Salary Cap: The Salary Cap Thread | Nope, Still Nothing ...

[Dipsy Doodle]

We really are a different team with Horny. His determination and ability to score ugly allows us to beat teams different ways when skill alone isn't getting the job done.

I'd hoped ZAR would be able to come in and replace some of that if Horny rides off into the sunset next summer, but the kid looks to be a little further away from that kind of impact than we'd hoped.

 

[ColePens]

I could imagine a line with Haula centering Hags/Kessel and not a single soul would be able to deal with their speed. Then you give Rust and Sheary to Geno. Guentzel and Horny to Sid. Good lord.

 

[Empoleon8771]

My only concern with Hornqvist is where does he fit in on this team at ES? Especially when Sprong comes up eventually. When Sprong comes up, you're either going to have to move a RWer to LW or trade a RW. It's just kinda a crappy situation overall because Crosby apparently doesn't like playing with Hornqvist, Kessel and Crosby don't mesh and Malkin and Hornqvist don't mesh. With the Haula example, you could go with:

Guentzel-Crosby-Sprong
Rust-Malkin-Kessel
Sheary-Haula-Hornqvist

But that's really the only option there that doesn't put two guys who either don't work well together or don't like playing together. Is it worth re-signing Hornqvist to what he'll make if he doesn't play with either of your top-2 centers? I'm honestly not sure, I have to see how much he'll make. I personally really like that lineup, but at the same time, it's really the only option without moving someone to their off wing or playing two guys who don't mesh well together/don't like playing together.

From purely looking at the team on paper, letting Hornqvist go and sliding Hagelin into the top-9 makes the most sense. You have a lot more roster flexibility, since Hagelin fits pretty well with any line, plus Hagelin would be a much shorter (and cheaper) commitment.

 

[Andy99]

Yup that's a good point. Sully gave Willy a pretty short lease, but I guess with how bad that line is at ES, the difference on the PK earns Kuhn a spot in the lineup.

Now that Cole appears to be back in the lineup, if he plays tonight I'll be interested to see if Kuhn is still in the lineup. I wouldn't be surprised to see Wilson playing again on the fourth line

 

[Speaking Moistly]

My only concern with Hornqvist is where does he fit in on this team at ES? Especially when Sprong comes up eventually. When Sprong comes up, you're either going to have to move a RWer to LW or trade a RW. It's just kinda a crappy situation overall because Crosby apparently doesn't like playing with Hornqvist, Kessel and Crosby don't mesh and Malkin and Hornqvist don't mesh. With the Haula example, you could go with:

Guentzel-Crosby-Sprong
Rust-Malkin-Kessel
Sheary-Haula-Hornqvist

But that's really the only option there that doesn't put two guys who either don't work well together or don't like playing together. Is it worth re-signing Hornqvist to what he'll make if he doesn't play with either of your top-2 centers? I'm honestly not sure, I have to see how much he'll make.

Honestly, I'm past the point of caring. Whoever has the problem with CH can get the f*** over it and Guentzel should go a long way to making up for any problems. Crosby also inevitably gets frustrated with anyone on his line, Hornqvist is effective enough there that it should be glossed over for the positives. Tell him 72 is a lucky number in some obscure culture.

Even on L3 I'd still do it, too.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Honestly, I'm past the point of caring. Whoever has the problem with CH can get the **** over it and Guentzel should go a long way to making up for any problems. Crosby also inevitably gets frustrated with anyone on his line, Hornqvist is effective enough there that it should be glossed over for the positives. Tell him 72 is a lucky number in some obscure culture.

Even on L3 I'd still do it, too.

If you force Hornqvist on to Crosby's RW, that solves a lot of issues, because it lets you have more flexibility on the 2nd and 3rd lines. I just don't know how much influence Crosby has on his linemates. If he has a significant amount, I'm not sure re-signing Hornqvist and getting rid of Hagelin would be the smart move. I don't think it's a black and white question to answer, I think it's a debate worth having. Hornqvist is the more needed player and would be much harder to replace internally, but Hagelin gives the team much more roster and cap flexibility and would be a much shorter commitment.

 

[ColePens]

My question to you Emp is this - who are we replacing Horny with? There is legit nobody on this team that can replace Hornqvist.

Not putting down any of Sheary, Rust, Hags, Sprong, etc... but those guys all at least have a replaceable player among one another. Hornqvist is a guy we just simply do not have a replacement for.

 

[Empoleon8771]

My question to you Emp is this - who are we replacing Horny with? There is legit nobody on this team that can replace Hornqvist.

Not putting down any of Sheary, Rust, Hags, Sprong, etc... but those guys all at least have a replaceable player among one another. Hornqvist is a guy we just simply do not have a replacement for.

I know, that's a problem. That's definitely something that has to be considered, but that's not the only thing that needs to be considered. Like I said, I really don't think it's a black and white question, I don't think there's really a wrong answer here. Keeping either one has their pros and cons.

I personally think Guentzel can replace a lot of what Hornqvist did on the PP, but he won't be able to replace all of it. That's also not really an appropriate use of his talent either IMO, he's more suited for a Crosby type of PP role, not a Hornqvist type of PP role.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

My question to you Emp is this - who are we replacing Horny with? There is legit nobody on this team that can replace Hornqvist.

Not putting down any of Sheary, Rust, Hags, Sprong, etc... but those guys all at least have a replaceable player among one another. Hornqvist is a guy we just simply do not have a replacement for.

ZAR. He looked good in rookie camp, so therefore he's made Hornqvist redundant. Problem solved.

 

[Empoleon8771]

ZAR. He looked good in rookie camp, so therefore he's made Hornqvist redundant. Problem solved.

I don't think I ever said that

I think if Hornqvist leaves, you'll see Guentzel as the 1st PP unit net front guy and ZAR as the 2nd PP unit net front guy. Without Hornqvist, you'd probably have something like this:

Guentzel-Crosby-Sheary
Rust-Malkin-Kessel/Sprong
Hagelin-3C-Sprong/Kessel
ZAR-4C-4RW

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I don't think I ever said that

I think if Hornqvist leaves, you'll see Guentzel as the 1st PP unit net front guy and ZAR as the 2nd PP unit net front guy. Without Hornqvist, you'd probably have something like this:

Guentzel-Crosby-Sheary
Rust-Malkin-Kessel/Sprong
Hagelin-3C-Sprong/Kessel
ZAR-4C-4RW

Oh, I wasn't attributing that to you. I just remember it being said (can't recall by whom) that ZAR's play in the rookie scrimmage could make Hornqvist redundant as early as this season. I think we saw in exhibition just how much work ZAR still needs before we even contemplate penciling him in as Horny's replacement.

 

[ColePens]

I know, that's a problem. That's definitely something that has to be considered, but that's not the only thing that needs to be considered. Like I said, I really don't think it's a black and white question, I don't think there's really a wrong answer here. Keeping either one has their pros and cons.

I personally think Guentzel can replace a lot of what Hornqvist did on the PP, but he won't be able to replace all of it. That's also not really an appropriate use of his talent either IMO, he's more suited for a Crosby type of PP role, not a Hornqvist type of PP role.

It's never a good thing when Sid/Jake are the two who get dirty goals and nobody else really does except Horny. Credit Sid/Jake, though.

ZAR. He looked good in rookie camp, so therefore he's made Hornqvist redundant. Problem solved.

ZAR looked good in rookie camp, for sure. He also looked like Tangradi when put w/ Geno in preseason. Exaggerations of Tangradi aside, he really did look lost and not ready for the NHL. So no.. problem not solved. Problem not even remotely solved.

I've seen this a lot from HF, lately. Sprong is going to replace Kessel, before he even scored 10 goals in the NHL. I love what Sprong is developing into, but the kid has to score some goals before he's replacing Kessel. And Hornqvist? I can name you maybe 1-2 players who can do what #72 does anymore in the league. Simmonds is the one we all know. Nobody else is on his level. ZAR is developing, but he's a healthy scratch in the AHL right now. So no.. he's not taking over for #72 any time soon. In fact, I really don't think anyone will ever take over for what Horny brings. We can just hope we add someone who adds that spunk in the same way. ZAR has some more time before he develops into what we think he can be, and we aren't even sure he will.

 

[Speaking Moistly]

If you force Hornqvist on to Crosby's RW, that solves a lot of issues, because it lets you have more flexibility on the 2nd and 3rd lines. I just don't know how much influence Crosby has on his linemates. If he has a significant amount, I'm not sure re-signing Hornqvist and getting rid of Hagelin would be the smart move. I don't think it's a black and white question to answer, I think it's a debate worth having. Hornqvist is the more needed player, but Hagelin gives the team much more roster and cap flexibility.

Who knows, but this also isn't the only annoying line decision we've seen under Sullivan. If it's Crosby then there needs to be boundaries re-established because it's a somewhat self-destructive problem with a ripple effect. I'd still consider Hornqvist the far more valuable player and Hagelin is only signed for one more season after this. Hagelin is fast and good defensively, I'd say he's an important part of establishing their identity. He's still a speeedster (a trait that you don't count on aging well) and nowhere near the game changer Hornqvist can be. I'd say we've seen Hornqvist influence the identity of the team as well and he's the better offensive player who should age better.

They have Rust. They have prospects like DiPauli and Archibald to be Hagelin lite types. They don't have anything close to Hornqvist right now. Hagelin doesn't have a good contract at the end of the day, it's nearing the end and it's manageable so far but it's not good. Cap flexibility isn't worth shit if we spend the next few years looking for another Hornqvist.

ZAR. He looked good in rookie camp, so therefore he's made Hornqvist redundant. Problem solved.

He didn't look that good, though... hence why it hasn't been a season of never ending Hornqvist trade proposals.

 

[ColePens]

I think Sidney the Kidney was being sarcastic and I missed it. BRING BACK OUR SARCASM EMOJIS! :angry:

 

[Shady Machine]

As a major member of the Hornqvist fanclub, I'm glad to see others coming around to re-signing the guy.

 

[ColePens]

As a major member of the Hornqvist fanclub, I'm glad to see others coming around to re-signing the guy.

Don't you dare lump me into a "coming around" category. I have texts messages from Nashville playoff games drooling over Hornqvist.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Who knows, but this also isn't the only annoying line decision we've seen under Sullivan. If it's Crosby then there needs to be boundaries re-established because it's a somewhat self-destructive problem with a ripple effect. I'd still consider Hornqvist the far more valuable player and Hagelin is only signed for one more season after this. Hagelin is fast and good defensively, I'd say he's an important part of establishing their identity. He's still a speeedster (a trait that you don't count on aging well) and nowhere near the game changer Hornqvist can be. I'd say we've seen Hornqvist influence the identity of the team as well and he's the better offensive player who should age better.

They have Rust. They have prospects like DiPauli and Archibald to be Hagelin lite types. They don't have anything close to Hornqvist right now. Hagelin doesn't have a good contract at the end of the day, it's nearing the end and it's manageable so far but it's not good. Cap flexibility isn't worth **** if we spend the next few years looking for another Hornqvist.

I don't really disagree with any of this, but at the same point, you can come up with similar pros for keeping Hagelin over Hornqvist. I don't think Hagelin only being signed for 1 additional year is a negative, and he has the big advantage of being able to play with any center on this team and fitting well. I wouldn't say keeping Hagelin would be the "better" decision in terms of ES play, but it would be the decision to give them a lot more flexibility. I think Hornqvist is dramatically harder to replace than Hagelin and is just a flat out better player, but at the same time, he'd leave the Penguins limited with options to run with at ES, he'd cost more than Hagelin and it might be difficult to move Hagelin anyway (although I doubt it since he'd only have 1 year under contract left). That's why I was saying it's not a simple question, there are pros and cons for keeping each of them over the other.

I'd like to re-sign him, but I'd be a little concerned with how the ES lines would play out if CH doesn't play together, or if both Kessel and Sprong are on RW. If one of them moves to LW or gets traded, I think that solves most of the issues at ES. You can then have Sheary or Rust as your top line RW, Kessel or Sprong as your 2nd line RW and Hornqvist as your 3rd line RW. However, if your top-9 RWers next year are Sprong, Kessel and Hornqvist, you're kinda limited with options if Crosby is calling the shots for who is on his line.

 

[Shady Machine]

Don't you dare lump me into a "coming around" category. I have texts messages from Nashville playoff games drooling over Hornqvist.

haha not you of course.

Just more speaking to the general tone around re-signing him. The majority (and this is me making shit up) seemed to be in the "give him 3 years or let him walk" category in the summer.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Actually, I should probably clarify something. I don't think it's fair to say "it's Hagelin or Hornqvist", because they should be getting rid of Hagelin after the year. I'm wrong for making this discussion about Hagelin, because Hagelin shouldn't be on this team for 2018-2019 if he continues to play like he has for the last year and 6 games. It's either re-signing Hornqvist and making an "inconvenience" (not the right word, but it's the word I'm going to use anyway) for your ES lines, or not re-signing Hornqvist and making an inconvenience (this is the right word for this one, though) for your PP. I'm wrong for making this discussion Hagelin vs Hornqvist, because there's no reason to keep Hagelin at the salary he's making beyond this year. It only becomes Hornqvist vs Hagelin if you can't get rid of Hagelin.

 

[AjaxTelamon]

I don't really disagree with any of this, but at the same point, you can come up with similar pros for keeping Hagelin over Hornqvist. I don't think Hagelin only being signed for 1 additional year is a negative, and he has the big advantage of being able to play with any center on this team and fitting well. I wouldn't say keeping Hagelin would be the "better" decision in terms of ES play, but it would be the decision to give them a lot more flexibility. I think Hornqvist is dramatically harder to replace than Hagelin and is just a flat out better player, but at the same time, he'd leave the Penguins limited with options to run with at ES, he'd cost more than Hagelin and it might be difficult to move Hagelin anyway (although I doubt it since he'd only have 1 year under contract left). That's why I was saying it's not a simple question, there are pros and cons for keeping each of them over the other.

I'd like to re-sign him, but I'd be a little concerned with how the ES lines would play out if CH doesn't play together, or if both Kessel and Sprong are on RW. If one of them moves to LW or gets traded, I think that solves most of the issues at ES. You can then have Sheary or Rust as your top line RW, Kessel or Sprong as your 2nd line RW and Hornqvist as your 3rd line RW. However, if your top-9 RWers next year are Sprong, Kessel and Hornqvist, you're kinda limited with options if Crosby is calling the shots for who is on his line.

Having PH as 3rd line RW is a great problem to have. You know he can slide up next to Sid any time we need that tenacity to close out a game, like we did the other day against the Caps. Sheary and Guentzel should both be on LW, and Rust can be there too. That makes room for both Kessel and Sprong in the top 9.

As much as I love Hags, there's no question between him and PH who we need to keep, IMO.

 

[Gurglesons]

In terms of long term cap structure I see two things happening this summer. We either move our Hagelin for cap, or we trade Rust because he is asking for money. I think Rust is clearly playing himself into the 4 million dollar range this year.

I honestly think we can resign Hornqvist fairly easily. The main worry with him is going to be term, not cost. I have no issues giving him a five year contract as I think he'll age like Kunitz did into his mid 30s.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Having PH as 3rd line RW is a great problem to have. You know he can slide up next to Sid any time we need that tenacity to close out a game, like we did the other day against the Caps. Sheary and Guentzel should both be on LW, and Rust can be there too. That makes room for both Kessel and Sprong in the top 9.

As much as I love Hags, there's no question between him and PH who we need to keep, IMO.

I don't have an issue with Hornqvist on the 3rd line at all, that's probably where I'd ideally have him to be honest. Sheary and Hornqvist as a 3rd line wing duo is phenomenal. The issue is what impact having him has on the top-6. That basically locks Kessel with Malkin, which locks Sprong with Crosby (assuming Sprong is up by then and playing RW). That lineup could work, without a doubt. You just don't have many options if that lineup doesn't work, unless you're playing guys who don't mesh well together (Kessel and Crosby or Malkin and Hornqvist) or you move someone like Sprong to LW. Watching Sprong in WBS makes me really not want to move him to LW, he scores those 2013 Kessel goals from RW way too often.

 

[Shaffer]

I have been thinking about this: Why not put Sheary on fourth line and help create offense? Creates depth and a Sheary-McKeeg/Rowney-Reaves line could actually be good. And it allows Sprong to be called up once/if we trade Wilson+1st for Haula.

Guentzel-Crosby-Hornqvist
Rust-Malkin-Sprong
Hagelin-Haula/McKeeg-Kessel
Sheary-McKeeg/Rowney-Reaves

 

[66-30-33]

Unless we get a speedy 3C like Hags I think losing Hags would be a mistake.

 

[Shaffer]

Would prefer a Sheary-McKeeg-Archibald line though.