years. We have Crosby, Malkin, Letang and Murray. Build around them, don't give a defensive d-man like Dumo who has absolutely no offensive upside a six year term until you see how he plays when we aren't blinded by winning cups.

Trade a third for Beaulieu, bring in another player like Schultz, sign a younger Hunwick if it doesn't pan out.

 

[Gurglesons]

Just to provide some context
So at this point, we have:

-Cole shouldn't be re-signed after this year
-Schultz should only get a 1 year deal, they should trade a young winger for a #2 defenseman and get rid of Schultz after that 1 year deal
-Dumoulin should only get a 2 year deal, possibly let him walk after that contract
-Hunwick shouldn't have been signed

Those are all within the last 3 months, so it's not like I'm pulling up stuff from November before Schultz broke out. I think this pretty much shows pixie's game here. It's just complaining to complain and not really offering any real solutions. It's the same game as Pens x.

It isn't a game? I don't think Dumo is worth his contract and I think we have spent an insane amount on a d-core that has three players making over 4 million that on their best day are a solid #3. Who on our defense is running a pairing outside of Letang?

I'm not impressed when you can bring in a 35 year old Hainsey and he plays about the same as everyone on our D outside of Maatta and Schultz in the playoffs.

 

[Empoleon8771]

You've also said the Penguins should have traded a 3rd for Beaulieu to replace Hunwick. So which is it? Do the Penguins do that move (which in reality, they'd have to trade their 2nd to get Beaulieu since the Sabres 3rd was a high 3rd) to replace Dumoulin or Hunwick? What younger Hunwick was out there?

It isn't a game? I don't think Dumo is worth his contract and I think we have spent an insane amount on a d-core that has three players making over 4 million that on their best day are a solid #3. Who on our defense is running a pairing outside of Letang?

No, it's not a game, it's providing evidence that all you do is complain without providing any real solutions. So far, here are the solutions you've provided:

-Trade a 3rd for Beaulieu, when the Penguins didn't have as high of a 3rd round pick as the Sabres had. In reality, it would have actually been a 2nd most likely and Beaulieu got a lot of money on his extension ($2.4 million AAV). You've also said they should replace both Hunwick and Dumoulin with that, which you can't do.
-Trade a young winger for a #2 defenseman, didn't provide a name or any other specifics.
-Re-sign Dumoulin for only 2 years and Schultz for only 1 year, while letting both go after their contracts are done.