Speculation: 2015 NHL Entry Draft

[Bennett Brauer]

At this point, they should just be searching for another 2nd instead of a 1st. We deffo have some players that can land us a 2nd. Theres some good talent available from 30-60 this year.

In 2013 we had no 1st and a mid 2nd and we picked Jarry and Guentzel. We can still grab a decent prospect with our 46th pick if it isn't traded and we most certainly can get a 2nd round pick for players we don't need. Sutter should be traded in a package for top 6 help, Bennett can be traded for a 2nd or more, Kunitz for a 2nd, etc.

We have options there and I'd say it's a good bet that GMJR acquires more picks.

 

[eXile59]

In 2013 we had no 1st and a mid 2nd and we picked Jarry and Guentzel. We can still grab a decent prospect with our 46th pick if it isn't traded and we most certainly can get a 2nd round pick for players we don't need. Sutter should be traded in a package for top 6 help, Bennett can be traded for a 2nd or more, Kunitz for a 2nd, etc.

We have options there and I'd say it's a good bet that GMJR acquires more picks.

Why would you trade Bennett for a 2nd round pick? He's a 23 year old first round pick that hasn't got a chance to play? That's the kind of bad asset management we need to avoid.

 

[T1K]

Why would you trade Bennett for a 2nd round pick? He's a 23 year old first round pick that hasn't got a chance to play? That's the kind of bad asset management we need to avoid.

He might not pan out here. Getting a 2015 2nd would be a good return for him.

 

[eXile59]

He might not pan out here. Getting a 2015 2nd would be a good return for him.

He might and you fill a hole at wing for several years. That reward out weighs a 2nd round pick every day.

It's like people don't remember the Despres trade and it just happened.

 

[Jag68Sid87]

Why would you trade Bennett for a 2nd round pick? He's a 23 year old first round pick that hasn't got a chance to play? That's the kind of bad asset management we need to avoid.

I agree completely.

 

[Zero Pucks]

He might not pan out here. Getting a 2015 2nd would be a good return for him.

That's the dumbest return we could ever get for Bennett. The risks would highly outweigh the reward. The likelihood of whoever we draft in the 2nd will probably have a greater chance of busting. Meanwhile Bennett could be an effective, young, cheap player for us next season.

If we're going to trade Bennett then it should be in a package for a young proven NHL player. Nothing less.

 

[penzweiser]

Would Murray or Jarry paired with Sutter be attractive to enough to any teams to get us a younger top 6 winger?

 

[eXile59]

Would Murray or Jarry paired with Sutter be attractive to enough to any teams to get us a younger top 6 winger?

Young top 6 wingers are hard to find. It might be but who knows what the market is like right now.

I think we might have to part with DP to get a real impact player. I know people don't want to hear that.

 

[sexyllama]

Why would you trade Bennett for a 2nd round pick? He's a 23 year old first round pick that hasn't got a chance to play? That's the kind of bad asset management we need to avoid.

But it's the kind of bad asset management JR excels at...

 

[T1K]

Bennett could turn it around, but considering how he's been used, do you really expect that happening here? He's just not a good fit, not that it's entirely his fault, but considering the depth of this draft I wouldn't be opposed to getting a shot at a different prospect. Or we could just keep him and continue to not use him properly I guess. If it's in the plans to put Bennett in a position to succeed, then keep him, absolutely. But if they plan on having him figure it out on his own and continue dicking him around, then they should trade him for a 2nd IMO. His draft position is irrelevant at this point. Despres was a 1st round pick the year before, and we just traded him for Ben Lovejoy, who isn't even close to a 2nd in terms of value.

 

[Bennett Brauer]

My idea of trading Bennett for a 2nd would be to "restart", he hasn't really fit in here and if we can acquire an early 2nd and draft a Jordan Greenway and develop him the right way, then it's an option.

However, I want to see Bennett succeed here and he's going to be kept because he's cost controlled. GMJR said he wants him back, thinks he will be a great NHL player and hopes he realizes his potential next season.

Bennett is staying regardless.

 

[Zen Arcade]

Would Murray or Jarry paired with Sutter be attractive to enough to any teams to get us a younger top 6 winger?

Goalies that haven't played in the NHL don't have a ton of value.

Trading Murray or Jarry would be selling low at this point, we don't really know what we have in either of them.

 

[hooverdam]

Bennett could turn it around, but considering how he's been used, do you really expect that happening here? He's just not a good fit, not that it's entirely his fault, but considering the depth of this draft I wouldn't be opposed to getting a shot at a different prospect. Or we could just keep him and continue to not use him properly I guess. If it's in the plans to put Bennett in a position to succeed, then keep him, absolutely. But if they plan on having him figure it out on his own and continue dicking him around, then they should trade him for a 2nd IMO. His draft position is irrelevant at this point. Despres was a 1st round pick the year before, and we just traded him for Ben Lovejoy, who isn't even close to a 2nd in terms of value.

But it's universally agreed that Despres for Lovejoy was terrible value. That's not even a case of Pens fans overvaluing Despres; outside, neutral observers who couldn't pick Despres out of a lineup were like "that's horrible, why did they do that". We should not try to emulate that trade in any way shape or form, even for arguably better value.

In fact, dumping Bennett for a second is the same problem in principle as the Despres trade: giving up on a young player who isn't showing immediate returns (for whatever definition of returns the team likes) for some lesser entity that could be better (the veteran experience of Lovejoy, the possible development of a second round pick). It's bad asset management that we should be moving away from.

 

[T1K]

My idea of trading Bennett for a 2nd would be to "restart", he hasn't really fit in here and if we can acquire an early 2nd and draft a Jordan Greenway and develop him the right way, then it's an option.

However, I want to see Bennett succeed here and he's going to be kept because he's cost controlled. GMJR said he wants him back, thinks he will be a great NHL player and hopes he realizes his potential next season.

Bennett is staying regardless.

Agreed. Like if we're offered a later 2nd, no way, but if we're able to get one of the 1st rd caliber guys that drop, then I'd definitely make the trade.

 

[T1K]

But it's universally agreed that Despres for Lovejoy was terrible value. That's not even a case of Pens fans overvaluing Despres; outside, neutral observers who couldn't pick Despres out of a lineup were like "that's horrible, why did they do that". We should not try to emulate that trade in any way shape or form, even for arguably better value.

In fact, dumping Bennett for a second is the same problem in principle as the Despres trade: giving up on a young player who isn't showing immediate returns (for whatever definition of returns the team likes) for some lesser entity that could be better (the veteran experience of Lovejoy, the possible development of a second round pick). It's bad asset management that we should be moving away from.

It's not the same principle. We're giving up on a young player who isn't a good fit in exchange for another young player. Draft picks are always a risk, but it really just depends if the Pens are going to give Bennett a legit shot or not. If he has another season like this past one then his value will drop significantly. Bennett hasn't been given a true opportunity, and that's the organization's fault, but considering that why would we keep him if we're probably just going to treat him the same way next year? Do we think the Penguins are going to just change their minds on him when it's pretty clear they don't think that highly of him? Bad asset management is letting a UFA like Niskanen walk. Trading a young guy who might not pan out for a 2nd is not bad asset management.

Look at Sven Baertschi, he was the 13th pick in the 2011 draft, and he just got traded for a 2nd. He's very talented too, and the Flames are taking a risk on that prospect developing. I wonder why they just didn't keep him?

 

[eXile59]

Bennett could turn it around, but considering how he's been used, do you really expect that happening here? He's just not a good fit, not that it's entirely his fault, but considering the depth of this draft I wouldn't be opposed to getting a shot at a different prospect. Or we could just keep him and continue to not use him properly I guess. If it's in the plans to put Bennett in a position to succeed, then keep him, absolutely. But if they plan on having him figure it out on his own and continue dicking him around, then they should trade him for a 2nd IMO. His draft position is irrelevant at this point. Despres was a 1st round pick the year before, and we just traded him for Ben Lovejoy, who isn't even close to a 2nd in terms of value.

You're argument is that we are not good at developing players so we can trade for a younger one to screw up?

If you go by what JR said in his interview they know they made a mistake and are going to give him a shot. With the cap at what it is they need to.

 

[eXile59]

It's not the same principle. We're giving up on a young player who isn't a good fit in exchange for another young player. Draft picks are always a risk, but it really just depends if the Pens are going to give Bennett a legit shot or not. If he has another season like this past one then his value will drop significantly. Bennett hasn't been given a true opportunity, and that's the organization's fault, but considering that why would we keep him if we're probably just going to treat him the same way next year? Do we think the Penguins are going to just change their minds on him when it's pretty clear they don't think that highly of him? Bad asset management is letting a UFA like Niskanen walk. Trading a young guy who might not pan out for a 2nd is not bad asset management.

Look at Sven Baertschi, he was the 13th pick in the 2011 draft, and he just got traded for a 2nd. He's very talented too, and the Flames are taking a risk on that prospect developing. I wonder why they just didn't keep him?

Are the Flames really the organization we should be taking a note from?

 

[MrBurghundy]

There's a whole lotta stupid on the last page or so... I don't even know where to begin, so maybe I won't and I'll just see myself out.

 

[hooverdam]

It's not the same principle. We're giving up on a young player who isn't a good fit in exchange for another young player. Draft picks are always a risk, but it really just depends if the Pens are going to give Bennett a legit shot or not. If he has another season like this past one then his value will drop significantly. Bennett hasn't been given a true opportunity, and that's the organization's fault, but considering that why would we keep him if we're probably just going to treat him the same way next year? Do we think the Penguins are going to just change their minds on him when it's pretty clear they don't think that highly of him? Bad asset management is letting a UFA like Niskanen walk. Trading a young guy who might not pan out for a 2nd is not bad asset management.

Look at Sven Baertschi, he was the 13th pick in the 2011 draft, and he just got traded for a 2nd. He's very talented too, and the Flames are taking a risk on that prospect developing. I wonder why they just didn't keep him?

To me, a second is just as risky as bringing in a tool like Lovejoy. The bad asset management part is dumping what you perceive to be "bad fit" for a total crapshoot of another young player. It could be a Saad or a Kucherov, or it could be another Beau Bennett. Which one is more likely at this point, with how this team drafts and develops forwards?

The Flames could afford to get rid of Baertschi because they had an abundance of young forwards already clamoring for NHL spots, and he was the odd one out. We cannot afford to get rid of Bennett for a maybe that will likely take years to succeed or bust. Bennett could finally break out this year with a little luck.

 

[T1K]

You're argument is that we are not good at developing players so we can trade for a younger one to screw up?

If you go by what JR said in his interview they know they made a mistake and are going to give him a shot. With the cap at what it is they need to.

I'm not even trying to argue here. I'm just saying that a 2nd for Bennett is a fair return based off of what similar players have gotten. Having a "redo" on a prospect isn't all that bad. JR has said a lot of stuff since the season ended. When did he say he was going to give Bennett a shot though? I remember him admitting that they used Bennett poorly, but I don't recall him elaborating on that (not trying to be a smart ass, legitimately curious).

I see the benefit in keeping Bennett, but I just don't believe that he will be put in a position to succeed which is why I'd trade him.

 

[Penguinator]

One thing is certain, this will be a do or die season for Beau Bennett & i just hope he stays healthy in order to be properly tested before being traded or not.

 

[Darth Vitale]

Hard to believe some of the **** getting posted in here regarding Bennett.

Yeah, he's been a mess health-wise and that's at least partly on him but it's bad luck more than anything.

But he has yet to get the minutes or the chance he deserves -- even for a 25 or 30 game stretch with a Top 6 C and no musical lines. He's been mismanaged by clueless coaching staffs, possibly by clueless medical staffs too, bounced in and out of the top 6 every time he has a bad game or two, and generally never gets a chance to build confidence and chemistry as a creative offensive player.

I'm not saying he's going to be awesome, he may not be. But before you trade him for a ****ing draft pick (cuz it ain't going to be a 1st or even early 2nd rounder we get in this draft), you better know for sure that you're not trading away part of the solution to your biggest problem. If we can package him with another asset for an existing, known top-6 quantity, FINE. You move him because you're improving your team and not taking any real chances to do it unless the guy is too old. And you're not relying on a completely unproven player to solve our problems -- 3 years from now.

Trading Bennett for a mid-round draft pick (because that's all you'll get for him the way the Penguins have driven his value down, and because of his injury history) is Full Rossi if ever there was such a thing. There's little to no downside to keeping him on for at least a half a season and giving him a real shot during that firt half, but there's plenty of downside to trading him for a long-shot prospect before you ever know what he would do with that shot.

 

[The Greatest 101]

If Bylsma or Johnston put Drouin on the fourth line,this place would riot.

 

[JackFr]

If Bylsma or Johnston put Drouin on the fourth line,this place would riot.

You mean riot just like Lightning fans have been rioting? I'm not sure what your point is, Lightning fans are just as frustrated as we would have been.

 

[WayneSid9987]

Bennett has the ability to be really good and come really cheap for 2-3 yrs here. Might as well hang on to him.

JR should've been trading his 2nds for the likes of Baertschi and Connolly instead of Winnik.