Where would he play?
Jarry and a 3rd round pick with Sheary for ****ing Del Zotto?
I'm gonna leave this place for the weekend.
******ed **** like this is gonna make me say some next level angry ****.
Someone had a great idea....that Taveres pull a Hossa and sign with the Pens for a one-year contract at $7 mil if he wants to win....could be accomplished by trading Hags, Shear and Hunwick only...lol
NHL Free Agency: Can the Penguins land John Tavares?
Plugging a guy like Tavares into our line up pushes everyone else down, so he absolutely does help depth. But he doesn’t help the defense, which should be first priority.Lol. Why would the pens even want tavares? He doesnt help forward depth..hes not gonna be 3/4th liner or sketchy defense. Lol. Waste of time, money, picks, whatever.
If he’s cool playing wing, not getting prime PP minutes and being underpaid, we’re right up his alley!
Being OK with that TOP4 doesn´t mean that you don´t add a TOP4 dman if there is a chance. Maatta is not an ideal TOP4 option anyway, but having him on 3rd pair is tremendous depth, for example... I still think that Kessel´s situation needs to be looked at. His value is solid now and the risk of him sucking like these last 4 months is significant for upcoming years. Also, obviously.. Sheary and Hunwick need to be traded or dumped.Back to a more realistic discussion, let's talk about what Yohe said in his most recent article. He said that Dumoulin is completely untouchable and Maatta and Schutlz are "virtually untouchable", correct? If that's the case, I think that just means that the Penguins are satisfied with their top-4. If Maatta, Letang and Schultz all play to their capabilities (or even close to their capabilities), that should be a pretty good top-4 I think. I'd personally rather see the pairs be Maatta-Letang and Dumoulin-Schultz, but I don't think that will happen.
Outside of Dumo, you can make a case to either or trade every other defenseman. Which one do you make a case to trade and switch ones not to trade?
I’m split on Maatta.
He'd have to take a lot less than the 2.5 he was making. Too much for a guy who was regularly a healthy scratch.Don't know if discussed but Jannik Hansen said he doesn't want to return to San Jose with the current coaching setup. He's a UFA.
Id still target a guy like Hickey or a guy like de Haan in free agency. Use Maatta to get some help up front.Dumo: Easy no.
Ruhwedel: No - just no value to be gained.
Oleksiak: Probably not for the same reason as Ruh - not likely to gain any real value. But it's more dependent on what we do with the blueline and where our cap sits.
Schultz: Probably not, simply because whomever we bring in isn't likely to be all that much better then Schultz, and we really need his PPQB/PMD skills on the right side.
Letang: I do not see us being a better team by trading Letang. Yes I'm well aware of all the arguments about addition by subtraction, and all that. I still do not see this team being better simply by trading Letang. At least not this summer. And if we wanted to do it next season/summer, we would have to bring in one quality PMD first.
Maatta: I wouldn't hesitate to move him for a strong PMD who is a better skater. Probably a LD, but I'd consider a RD if we were working on bringing in another LD.
One of the issues we have is our makeup on the blueline is a little precarious. Whomever we trade Maatta for has to be able to PK, as Schultz currently doesn't PK, and Sullivan doesn't seem to trust Oleksiak with that duty. In the POs it was Letang, Dumoulin, Maatta and Ruhwedel on the PK. This is one of the reasons players like Demers and Gogo are attractive, as they do it all. They can skate, move the puck, push the pace, not be terrible defensively, and PK. If there was a way to move Maatta and somehow get both of those guys, I'd be a very happy camper. I just do not know a realistic way of accomplishing that. Then if we wanted to move Letang, we'd actually be in a position to do so.
Dumoulin - Letang
Goligoski - Demers
Oleksiak - Schultz
Ruhwedel
Expensive at ~28m, but also deep and good. But it also provides a lot of puck movement skills that we will need if we seriously wanted to consider moving Letang. Then we wouldn't be extremely dependent on getting back a high end RD to replace him as we'd have Schultz and Demers, while also having Dumoulin and Gogo who can all move the puck. And as long as whomever we got back was in the same realm as Schultz/Gogo/Demers, we'd probably be okay.
That said, I think we all know that trading Letang (at least anytime soon) is a pipe dream.
Don't know if discussed but Jannik Hansen said he doesn't want to return to San Jose with the current coaching setup. He's a UFA.
Id still target a guy like Hickey or a guy like de Haan in free agency. Use Maatta to get some help up front.
Same issue as with Calvert. How much does he want, and can we afford that simply to play him on the 3rd/4th line?
Back to a more realistic discussion, let's talk about what Yohe said in his most recent article. He said that Dumoulin is completely untouchable and Maatta and Schutlz are "virtually untouchable", correct? If that's the case, I think that just means that the Penguins are satisfied with their top-4. If Maatta, Letang and Schultz all play to their capabilities (or even close to their capabilities), that should be a pretty good top-4 I think. I'd personally rather see the pairs be Maatta-Letang and Dumoulin-Schultz, but I don't think that will happen.
If the Penguins aren't touching the top-4, then I imagine that means the Penguins will be looking at improving the bottom pair and swapping some forwards. I imagine the Penguins will probably trade 2 or 3 regulars from last year either for other wingers or a defenseman. I've already said I really like the idea of trading Sheary for Del Zotto, but I could also see Rust being moved for a more natural LW that brings similar things as Rust.
I could see Brock McGinn from Caronlina being a trade target, if the Penguins are looking to swap Rust for a LW similar to Rust. I also wonder if Tanner Pearson could be an attainable target, he already got his big extension ($3.75 million AAV) but he seems like another LW similar to Rust.
On the forward front, we need a LW....the two best and the two that are out of our price range are Kane and JVR...everyone else out there in FA are older players, 30+, which I’m not enamored of...we don’t need any more older players, as we have plenty....
But if we’re going that route, I would give a ring to Kovalchuk .... I know the rumors are NYR but he’s a big body, skilled, and could work with G or on any bottom line....as with anything, it’s the cost, but if we’re going 30+, I’d prefer him over Komarov or Calvert etc...
I honestly do not get why "old" (and yes "old" is subjective), is necessarily a bad thing. I mean our #2D in the POs last year (TOI) was Hainsey who was 36. Cullen was 40. There's actually advantages to signing someone who's not 26-30. You sign someone that young who's in demand and they will get money and term. You sign someone who's 33-36 and you have a lot more flexibility there with both.
I'm not saying we should be going after every old player out there, but I wouldn't automatically discount the idea just because someone isn't 25.
Don't know if discussed but Jannik Hansen said he doesn't want to return to San Jose with the current coaching setup. He's a UFA.
I'd rather have Calvert at around 2 than Sheary at 3 in the bottom 6.Same issue as with Calvert. How much does he want, and can we afford that simply to play him on the 3rd/4th line?