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

[ColePens]

Just to provide some context:

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



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



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.

Yikes.. Pixie... game set match. Yikes.

 

[Ogrezilla]

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.

We literally just won the Cup with Dumo running our top pairing...

 

[Gurglesons]

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?



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.

Dumo was an RFA. He is here next year regardless. You bring in Beaulieu instead of Hunwick and hope he blossoms like Schultz.

Like I've said, I'd rather have four Schultz on our D then anything else. Move the puck out of our zone and score. Dumo doesn't score.

 

[Gurglesons]

We literally just won the Cup with Dumo running our top pairing...

We literally didn't have a top pairing.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Yikes.. Pixie... game set match. Yikes.

I remembered the discussion about Cole and I found the thing about Schultz when trying to find that. It's kinda funny, actually. Bringing it from the last page, here's what I can piece the Penguins defense to look like based on what Pixies has suggested:

-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.

Let's say they don't make that trade this summer, instead they wait until Sprong is ready. That gives them this D group:

Dumoulin-Letang
Maatta-Schultz
Cole-Beaulieu

For next year. Not much of a change, it would probably cost around the same because Schultz wouldn't be making much less on a 1 year deal than he makes on a 3 year deal and Beaulieu actually costs more per year than Hunwick does. After this year, you'd let Cole and Schultz both walk. Let's say they actually do make that trade for a defenseman at this point, let's pretend Sheary does enough next year to be the centerpiece for that trade. Now you have:

Dumoulin-Letang
Maatta-#2 defenseman
Pouliot-Beaulieu

The year after, you have Dumoulin walk, and now you have:

Maatta-Letang
Beaulieu-#2 defenseman
Pouliot-Unknown

I don't know why, but I like this D group in 2 years:

Dumoulin-Letang
Maatta-Schultz
Pouliot-Hunwick

More than that D group. That also doesn't even touch on who the mythical #2 defenseman is, plus I'm assuming that the Penguins don't find a way to make it work out with keeping Cole.

Dumo was an RFA. He is here next year regardless. You bring in Beaulieu instead of Hunwick and hope he blossoms like Schultz.

Like I've said, I'd rather have four Schultz on our D then anything else. Move the puck out of our zone and score. Dumo doesn't score.

And then when you let Dumoulin walk in 2 years, you suddenly don't have him anymore. That's the part you're ignoring. Beaulieu instead of Hunwick may have been a smart move, but you're not only saying "the Penguins should have traded for Beaulieu instead of signing Hunwick". You're saying "the Penguins should have only given a 1 year deal to Schultz and let him walk after, only a 2 year deal to Dumoulin and let him walk after and have traded for Beaulieu instead of signing Hunwick".

 

[brewski420]

We literally just won the Cup with Dumo running our top pairing...

Yes but he only had 1G and 5A in the playoffs.

 

[Peat]

That would be the Beaulieu who ended up signing a bigger contract than Hunwick, right?


Hang on. Pixies, if you just want a dynasty and don't care what happens after the next two years, why on earth were you proposing trading Guentzel on his ELC for Bennett on the grounds that you thought Bennett could be a top 6 C of the future for us?

ETA:

-Trade a young winger for a #2 defenseman, didn't provide a name or any other specifics.

I missed this. Given the way the Hall-Larsson trade worked out, as well as other trades involving D and W, I think this might actually be impossible.

 

[Gurglesons]

I remembered the discussion about Cole and I found the thing about Schultz when trying to find that. It's kinda funny, actually. Bringing it from the last page, here's what I can piece the Penguins defense to look like based on what Pixies has suggested:

-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.

Let's say they don't make that trade this summer, instead they wait until Sprong is ready. That gives them this D group:

Dumoulin-Letang
Maatta-Schultz
Cole-Beaulieu

For next year. Not much of a change, it would probably cost around the same because Schultz wouldn't be making much less on a 1 year deal than he makes on a 3 year deal and Beaulieu actually costs more per year than Hunwick does. After this year, you'd let Cole and Schultz both walk. Let's say they actually do make that trade for a defenseman at this point, let's pretend Sheary does enough next year to be the centerpiece for that trade. Now you have:

Dumoulin-Letang
Maatta-#2 defenseman
Pouliot-Beaulieu

The year after, you have Dumoulin walk, and now you have:

Maatta-Letang
Beaulieu-#2 defenseman
Pouliot-Unknown

I don't know why, but I like this D group in 2 years:

Dumoulin-Letang
Maatta-Schultz
Pouliot-Hunwick

More than that D group. That also doesn't even touch on who the mythical #2 defenseman is, plus I'm assuming that the Penguins don't find a way to make it work out with keeping Cole.



And then when you let Dumoulin walk in 2 years, you suddenly don't have him anymore. That's the part you're ignoring. Beaulieu instead of Hunwick may have been a smart move, but you're not only saying "the Penguins should have traded for Beaulieu instead of signing Hunwick". You're saying "the Penguins should have only given a 1 year deal to Schultz and let him walk after, only a 2 year deal to Dumoulin and let him walk after and have traded for Beaulieu instead of signing Hunwick".

Or just resign Dumo if you want after two years?

It is obvious you guys think we have a really solid D. I don't and I think when you have 35 year old Hainsey a touch below and above in terms of ice time the two players you just threw 10 million at and a combined nine years you have a chance that could blow up in your face

 

[Empoleon8771]

Or just resign Dumo if you want after two years?

Giving him 2 years and taking him right to free agency is basically just letting Dumoulin walk after 2 years, because the Penguins aren't going to be able to match what other teams are going to offer Dumoulin.

I missed this. Given the way the Hall-Larsson trade worked out, as well as other trades involving D and W, I think this might actually be impossible.

I think it would be possible if Sheary repeats what he did last year over 82 games and a team would really like him, but I think you might be maxing out at a young middle pair defenseman with top pair upside if you're making that trade. I don't think you could pull off a guy like Muzzin or Trouba for Sheary, even if he has a great year next year.

It is obvious you guys think we have a really solid D. I don't and I think when you have 35 year old Hainsey a touch below and above in terms of ice time the two players you just threw 10 million at and a combined nine years you have a chance that could blow up in your face

Hunwick played a minute less in ice time than Dumoulin and 20 seconds more than Schultz in the playoffs, yes. Hainsey also did significantly worse with those minutes than either Schultz or Dumoulin did.

 

[Ogrezilla]

We literally didn't have a top pairing.

they led the team in ice time every single game. That's a top pairing. And you didn't even say he couldn't run a top pairing, you said he couldn't run a pairing. You're obviously wrong.

 

[Speaking Moistly]

I missed this. Given the way the Hall-Larsson trade worked out, as well as other trades involving D and W, I think this might actually be impossible.

Oh, just something like Guentzel+ for an aging #2 with a bad contract or pending free agency might get it done.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Oh, just something like Guentzel+ for an aging #2 with a bad contract or pending free agency might get it done.

Guentzel was traded with a 1st for Sam Bennett though, don't forget that

 

[Gurglesons]

they led the team in ice time every single game. That's a top pairing. And you didn't even say he couldn't run a top pairing, you said he couldn't run a pairing. You're obviously wrong.

That isn't true. Maatta led at least three games. I honestly do not think anyone besides Letang is a player that "makes those around them better".

Schultz to a degree.

If you want to hear how I feel about our D going forward listen to the latest Garage League podcast. They do a good job summarizing it and you won't be caught in the game this board likes to play where one person disagrees so they are automatically wrong no matter what logic they use.

 

[Gurglesons]

Guentzel was traded with a 1st for Sam Bennett though, don't forget that

I forgot we solved our center issues in a fictious trade where Riley Sheahan was given to us for future considerations.

 

[Speaking Moistly]

Guentzel was traded with a 1st for Sam Bennett though, don't forget that

.... Maatta/Dumoulin and Sprong for them, then.

Sheary-Crosby-Hornqvist
Hagelin-Malkin-Kessel
ZAR-Bennett-Rust
Wilson-Rowney-Reaves

"#2"-Letang
Dumoulin/Maatta-Schultz
Pouliot-Cole

It'll be fine...

 

[Ogrezilla]

That isn't true. Maatta led at least three games. I honestly do not think anyone besides Letang is a player that "makes those around them better".

Schultz to a degree.

If you want to hear how I feel about our D going forward listen to the latest Garage League podcast. They do a good job summarizing it and you won't be caught in the game this board likes to play where one person disagrees so they are automatically wrong no matter what logic they use.

sorry, so they led time in 22 of 25 games, and were 2nd and 3rd in the rest.

 

[Peat]

I think it would be possible if Sheary repeats what he did last year over 82 games and a team would really like him, but I think you might be maxing out at a young middle pair defenseman with top pair upside if you're making that trade. I don't think you could pull off a guy like Muzzin or Trouba for Sheary, even if he has a great year next year.

I would agree with although middle pair dman with top pair upside isn't what I took No 2 Dmen to mean.

I'd also add that with Sheary only having two years to UFA in such a scenario, you're probably getting an equally short term solution back.

Or just resign Dumo if you want after two years?

It is obvious you guys think we have a really solid D. I don't and I think when you have 35 year old Hainsey a touch below and above in terms of ice time the two players you just threw 10 million at and a combined nine years you have a chance that could blow up in your face

I think its pretty solid. I don't think its ideal but I also don't see what superior way forward there is.

Your solution seems to be shortchanging the dmen and hoping magic happens in terms of dmen developing (Beaulieu, Pouliot) and/or guys staying (Dumo ignoring the joys of free agency for a team that punched his bank balance in the face). That is genuinely terrifying asset management.

Honestly, for the d we've got, I'd like to be paying less. But there we go. We're not. We've got two dmen coming off the back of great seasons close to free agency, one dmen we gambled on getting a cheap deal and currently only breaking even on due to fitness, and Letang. It happens. And no one is handing over their bargain dmen for anything less than a trade overpayment.

They all fit under our cap. They're all fairly paid. There is no issue this season - unless you think defence doesn't matter and we should pump everything into points production.

And I think there's a reason you're the only guy arguing for that Pixies.

ETA:

Guentzel was traded with a 1st for Sam Bennett though, don't forget that

I'm still waiting to hear how this squares with "Only the next 2 seasons matter".

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Guentzel was traded with a 1st for Sam Bennett though, don't forget that

Why do we even need Sam Bennett? In that alternate reality, we've got David Desharnais filling that last center spot.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I forgot we solved our center issues in a fictious trade where Riley Sheahan was given to us for future considerations.

Sheahan for future considerations is a lot more realistic than Guentzel and a 1st for Sam Bennett at least. And I never said Sheahan would only cost future considerations (I said he'd be cheap to acquire), when you defended Guentzel and a 1st for Bennett for like a couple days.

I would agree with although middle pair dman with top pair upside isn't what I took No 2 Dmen to mean.

Oh yeah, that's not what it meant at all. I was just being generous with that and giving them the benefit of the doubt.

I'm still waiting to hear how this squares with "Only the next 2 seasons matter".

Plot twist: it doesn't.

 

[xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

I have a feeling JR has been in touch with the Avs about Duchene. Something's gonna give one way or another in that situation soon, and I wouldn't be surprised if we were one of the final two or three teams in the running before he's ultimately traded or he stays put. I think JR is waiting to hear what's going on with that situation once and for all before moving on, and that's why it seems like he's dragging his feet a bit.

One thing is for sure, having Rowney and 2017 Jay McClement as our 3C/4C combo is not going to cut it over the course of an entire season and playoffs. Everyone knows that, including JR. Something will be done eventually. I just hope JR lands the right guy, and not just whomever is available when he decides a move must finally be made.

 

[Gurglesons]

I would agree with although middle pair dman with top pair upside isn't what I took No 2 Dmen to mean.

I'd also add that with Sheary only having two years to UFA in such a scenario, you're probably getting an equally short term solution back.



I think its pretty solid. I don't think its ideal but I also don't see what superior way forward there is.

Your solution seems to be shortchanging the dmen and hoping magic happens in terms of dmen developing (Beaulieu, Pouliot) and/or guys staying (Dumo ignoring the joys of free agency for a team that punched his bank balance in the face). That is genuinely terrifying asset management.

Honestly, for the d we've got, I'd like to be paying less. But there we go. We're not. We've got two dmen coming off the back of great seasons close to free agency, one dmen we gambled on getting a cheap deal and currently only breaking even on due to fitness, and Letang. It happens. And no one is handing over their bargain dmen for anything less than a trade overpayment.

They all fit under our cap. They're all fairly paid. There is no issue this season - unless you think defence doesn't matter and we should pump everything into points production.

And I think there's a reason you're the only guy arguing for that Pixies.

ETA:



I'm still waiting to hear how this squares with "Only the next 2 seasons matter".

Go listen to the Garage League Podcast latest episode. They summarize my feelings exactly. Nothing really wrong with the deals, they just feel like overpayments and I'm not exactly sold on them.

In terms of Bennett. I think he is my dark horse to break out this year and put up 50+. I could be really wrong about that. My trade was I would trade up to Guentzel and a 1st, I think the trade being discussed was Sprong and a 1st and I misspoke and said Guentzel and a 1st when I meant I'd go as high as that for a center I believe is going to be a physical force, point producer and overall stud that would allow us to throw Malkin into just purely offensive starts.

I also think that our window is closing because Malkin is going to start slowing down and Bennett is the kind of kid that projects as a 20 minute + center that extends our window. I don't think wingers do that. If Jake suddenly proves
He can play center like he does wing in the NHL this year. I'd completely change my mind.

 

[Peat]

Go listen to the Garage League Podcast latest episode. They summarize my feelings exactly. Nothing really wrong with the deals, they just feel like overpayments and I'm not exactly sold on them.

In terms of Bennett. I think he is my dark horse to break out this year and put up 50+. I could be really wrong about that. My trade was I would trade up to Guentzel and a 1st, I think the trade being discussed was Sprong and a 1st and I misspoke and said Guentzel and a 1st when I meant I'd go as high as that for a center I believe is going to be a physical force, point producer and overall stud that would allow us to throw Malkin into just purely offensive starts.

I also think that our window is closing because Malkin is going to start slowing down and Bennett is the kind of kid that projects as a 20 minute + center that extends our window. I don't think wingers do that. If Jake suddenly proves
He can play center like he does wing in the NHL this year. I'd completely change my mind.

But you said you don't want to care what happens to our window beyond the next two years. If you still back this statement, why does it matter what happens after Malkin slows down?

And, even if they were overpayments, I still don't see a better use for our money. I'll pay at the high end of the market (as long as the contract is movable) if that's what makes a stronger team.

 

[Andy99]

I also think that our window is closing because Malkin is going to start slowing down

Lol...I thought we dispensed with this "Malkin is in decline" thread numerous pages ago. He's no more going to slow down than any other of our aging core, including Sid, Letang, Kessel. There's no empirical evidence for this other than he's getting older and so is everyone else. Where is this crap coming from?

Edit: if you truly believe our window is two years, you'd be all in on Duchene and not Bennett who needs some development

 

[Jenkins]

I have a feeling JR has been in touch with the Avs about Duchene. Something's gonna give one way or another in that situation soon, and I wouldn't be surprised if we were one of the final two or three teams in the running before he's ultimately traded or he stays put. I think JR is waiting to hear what's going on with that situation once and for all before moving on, and that's why it seems like he's dragging his feet a bit.

One thing is for sure, having Rowney and 2017 Jay McClement as our 3C/4C combo is not going to cut it over the course of an entire season and playoffs. Everyone knows that, including JR. Something will be done eventually. I just hope JR lands the right guy, and not just whomever is available when he decides a move must finally be made.

The one thing that scares me with Duchene is JR has made an offer (allegedly) that was two of Sheary, Sprong and Guentzel plus a 1st and it was turned down.
EDIT: This was at the deadline not this off-season.

Obviously Guentzel would be off the table now. I mean for me Sheary, Sprong and a first is probably fair for a player like Duchene (or slightly over) but it hurts us with having cheap young wingers which was a huge help filling out a great forward line up.

If he thinks this is the best chance at a threepeat maybe he goes for it.

Guentzel-Crosby-Hornqvist
Hagelin-Malkin-Kessel
Wilson-Duchene-Rust
Archibald-Rowney-Reaves

It's great for this season but really might squeeze us cap wise the next year. I mean we could worry about that then but we can be a contender for the rest of Sid and Geno's prime if we play it smart.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

The one thing that scares me with Duchene is JR has made an offer (allegedly) that was two of Sheary, Sprong and Guentzel plus a 1st and it was turned down.
EDIT: This was at the deadline not this off-season.

Obviously Guentzel would be off the table now. I mean for me Sheary, Sprong and a first is probably fair for a player like Duchene (or slightly over) but it hurts us with having cheap young wingers which was a huge help filling out a great forward line up.

If he thinks this is the best chance at a threepeat maybe he goes for it.

Guentzel-Crosby-Hornqvist
Hagelin-Malkin-Kessel
Wilson-Duchene-Rust
Archibald-Rowney-Reaves

It's great for this season but really might squeeze us cap wise the next year. I mean we could worry about that then but we can be a contender for the rest of Sid and Geno's prime if we play it smart.

I'm not in favor of any deal for Duchene that involves losing two of Sheary, Sprong, or Guentzel. I'm not in favor of any deal involving Guentzel, period, as a matter of fact. I think it solves one issue, but creates another.