Salary Cap: Salary Cap & Roster Building | Nine Mile Skid on a Ten Mile Ride

Status
Not open for further replies.

Honour Over Glory

Fire Sully
Jan 30, 2012
77,316
42,447
I think its fair to say Johnson is a few miles above Sheahan in terms of offence. He should be at 5.5m. He's a legit 2C.

Eller and Jarnkrok are on pace for 35 non PP points, Bozak for 33.5. Sheahan's on pace for 31. I really don't see 2-4 points over the season being a matter for huge excitement on a 3C. Sure, I'd rather have them than not, but 35 vs 31? I get thinking that having a guy like Johnson at 3C would be a big advantage, because he really would, but Eller/Jarnkrok as things stand?



I don't think any one bottom sixer is the difference between being an adequate team and a good team. I get any upgrade makes a difference, but I'm pretty sure every SC somewhere has some players that most fans would consider only adequate.



Current centre situation? Yeah. I think we need at least one more centre. I don't think anyone here thinks we're gonna do it without at least another Sheahan.

Also, if Letang could extract his head from his derriere, then we shouldn't have to defy the possession gods this year.

Eller is also producing much better numbers because he's getting the opportunity to have Oshie on his wing, a solid finisher. Sheahan has had his lines juggled until he's settled into this current line with snipers Kuhnhackl and Reaves. But before that he briefly had Sheary and Hornqvist, then Rust and Hagelin, etc.

With all of that juggling, he's on pace for those 31pts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Riptide

Ryder71

Registered User
Nov 24, 2017
22,831
11,036
Jesus ****ing christ...

Lars Eller is also playing with TJ Oshie. Imagine that, his production which is usually around 29pts, is now on pace for 39+...it's...it's like when you put talented players with marginally decent players, they like, produce or something.

Sheahan has had a rotation of wingers and is producing numbers he's produced before in back 2 back years with the Red Wings. Meanwhile, Eller is producing numbers he only did in a shortened season and then never again and now to get offense out of him on a roster that needs more out of cheaper players, they put Oshie with Sheahan. Imagine, if you are capable, Sheahan rebounding into the 30+ pt player he is and then suddenly also having wingers that can finish to take advantage of his playmaking, you know, kind of like how lines work and production.

So now we're moving the goal post yet again because Sheahan is stuck with 4th liners and Eller has Oshie. Well, that wasn't brought up until now, was it? You can manipulate any stat and any f***ing circumstance to fit your narrative because your precious Sheahan MUST be better eh? Give me a f***in break!

If this was your argument as to who certain players played with why wait until now to bring it up? And whats it going to be next, before you bring up yet another wrinkle to consider huh? You're shameful, you really are. YOU are intellectually dishonest!
 

Peat

Registered User
Jun 14, 2016
29,288
25,206
Eller is also producing much better numbers because he's getting the opportunity to have Oshie on his wing, a solid finisher. Sheahan has had his lines juggled until he's settled into this current line with snipers Kuhnhackl and Reaves. But before that he briefly had Sheary and Hornqvist, then Rust and Hagelin, etc.

With all of that juggling, he's on pace for those 31pts.

DobberHockey Presents FrozenPool's NHL Line Combinations - based on this, Eller is seen as much juggling as Sheahan.

Not playing him can't be doing a whole lot for his value though.

I guess you can argue holding onto him for depth when someone gets inevitably hurt though.

I doubt it hurts it a huge amount either. People know what Cole is and they know he's in iffy form.

I made it perfectly clear as to what my stance on the matter is. To include all points and use the same sample size for all players within the discussion. And I don't care who else said anything. This isn't a popularity contest. So, you, like them are wrong.

Now, we can keep going round and round but I'm pretty sure we won't find a resolution. I think you're full of ****, in fact I know you are. And you're of the belief that only ES production counts. So let's leave it there because we're not gonna agree. And I'm pretty sure this forum has had enough of this.

So you're not going to actually respond to the people politely posting stats and trying to engage with you, but instead come here just to call people names?

Got it. Stay classy.
 

Ryder71

Registered User
Nov 24, 2017
22,831
11,036
DobberHockey Presents FrozenPool's NHL Line Combinations - based on this, Eller is seen as much juggling as Sheahan.






So you're not going to actually respond to the people politely posting stats and trying to engage with you, but instead come here just to call people names?

Got it.

I've responded quite a bit actually to you Sheahan cheerleaders. But at some point I get bored with the process. And I'm sure this forum is as well. Did you get that? Is that clear enough?
 

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
And I don't care who else said anything. This isn't a popularity contest. So, you, like them are wrong.

It's not about popularity. Where I was going with that, is that when multiple people say "you're wrong, and this is why", you should be at the very least pausing and looking at what they're saying and presenting to see if a re-evaluation is required. There's usually a reason when more than one person are saying the same thing. Not always, but it should make someone at least give things a second thought.

I made it perfectly clear as to what my stance on the matter is. To include all points and use the same sample for all players within the discussion.

I always have. The games played with their current team from this season. I've brought up what different players have done in past seasons to show that they're not all that different from this season (and I've done the same for Sheahan), but I've never excluded this season with their current team. A 37 game sample size is more than enough to get an idea as to what we can probably expect out of a player. Especially when it's not all that different then what the player has done in other seasons. Sheahan has had one absolutely dismal season. But prior to that, his stats are not out of wack with the pace he's currently on - which means what he's doing is likely sustainable.


Let me try one last time to explain why PP points as a baseline to compare different players from different teams is a terrible idea. Especially when looking at a team that's as stacked as Pittsburgh is up front. @Peat had a great post on that HERE. I've edited out part that addresses other posts in the quote below.

a) Power Play time is more a reflection of the team than the player. Why is Guentzel 138th among forwards for PP time when he's 93rd for production? Answer - the team has better PP forwards. Why did Bonino's PP usage drop when moving from Vancouver to Pittsburgh? Answer - the team had better PP forwards. Why isn't Sheahan, a forward with a decent history of PP usage, not being used much in Pittsburgh?
<snipe>
You look at their previous history and then you use your judgment to work out how they would transfer to their likely role over here. Which yes, does involve being selective with statistic use. A player probably won't score the same if their role goes from 2C to 3C, or if their PP usage halves. A player probably will score more if they're on a team where there hasn't been a massive decrease in production across the board since the new coach arrived.

So while you may feel that looking at Bozak as a 55pt player is a more accurate representation of him as a player, how can you rationally use that as some sort of baseline to compare him to a player on another team that doesn't receive any PP minutes? The whole point of this is to try and forecast some realistic expectations for said player if they magically became a Penguin. You can't forecast someone who's getting that much PP time (2:22, tied for 2nd on his team) and producing over 30% of their production on the PP... and then rationally expect them to come to a different team - especially here and do the same thing. It's just not rational or logical. That's my issue with including PP production. It's not about diminishing them as a player, it's about baselining some sort of expectations for them.

And as I've said before - if a player is that much better offensively... it WILL be reflected in their ES points. And it was with Bozak - he had 37 ES points last year with Toronto - which is very impressive and very good. But the latter (his ES production) is always going to be a much better representation as to what one should realistically expect if he were to magically become a Penguin tomorrow. That's just the reality of being a Penguin and having to deal with getting scraps for PP minutes. If you look at the last game vs NYR (where our PP was poor - 0/3), the forwards on the 2nd unit only averaged 45 seconds a PP. However, if you look at the game vs DET where our PP was good (2/5), that 2nd unit in 5 PPs averaged around 20-25 seconds a PP, and none received 2 minutes of total PP time that game, where as our big boys all received 4 minutes + (the big 3, 5 minutes+).

It would be a little different if we were talking about a skilled top 6 winger who could realistically challenge for some quality PP minutes. Then I'd care a lot less about their PP production. But when we're talking about a #3C - and one who would likely be taking on a heavy defensive role - or at least should be given the quality of centers ahead of them, any PP production from them will be a bonus, not the "norm" - because they just won't get the minutes. The joys of having the talent we do, and the leagues best PP.

I could bring up zone starts and quality of linemates and whatnot... but I suspect that like everything else, it will be a waste of time.

Right, when people expose you for the fraud that you are and the fact that your criteria is derived from cherry picking. That would make anyone mad.

The f***? :dunno: :facepalm:
 

Ogrezilla

Nerf Herder
Jul 5, 2009
75,534
22,049
Pittsburgh
hey the team is winning, I wonder how the salary cap thread is going

cMWalaa.gif
 

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
I get they love Kuhnhackl, but I would love to land a better 4th line LW and C. If we could pick up Pouliot for that spot and then add a decent 4th line C that isn't incompetent with the puck like Rowney, we're set.

I don't think they would do that. At least not unless one of Rust or Hagelin was moved.

Plekanec + Pouliot on this roster and you take off Rowney + Kuhnhackl...

Simon/Hagelin, Crosby, Sprong
Guentzel, Malkin, Kessel
Sheary, Plekanec, Hornqvist
Pouliot, Sheahan, Reaves/Rust

We all know that Reaves if healthy is likely playing every single game. Which means unless we're scratching both of Simon and Sprong or one of Rust/Hagelin... I see little point to bringing Pouliot in. Quality player... just not one that separate's himself enough from Hagelin/Rust to be worth the cost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Honour Over Glory

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
With the exception of center the Penguins have more than enough depth everywhere. The issue is getting the mix right. Very interested to see how JR shuffles this up in the coming weeks.

However that goes for personal on the roster as well as the individual combinations. Even before acquiring Oleksiak, concerns were expressed this summer about the individual makeup of the blueline. Maatta returning to form really helped there, but that doesn't really change the fact that we could probably use another guy who's closer to Green/Daley in how they transition the puck, then a Hunwick, Cole or Oleksiak.

I was thinking about Mike Green the other day.

Dumoulin-Letang
Maatta-Green
Oleksiak-Schultz

Don’t think I’d want to give up a 1st for him though, as we can use the pick some where else.

Personally I'd rather have someone a little more well rounded then Green. Gogo is still my favorite, as someone who might be semi realistically available - even if un-affordable. He can skate and transition the puck AND he's decent enough defensively that you can play him 20+ minutes a night. That aspect of Green scares me (in his own end). Not saying it couldn't work... and I recognize that our options are likely limited if we wanted to make a change there. But I'm not quite sure that he's the guy I'd be targeting if we were looking at another D.

I'm not sold on their defense personally, I think they really could use one more guy if Cole is going out (which he should). Ironically, I think the kind of guy they can use on their 2nd pair is Hainsey, he's the exact kind of player I'm thinking of to play with Schultz on the 2nd pair.

I don't think Green is the type of defensemen I'd be looking at. I'd be looking at a Hainsey type of defensemen, not a pure OFD. I'd target Green if I was moving Letang, which doesn't look to be happening.

Might as well just keep Hunwick or Cole then.

Not playing him can't be doing a whole lot for his value though.

I guess you can argue holding onto him for depth when someone gets inevitably hurt though.

Honestly, I doubt it changes things too much. If he was valued at (for example) 2x 2nds a month ago (or 2), that's not going to change all that much since then.
 

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
If this was your argument as to who certain players played with why wait until now to bring it up? And whats it going to be next, before you bring up yet another wrinkle to consider huh? You're shameful, you really are. YOU are intellectually dishonest!

It's been brought up many times when pointing to Bonino's production and who his #1 linemate was in comparison to who Sheahan hasn't had. Just like zone starts have been (before you start calling those "intellectually dishonest and shameful" as well). :shakehead
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->