Salary Cap: Be a GM Mode | Is it October yet?

[Jenkins]

I mean if our options to start the season turn out to be a Vegas center who's not Haula, then I'd rather see if we can develop our internal options first like ZAR, Johnson. The press seem to think ZAR is an option at center--I keep hearing it--so I think it's reasonable to think he might get a shot. If they suck, then Pens can always trade with Vegas later

I think Lindberg would do well here. You could even try to get him and Karlsson. That'd be a really good 3C/4C combo.

 

[Gurglesons]

I think Lindberg would do well here. You could even try to get him and Karlsson. That'd be a really good 3C/4C combo.

I think the lack of forwards that Vegas wants to play in the NHL makes this a pipe dream.

Also, I wouldn't be surprised if they are planning on keeping Lindberg and Karlsson to insulate their youth.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

He had 5 PP points with Vancouver. Eakin had 4 PP points in 2014-2015 and 2015-2016, and 6 PP points in 2013-2014. Eakin easily has more short handed points, though, so that's something to consider. Bonino's big PP production seasons were with Anaheim and last season here.

But that's my point!

Aside from when Bonino was used on the PP, his production isn't any better than what Eakin has produced the three years in Dallas prior to this one.

25% of his production at ES in 2015-16 came with Seguin. Same with his powerplay production.

31% of his production at ES in 2014-15 came with Seguin. 100% with his powerplay production.

2013-14 I was way off on his production mainly came with Chiasson, Whitney, Garbutt, and Roussel.

Why are you using production and not actual ice time, since your argument has been "he's played the past four seasons with Jamie Benn"? If Scott Wilson scores 10 points in 100 minutes of ice time next to Crosby, and scores 7 points in 700 minutes of ice time next to Carter Rowney, you can't state "he played last season next to Crosby" just because he produced better with him. The correct answer for the question: "who did Wilson play with this past season" would be "most often with Carter Rowney".

I've explained this literally three times now. Apart from last season, Eakin's most common linemate in Dallas has been Roussel on Dallas' "checking line". He gets minutes next to Benn (and Seguin) when Dallas wants to shake things up and split up Benn and Seguin. But you keep making it sound like Eakin is next to Benn more often than not.

 

[mpp9]

Our 3C needs to be better than Eakin if our 4th line is Wilson/Archibald-Rowney-Reaves. Those three could hit it off and it's still not anywhere near what we had with Cullen.

Like the poster above said, you need to run two third lines to replicate what we've had in the past. Losing Cullen hurts quite a bit.

And it doesn't sound like JR has any plans on acquiring two centers. So one would hope the players he's holding out for will allow us to roll three quality lines.

 

[Gurglesons]

Why are you using production and not actual ice time, since your argument has been "he's played the past four seasons with Jamie Benn"? If Scott Wilson scores 10 points in 100 minutes of ice time next to Crosby, and scores 7 points in 700 minutes of ice time next to Carter Rowney, you can't state "he played last season next to Crosby" just because he produced better with him. The correct answer for the question: "who did Wilson play with this past season" would be "most often with Carter Rowney".

Because his point totals have been impacted by playing shifts with Jamie Benn and Tyler Seguin?

Some pointed out his production, so I'm arguing his production is greatly impacted by playing next to two players who have topped 70 points a couple times the last few years?

My main point was that in 2016-17 when he played over 60% of his time on the ice with Benn he put up 12 points. Is that incorrect?

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Production wise, outside of last year, Eakin is a 35-40pt C that skates very well, loves the physical game, can pk, can plays some pp minutes but not the guy you want there, there's more to his game and potential than meets the eye, but he had such a terrible year last year on a bad, very bad, Dallas team and his cap hit isn't even nearly as bad as people think it is if you omit last year.

Eakin is a good target and a suitable 3C, he can be had because his last year was so bad but he's also proven to be more than what last year indicates.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

My main point was that in 2016-17 when he played over 60% of his time on the ice with Benn he put up 12 points. Is that incorrect?

Well no, but that's already been talked about. If you believe last year is indicative of Eakin's performance going forward, then sure it's relevant. But if you believe a player should be judged on multiple years, not just a bad season, then it's irrelevant to the discussion of Eakin being able to provide roughly equal offense to Bonino as 3C going forward.

It's kind of ironic you're hell bent on Eakin's 12 point season as being what his value is, while in this very thread you keep pushing for 26-point Sam Bennett as a target to trade Jake Guentzel for. Why is Eakin being judged by his one bad season, while Bennett's is just an anomaly?

 

[Speaking Moistly]

But that's my point!

Aside from when Bonino was used on the PP, his production isn't any better than what Eakin has produced the three years in Dallas prior to this one.

Yeah, I take it back. Amusingly similar ES production.
Bonino
2013-14: 29ES
2014-15: 34ES
2015-16: 26ES (on pace for 31 over 82 games)
2016-17: 25ES

Eakin
2013-14: 28ES
2014-15: 33ES
2015-16: 27ES
2016-17: 10ES (on pace for 14 over 82 games)

The thing with Bonino is he was way cheaper and retention would be important for me not to whine. It relies on Eakin bouncing back, too.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Who in their ****ing right mind would ever trade Guentzel for Sam Bennett? That's the sort of **** I never want to see ever again, a Naslund type of deal where we get boned again.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Yeah, I take it back. Amusingly similar ES production.
Bonino
2013-14: 29ES
2014-15: 34ES
2015-16: 26ES (on pace for 31 over 82 games)
2016-17: 25ES

Eakin
2013-14: 28ES
2014-15: 33ES
2015-16: 27ES
2016-17: 10ES (on pace for 14 over 82 games)

The thing with Bonino is he was way cheaper and retention would be important for me not to whine. It relies on Eakin bouncing back, too.

There's no way Eakin doesn't rebound from a year like that.

 

[Gurglesons]

Well no, but that's already been talked about. If you believe last year is indicative of Eakin's performance going forward, then sure it's relevant. But if you believe a player should be judged on multiple years, not just a bad season, then it's irrelevant to the discussion of Eakin being able to provide roughly equal offense to Bonino as 3C going forward.

It's kind of ironic you're hell bent on Eakin's 12 point season as being what his value is, while in this very thread you keep pushing for 26-point Sam Bennett as a target to trade Jake Guentzel for. Why is Eakin being judged by his one bad season, while Bennett's is just an anomaly?

I don't really want to get into reiterating why I feel moving a player like Guentzel for Bennett is a move I'd like to see. I don't think I'd defend it as a good move, I'd defend it as a risky move to potentially prolong our current's core's chances at being a contender for more than 3 years if Bennett projects to be the player he was when he was drafted and has shown glimpses of because he can step in for Crosby or Malkin when they have their eventual injuries. I also think at worse he'd be a replacement for Hornqvist on RW.

As for Eakin I don't think he is terrible. I just think that if we moved on from Bonino you'd hope we would bring in a 3C that could create on his own. Like, if you make a move for Eakin you are basically making it a point that Kessel is on our third line, I think if you can run Guentzel - Crosby - Sheary, Hagelin - Malkin - Kessel Wilson - 3C - Hornqvist Kuhnhackl - Rowney - Rust, you ultimately have more depth throughout our line-up. I don't know. I wouldn't really be "upset" if we acquired Eakin. I just don't think he is really an improvement on Bonino at all.

 

[Shady Machine]

Even if we acknowledge the point that Eakin = Bones, one is free and the other costs assets. i won't be pissed if they acquire Eakin but I think it's reasonable to suggest they would have been better off retaining Bones if Eakin is the guy

 

[Riptide]

I've explained this literally three times now. Apart from last season, Eakin's most common linemate in Dallas has been Roussel on Dallas' "checking line". He gets minutes next to Benn (and Seguin) when Dallas wants to shake things up and split up Benn and Seguin. But you keep making it sound like Eakin is next to Benn more often than not.

Pretty sure Benn was his most common linemate last season with 400 ES minutes. He played a similar amount with him the year before as well... which would suggest that JB would have been at least in the top 2 for forwards with Eakin.

 

[Peat]

Mild tangent, but Wilson-Hornqvist is one of the potential wing combos we have that I hate the most. Its about the slowest, least skilled combo we can put out. I remain an adherent of the idea that every Penguins line should contain preferably one speedster.

Tbh, I would like to see one of Sheary/Guentzel/Kessel on line 3 as creator in chief. Rust at a pinch (not creative, but skilled and fast enough to cause real damage against lesser opposition). Which, to bring it back from tangent down, puts less pressure on the 3C to be a great creator. Sure, they've got do their part, but I'd rather get a defensively secure player with enough skill/brain/speed to piggyback on the winger.

edit:

Even if we acknowledge the point that Eakin = Bones, one is free and the other costs assets. i won't be pissed if they acquire Eakin but I think it's reasonable to suggest they would have been better off retaining Bones if Eakin is the guy

Yup. It would be one thing if Eakin was on Bones' old money, but he isn't.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

I wish this **** was over with already.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Yeah, if Eakin's our 3C, he'd better come with retention and we'd better not be giving up anything of consequence.

Otherwise, there really won't have been any point in letting Bones go. We could've re-signed the devil we know for the same dough, and without giving up any assets.

I imagine Eakin's in that category of "guys we could get right now if we can't find anyone better".

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Larkin would be so awesome on the Pens, but there's no way that's happening unless the wings want Sheary.

Wings GM kind of cracks me up, the guy seems to love giving his Detroit born guys long term contracts that they don't deserve. So Larkin will probably get like 5m-6m/yr for like 8yrs.

 

[Peat]

Yeah, if Eakin's our 3C, he'd better come with retention and we'd better not be giving up anything of consequence.

Otherwise, there really won't have been any point in letting Bones go. We could've re-signed the devil we know for the same dough, and without giving up any assets.

I imagine Eakin's in that category of "guys we could get right now if we can't find anyone better".

My guess is Rutherford's "Adequate" trade is someone who could be brought in without salary going out, so Eakin's contract would be too rich. My guess now would be Lindberg or Sheahan. Not sure who's on Rutherford's "Impact" list, other than probably Duchene.

 

[BlackAndGold87]

Seen a Detroit fan posted in the trade discussion thread(believe it was in that thread) that it could take a 3rd round pick to get Sheahan. Believe there is any truth to that? Because I also have heard that it would take 1st round pick.

 

[Shady Machine]

Seen a Detroit fan posted in the trade discussion thread(believe it was in that thread) that it could take a 3rd round pick to get Sheahan. Believe there is any truth to that? Because I also have heard that it would take 1st round pick.

It shouldn't be more than a 3rd since they need to shed cap space and he was brutal last year.

 

[mpp9]

I really like the idea of Pavelski if the Sharks decline big time this season. All it's gonna take is Thornton's knee to be an issue. We could be a candidate in a couple scenarios. Sprong kills it and pushes Kessel down the depth chart making him available and DW is delusional enough to think they can still contend with more speed on the wing.

Or they commit to a rebuild and value picking up some lesser forward talent in return.

I don't care what anyone says, Pavelski can still play center and would be dynamite here slotted behind our big guns.

 

[66-30-33]

Larkin would be so awesome on the Pens, but there's no way that's happening unless the wings want Sheary.

Wings GM kind of cracks me up, the guy seems to love giving his Detroit born guys long term contracts that they don't deserve. So Larkin will probably get like 5m-6m/yr for like 8yrs.

I'd do that trade any and every day of the week. Sheary for Larkin. Doubt Sheary has enough value right now to get Larkin 1 for 1 though, he's also 4 years older then Larkin.

 

[66-30-33]

I really like the idea of Pavelski if the Sharks decline big time this season. All it's gonna take is Thornton's knee to be an issue. We could be a candidate in a couple scenarios. Sprong kills it and pushes Kessel down the depth chart making him available and DW is delusional enough to think they can still contend with more speed on the wing.

Or they commit to a rebuild and value picking up some lesser forward talent in return.

I don't care what anyone says, Pavelski can still play center and would be dynamite here slotted behind our big guns.

Kessel for Pavelski? big nope from me, he just turned 33 and Kessel is only 29 and he's much much slower than Kessel.

 

[Riptide]

I really like the idea of Pavelski if the Sharks decline big time this season. All it's gonna take is Thornton's knee to be an issue. We could be a candidate in a couple scenarios. Sprong kills it and pushes Kessel down the depth chart making him available and DW is delusional enough to think they can still contend with more speed on the wing.

Or they commit to a rebuild and value picking up some lesser forward talent in return.

I don't care what anyone says, Pavelski can still play center and would be dynamite here slotted behind our big guns.

He would be. But I'm not trading Kessel or any of our other high end prospects/young kids for him. He's 32 and has 2 years left on a 6m contract.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Just say no to trading Kessel.