3rd line center poll

[BronzeSpruce]

I need to know if I’m crazy or not. After a discussion on another board.

The question is knowing then what you know now what would you do?

Resign Bonino at 4.1 cap hit and keep Reaves, Cole, Wilson, Gustavsson, 1st, 2nd, 3rd and two 4ths. Obviously those assests could be used to acquire other needs, not saying they have to still be on the team today.

Or

Go the route we traveled, trading for Sheahan and Brassard to ultimately end with Bjugstad as 3rd line center at a 4.1 cap hit.

Click to read more...

 

[Ogrezilla]

I don't even know if Bjug is going to be our 3C. I think it's clear that the Brass trade itself didn't work. That also doesn't mean that keeping Bones was the right move. This is just such a strange either/or when it's so many different things wrapped up in each of the two options.

 

[Randy Butternubs]

Should've kept Sutter over Bonino.

Obviously.

 

[Empoleon8771]

The only way I would pick the Bonino group in this is if the Penguins would also have re-signed Cole and not brought in Johnson. Seeing how they weren't going to do that, I'll stick with what has happened since.

Even with knowing that Brassard didn't work here, I'm still fine with JR trying to make the team better by acquiring him. A majority of the people listed on the Bonino side are nothing pieces, so I'm not going to lose sleep over guys who wouldn't even be here at this point.

 

[Peat]

Neither of the above although, yes, if I have to choose between the two keeping the assets and Bonino would seem to make more sense right now. Although given that Wilson was supernumerary when we moved him, and Cole and Reaves moving on due to not being liked by the coach, the word keep is kinda misleading.

 

[BronzeSpruce]

I would love to do business with you.

Chia ?

 

[Speaking Moistly]

Should’ve jumped straight to Bjugstad. Obviously.

It’s way too early to be looking Bjugstad into the 3C spot or deciding this is the end of the 3C search. What I like right now is that between Bjugstad, McCann and Blueger they shouldn’t be searching again for awhile.

 

[Andy99]

This is a false choice...you can’t make this decision in hindsight...for all we know Bonino would have re-signed and then lost his leg on the PA turnpike and never played hockey again, or been traded the following year somewhere else and his replacement be worse than Brass...you can only ask if the decision not to re-sign him for that price and term was right at the time...imo it was...in 2017 he was a ghost again during the RS and was injured much of the POs...JR had other plans to try to trade for Duchene..didn’t work out obviously but I can’t fault him for going for the better players time and time again...

 

[BronzeSpruce]

Should’ve jumped straight to Bjugstad. Obviously.

It’s way too early to be looking Bjugstad into the 3C spot or deciding this is the end of the 3C search. What I like right now is that between Bjugstad, McCann and Blueger they shouldn’t be searching again for awhile.

See I don’t think it’s to early. In the real world it cost us Reaves, Cole, Wilson, Gustavsson 1st 2nd 3rd and two 4ths for Bjugstad and McCann

This is a hindsight question remember.

 

[BronzeSpruce]

The only way I would pick the Bonino group in this is if the Penguins would also have re-signed Cole and not brought in Johnson. Seeing how they weren't going to do that, I'll stick with what has happened since.

Even with knowing that Brassard didn't work here, I'm still fine with JR trying to make the team better by acquiring him. A majority of the people listed on the Bonino side are nothing pieces, so I'm not going to lose sleep over guys who wouldn't even be here at this point.

I would love to do business with you.

Chia?

 

[Gurglesons]

@Shady Machine who could’ve guessed?

 

[BronzeSpruce]

This is a false choice...you can’t make this decision in hindsight...for all we know Bonino would have re-signed and then lost his leg on the PA turnpike and never played hockey again, or been traded the following year somewhere else and his replacement be worse than Brass...you can only ask if the decision not to re-sign him for that price and term was right at the time...imo it was...in 2017 he was a ghost again during the RS and was injured much of the POs...JR had other plans to try to trade for Duchene..didn’t work out obviously but I can’t fault him for going for the better players time and time again...

Dude its a hindsight question

 

[Andy99]

Dude its a hindsight question

Dude it’s an impossible question to answer...it’s like asking someone to answer a question presuming the world is flat

 

[Empoleon8771]

I would love to do business with you.

Chia?

Uh okay? I'm not giving up McCann, Bjugstad, a year and a half of Sheahan and a year of Brassard for Bonino, 20 more games of Cole and Reaves and some futures.

Neither of the above although, yes, if I have to choose between the two keeping the assets and Bonino would seem to make more sense right now. Although given that Wilson was supernumerary when we moved him, and Cole and Reaves moving on due to not being liked by the coach, the word keep is kinda misleading.

Yeah, that's the big thing here. You would have gotten like 20 more games out of Cole and Reaves had you kept them, and Wilson was a nothing piece that was likely going to end up on waivers at some point. The question changes if you make some assumptions like signing Cole and not signing Johnson, but that's not a comparison of what happened.

 

[BronzeSpruce]

Uh okay? I'm not giving up McCann, Bjugstad, a year and a half of Sheahan and a year of Brassard for Bonino, 20 more games of Cole and Reaves and some futures.



Yeah, that's the big thing here. You would have gotten like 20 more games out of Cole and Reaves had you kept them, and Wilson was a nothing piece that was likely going to end up on waivers at some point. The question changes if you make some assumptions like signing Cole and not signing Johnson, but that's not a comparison of what happened.

I think a 1st, 2nd, 3rd and two 4ths plus a top goalie prospect are very significant. That’s over half a draft year. I know not everyone pans out but cmon, you could get almost anyone you wanted at the deadline for that haul

 

[Speaking Moistly]

See I don’t think it’s to early. In the real world it cost us Reaves, Cole, Wilson, Gustavsson 1st 2nd 3rd and two 4ths for Bjugstad and McCann

This is a hindsight question remember.

Right. And if they’d win a cup in the next few years with Bjugstad and McCann it is. If they trade one or both of them for a player who helps them win a cup it was worth it. If they trade one of them for a pick that they use to draft a player who is key to them winning a cup it is. 2 games in who the hell knows.

Early returns? Bjugstad looks good with Kessel and that’s basically their wet dream but it doesn’t sound like that was the plan.

 

[Ogrezilla]

I think a 1st, 2nd, 3rd and two 4ths plus a top goalie prospect are very significant. That’s over half a draft year. I know not everyone pans out but cmon, you could get almost anyone you wanted at the deadline for that haul

that's not even close to true...

 

[Empoleon8771]

I think a 1st, 2nd, 3rd and two 4ths plus a top goalie prospect are very significant. That’s over half a draft year. I know not everyone pans out but cmon, you could get almost anyone you wanted at the deadline for that haul

How are we supposed to know what JR would have done with those picks? If you want to start making up hypotheticals for what they could have done with those assets, it's no longer "keep Bonino or have it play out like it did". The only comparison that works is what happened vs Bonino and keeping all of those assets, because we have no idea what JR would have done with keeping Cole, Reaves, Wilson and the futures.

 

[BronzeSpruce]

Uh okay? I'm not giving up McCann, Bjugstad, a year and a half of Sheahan and a year of Brassard for Bonino, 20 more games of Cole and Reaves and some futures.



Yeah, that's the big thing here. You would have gotten like 20 more games out of Cole and Reaves had you kept them, and Wilson was a nothing piece that was likely going to end up on waivers at some point. The question changes if you make some assumptions like signing Cole and not signing Johnson, but that's not a comparison of what happened.

Read my first post. I say keep but it says doesn’t mean they are on the team now, i dont care if you trade reaves and Cole the same year just for something else, basically do you wanna pay that price for a 3rd line center or would you have fathered resign bonino and use those assests elsewhere

 

[Empoleon8771]

Read my first post. I say keep but it says doesn’t mean they are on the team now, i dont care if you trade reaves and Cole the same year just for something else, basically do you wanna pay that price for a 3rd line center or would you have fathered resign bonino and use those assests elsewhere

Without knowing what they would have used those assets on, I'm not going to vote for keeping Bonino and the assets. For me to vote for the Bonino group, I would have to add some assumptions that would make me pick that group. Without those assumptions, I have no reason to vote for it.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Read my first post. I say keep but it says doesn’t mean they are on the team now, i dont care if you trade reaves and Cole the same year just for something else, basically do you wanna pay that price for a 3rd line center or would you have fathered resign bonino and use those assests elsewhere

and the answer is "it depends" because we have no idea what those other moves could have been.

 

[BronzeSpruce]

How are we supposed to know what JR would have done with those picks? If you want to start making up hypotheticals for what they could have done with those assets, it's no longer "keep Bonino or have it play out like it did". The only comparison that works is what happened vs Bonino and keeping all of those assets, because we have no idea what JR would have done with keeping Cole, Reaves, Wilson and the futures.

Ok that’s fair, doesn’t change my mind at all anyways, so would you rather resign Bonino , keep Reaves, Cole for the playoff run even if to let them walk in FA, Wilson would be in the pressbox and spot duty, keep your goalie prospect and actually use your 1st, 2nd, 3rd and two 4ths. or use all the formentioned assests to acquire Sheahan and brassard then trade them for Bjugstad and McCann this year?

 

[BronzeSpruce]

Without knowing what they would have used those assets on, I'm not going to vote for keeping Bonino and the assets. For me to vote for the Bonino group, I would have to add some assumptions that would make me pick that group. Without those assumptions, I have no reason to vote for it.

Ok say you lose Reaves Cole Wilson to FA after that year does that change things for you?

It doesn’t for me because that still mean that at the end of the day the you paid a 1st, 2nd, 3rd two 4ths and a top goalie prospect to be in 3rd line center turmoil for 2 years , Bjugstad and Mccann

 

[BronzeSpruce]

Ask yourself this. Assuming the roster players do their part and walk in FA does that really matter at this point with it being a hindsight question? Would you do this:

Pens trade : 1st, 2nd, 3rd, two 4ths , Gustavsson

To FLA for

Bjugstad and McCann

Do you think that would be overpayment?

 

[Peat]

I think a 1st, 2nd, 3rd and two 4ths plus a top goalie prospect are very significant. That’s over half a draft year. I know not everyone pans out but cmon, you could get almost anyone you wanted at the deadline for that haul

In terms of trading picks for NHL players with term... Tomas Tatar was a 1st, 2nd and 3rd. Travis Hamonic was a 1st and 2 2nds. That pick list for two NHL forwards who can play centre, one a guy who's paced above 40 points in 4 of his 6 NHL seasons and the other a young former first rounder with a lot of cost control left with a 32 point pace despite mainly playing 4th line this season, isn't all that outrageous when you consider that Hartman (a good comparable for McCann) went for a 1st last deadline and that Bjugstad is comparable with the guys I listed.