Salary Cap: Future Roster Building (2017-18 and beyond) Pt. 4 | Contract/FA charts in Post #1

[Penske]

There's a big, big distance between paying top end on a few roster players to avoid having to trade for replacements and giving out gigantic long contracts to everyone. Everyone does the former. A couple of possible slight overpayments this year is nowhere near Blackhawk level nor does it ever look like getting there, unless we sign both for eight years with NMCs at the same time.

Sure, we need to be smart. We always need to be smart with our cap. But we also need to be smart with our assets. And we're so far off Blackhawking it away that it's just not a reasonable comparison right now. Come back when Kunitz gets his 3 year 5m NMC extension

We aren't Chicago no but I was responding to you saying that people overrate being cap efficient. That's what can happen. If we start giving a bunch of guys an extra million it will hurt us somewhere.

Especially giving Schultz a huge contract on the back of one good year. Say we give him 5.5x5yrs what happens if he can't repeat his output. His 2nd best point total in a season was 33. If he goes back to that it gets bad. We aren't paying him for his D.

 

[Peat]

We aren't Chicago no but I was responding to you saying that people overrate being cap efficient. That's what can happen. If we start giving a bunch of guys an extra million it will hurt us somewhere.

Especially giving Schultz a huge contract on the back of one good year. Say we give him 5.5x5yrs what happens if he can't repeat his output. His 2nd best point total in a season was 33. If he goes back to that it gets bad. We aren't paying him for his D.

If we were talking about giving a bunch of guys an extra million, then I wouldn't be saying that the critics are overrating cap efficiency.

We're not though. We're talking about two guys max at the moment.

 

[Riptide]

We aren't Chicago no but I was responding to you saying that people overrate being cap efficient. That's what can happen. If we start giving a bunch of guys an extra million it will hurt us somewhere.

Especially giving Schultz a huge contract on the back of one good year. Say we give him 5.5x5yrs what happens if he can't repeat his output. His 2nd best point total in a season was 33. If he goes back to that it gets bad. We aren't paying him for his D.

We had better be prepared for this right off the bat. Schultz will NOT repeat his output next season regardless of what we pay him. He could be even better and even more effective next season, and he will still not repeat his 51 points. That's not because of anything he will or will not due, but completely because of the fact that Letang will almost certainly not miss 41 games next year and thus Letang and not Schultz will get those offensive opportunities.

But that will still not change the fact that we need Schultz (or someone very much like him) next season - even if that means paying him 5.5m.

 

[Penske]

If we were talking about giving a bunch of guys an extra million, then I wouldn't be saying that the critics are overrating cap efficiency.

We're not though. We're talking about two guys max at the moment.

We are potentially resigning more than 2 guys though. Either way we its not likely Schultz would get 5.5 here, I'm not too worried about that. I say its a 3 year 4.5 mil deal. He shows he can play at a high level for multiple years in a row he'll get a big contract.

My ideal scenario for our D would be sign Schultz for 4.5 max and trade Maatta and Sheary for the best D man we can get to play with Schultz.

We'd have:
Dumoulin-Letang
Trade-Schultz
Cole-UFA/Trade
Ruhwedel

 

[#66]

We are potentially resigning more than 2 guys though. Either way we its not likely Schultz would get 5.5 here, I'm not too worried about that. I say its a 3 year 4.5 mil deal. He shows he can play at a high level for multiple years in a row he'll get a big contract.

My ideal scenario for our D would be sign Schultz for 4.5 max and trade Maatta and Sheary for the best D man we can get to play with Schultz.

We'd have:
Dumoulin-Letang
Trade-Schultz
Cole-UFA/Trade
Ruhwedel

Im fine with giving Schultz anything 5 mil and below. I think 4.75 is fair for all. I also really like Cole with Schultz and think he can handle #4 duty.

Also maybe sheltered mins on the bottom pairing gets the best out of Olli. There are times he looks good but then just goes blah.

I would also really take a close look at Letang retiring or retiring early. Hes been through so much its ridiculous and I dont know why he would play past 30.

 

[JTG]

Piggybacking off the last thread - if you start throwing around bad deals now, you are legitimately talking about 5 year window in terms of competing. If we remain cap smart going forward, we can continuously keep that window open because we are never in a situation like Chicago is now where they have to sell off some of their bigger players. Where Chicago also went wrong is they gave out those uber-deals and now they may be stuck with them.

 

[Peat]

We are potentially resigning more than 2 guys though.

The organisation might be, but the conversation here is solely about Bonino and Schultz. Nobody is saying give Sheary/Dumo/Kunitz etc.etc. an extra million.

Not that 4m and 5.5m would actually make either player particularly overpaid imo. If I'm wrong about that, then I question whether they're the players we need at any price, because those aren't exceptional wages for players undertaking the duties we want from them.

 

[JTG]

What is sort of funny to me is that I value Dumoulin on this roster more than I value Schultz. Dumoulin has been an animal these playoffs.

 

[Peat]

What is sort of funny to me is that I value Dumoulin on this roster more than I value Schultz. Dumoulin has been an animal these playoffs.

Not sure I'd argue with that but Schultz's role as a PP guy ensures he will be getting a premium past Dumo, rightly or wrongly. Happily there's plenty of roster room for both!

 

[Empoleon8771]

I'm really not sure how people can say that you'd be happy with giving Schultz $5 million and above when a better OFD in Gostisbehere just got $4.5 million on a long term deal. If Schultz wants $5.5 million, I'm trading him because he's just flat out not worth that. The Penguins aren't in a position where they have to be desperate to fill out a team, they're 1 win away from winning 2 cups in a row. Making bad desperation moves isn't something they need to do right now.

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

Piggybacking off the last thread - if you start throwing around bad deals now, you are legitimately talking about 5 year window in terms of competing. If we remain cap smart going forward, we can continuously keep that window open because we are never in a situation like Chicago is now where they have to sell off some of their bigger players. Where Chicago also went wrong is they gave out those uber-deals and now they may be stuck with them.

Yeah I don't know why some think our window ends at 5 years. Sure those will be our best years. But Crosby and Malkin(unless theres more injuries to the two) will still be good late into their 30s. We saw Thornton and Marleau make it to the cup in their late 30s, surrounded by good players. Getzlaf was great this year.

So with Murray, that already extends our window. Then Guentzel who could be a top player in this league after 5 years. Sprong. ZAR. And whoever else we acquire during that span. Remember it starts with the coach/system and ours is great.

So while we will be on top the next 5 years or so(having great odda to win it all in any of those years) we will still be making the playoffs after that and could sneak in another cup when Crosby/Malkin are 37/38. Just keep making the right moves.

 

[chethejet]

Cap will not be going up as Shero expected when he wrote checks for Letang, Kunitz and Dupuis. Pens simply put have to be careful in not over extending to keep the band together. Schultz is not a top defender and a OK 4. Dumo is needed here as is Cole for they offer a size a physical presence. Losing MAF frees up some nice cap room but it does weaken the position. Letang healthy and contributing next year is big. Pens do have to add grit and needed size.

 

[Peat]

Looking at the above average 3C to Toronto thread and the pickings do look pretty bare. The idea of Haula for a 2nd might be okay though, not really seen enough of him to gauge.

I'm really not sure how people can say that you'd be happy with giving Schultz $5 million and above when a better OFD in Gostisbehere just got $4.5 million on a long term deal. If Schultz wants $5.5 million, I'm trading him because he's just flat out not worth that. The Penguins aren't in a position where they have to be desperate to fill out a team, they're 1 win away from winning 2 cups in a row. Making bad desperation moves isn't something they need to do right now.

Because we don't have a 24 year old OFD willing to take a long term deal on a decent cap hit and the teams that do have them don't like trading them?

 

[Empoleon8771]

Because we don't have a 24 year old OFD willing to take a long term deal on a decent cap hit and the teams that do have them don't like trading them?

That's a pretty crappy justification to pay a middle pair defensemen top pair money. You overpay to keep someone like Dumoulin, who's imperative to the success of this D group. Schultz? Schultz is too flawed of a player for me to do that.

 

[Penske]

The organisation might be, but the conversation here is solely about Bonino and Schultz. Nobody is saying give Sheary/Dumo/Kunitz etc.etc. an extra million.

Not that 4m and 5.5m would actually make either player particularly overpaid imo. If I'm wrong about that, then I question whether they're the players we need at any price, because those aren't exceptional wages for players undertaking the duties we want from them.

So I understand that you'd give Bonino and Schultz an extra million. Would you on top of that give Sheary and Dumoulin an extra 500,000 each if push came to shove. If so that's 3 mil you've just overpaid in one year.

At the end of the day Schultz is not worth 5.5 based on 1 year and you move on if that happens. Likely will be a 35-40 point OFD. If he was better at defending sure but he's not.

 

[888 98 twins]

I'd like Haula a lot, I think he'd flourish with Kessel or Sprong on his wing.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I'd like Haula a lot, I think he'd flourish with Kessel or Sprong on his wing.

Haula is an interesting target, he had 34 points last year while playing extremely little per game and had a solid season this year too. I don't know if the Wild would trade him, especially with the Wild possibly losing Staal to Vegas, but it's an interesting idea.

Speaking of Staal, that's the guy I'd be targeting to be the Penguins 3C next year. I feel like he'd be taken by Vegas since he's more valuable than Scandella, and while Vegas may keep him to stay competitive, I wouldn't be surprised for them to immediately trade him off for a 1st+.

 

[Peat]

That's a pretty crappy justification to pay a middle pair defensemen top pair money. You overpay to keep someone like Dumoulin, who's imperative to the success of this D group. Schultz? Schultz is too flawed of a player for me to do that.

No, that's my justification for thinking that Ghost's contract isn't particularly here or there as towards Schultz's value. Schultz's value to us is set by the replacements we can get and their cap hits, not the guys we can't get.

If the existence of better dmen on better contracts signed when they had plenty of RFA years left to run was reason enough not to consider paying Schultz, then the argument would never ever have arisen.

So I understand that you'd give Bonino and Schultz an extra million. Would you on top of that give Sheary and Dumoulin an extra 500,000 each if push came to shove. If so that's 3 mil you've just overpaid in one year.

At the end of the day Schultz is not worth 5.5 based on 1 year and you move on if that happens. Likely will be a 35-40 point OFD. If he was better at defending sure but he's not.

Are we talking 500k from the absolute best price we can get for them, or 500k from the best price they could get on the open market?

Any case, depends on contract lengths and what else I think I'm using my cap for in those years. I mean, paying an extra 3m more than you'd prefer on 4 players for a year is nothing. We've been doing that this year on Kunitz and Hagelin alone. As long as they're still at a cap hit and contract length where other teams would trade for them, no dramas.

I'd like to add - I'm defending the idea that paying the high end of what a player could expect on the UFA market to keep an important player that'll cost assets to replace. I'm not defending Bonino and Schultz in specific here.

In particular, I'm very chary of paying Bonino as a top 3C because he hasn't been one for us this year. Once I start looking at points production for other centres making 4-4.5m and other teams' idea of the top 3Cs they've got for trade though, I start feeling better about it.

But you do it for important players. I've been happy with Schultz's defence for most of the period Letang has been out and I'm happy treating him as an important player as a result. Anyone who disagrees is probably right to balk at a high price for him.

 

[Penske]

No, that's my justification for thinking that Ghost's contract isn't particularly here or there as towards Schultz's value. Schultz's value to us is set by the replacements we can get and their cap hits, not the guys we can't get.

If the existence of better dmen on better contracts signed when they had plenty of RFA years left to run was reason enough not to consider paying Schultz, then the argument would never ever have arisen.



Are we talking 500k from the absolute best price we can get for them, or 500k from the best price they could get on the open market?

Any case, depends on contract lengths and what else I think I'm using my cap for in those years. I mean, paying an extra 3m more than you'd prefer on 4 players for a year is nothing. We've been doing that this year on Kunitz and Hagelin alone. As long as they're still at a cap hit and contract length where other teams would trade for them, no dramas.

I'd like to add - I'm defending the idea that paying the high end of what a player could expect on the UFA market to keep an important player that'll cost assets to replace. I'm not defending Bonino and Schultz in specific here.

In particular, I'm very chary of paying Bonino as a top 3C because he hasn't been one for us this year. Once I start looking at points production for other centres making 4-4.5m and other teams' idea of the top 3Cs they've got for trade though, I start feeling better about it.

But you do it for important players. I've been happy with Schultz's defence for most of the period Letang has been out and I'm happy treating him as an important player as a result. Anyone who disagrees is probably right to balk at a high price for him.

OK that's fair. Each player would be treated differently. If Dumoulin wants a little more I pay that for sure. He doesn't have a lot of bargaining power though. Sheary I'd look at trading if we make our team better anyway.

I hope Bonino gets a big contract. He's never been well paid in terms of hockey wages. He deserves one and there will be some teams out there to give him one.

 

[Peat]

OK that's fair. Each player would be treated differently. If Dumoulin wants a little more I pay that for sure. He doesn't have a lot of bargaining power though. Sheary I'd look at trading if we make our team better anyway.

I hope Bonino gets a big contract. He's never been well paid in terms of hockey wages. He deserves one and there will be some teams out there to give him one.

I'd look at trading Sheary but I've got a feeling we won't get the trade value we want until he proves he's not a one season wonder.

Speaking of which, that is my main concern with Schultz. If this season of decent defensive play is a once off, we could get badly burnt. No idea how big a risk that is.

And I hope Bones gets paid too. Tbh I've spent all season thinking someone will bid more than is sane for us to pay and the more I look at the centre market, the likelier that seems and the more valuable to us he gets. If we can get someone's decent young centre like Haula, or Jarnkrok (Preds fans seem pretty resigned to him going to Vegas), that would be fantastic.

 

[Penske]

I'd look at trading Sheary but I've got a feeling we won't get the trade value we want until he proves he's not a one season wonder.

Speaking of which, that is my main concern with Schultz. If this season of decent defensive play is a once off, we could get badly burnt. No idea how big a risk that is.

And I hope Bones gets paid too. Tbh I've spent all season thinking someone will bid more than is sane for us to pay and the more I look at the centre market, the likelier that seems and the more valuable to us he gets. If we can get someone's decent young centre like Haula, or Jarnkrok (Preds fans seem pretty resigned to him going to Vegas), that would be fantastic.

I'm not as worried about the 3C position if we don't sign Bones. Mainly because Rust will probably be on that line and he can do a lot of things we'd want from a centre. Carrying the puck, great down low and he can create his own offense.

We'd still want someone decent but with Rust's best attributes it opens up what we need from a 3C. They need to be good on D because they will take a lot of defensive draws. On offence someone that can go hard to the net to create space for Rust and maybe Sprong eventually to get good screened shots.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Yeah, when looking around with the expansion draft, I'm becoming less nervous about filling that 3C spot. You have Thornton, Hanzal, Desharnais, Marleau and Bonino as potential free agent targets and Staal, Jarnkrok, Haula, Duchene and Perreault as potential trade targets. The Penguins should be patient with filling that spot, there are options available.

 

[JTG]

Haula has been a good faceoff man the last couple years too. I'd like to see us get tougher in that position, but bringing in a slick Finnish center would be different too. A guy like him would be big on the shootouts too.

 

[JTG]

One would have to imagine if the Pens swung a deal for Duchene, he'd be a LW'er.

The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of Landeskog. He brings something different.

 

[AjaxTelamon]

Yeah, when looking around with the expansion draft, I'm becoming less nervous about filling that 3C spot. You have Thornton, Hanzal, Desharnais, Marleau and Bonino as potential free agent targets and Staal, Jarnkrok, Haula, Duchene and Perreault as potential trade targets. The Penguins should be patient with filling that spot, there are options available.

Not many of those guys are going to be content to come here and take 37% of their starts in the D zone like Bonino does. Thornton has been used more like Geno in the last few years than Bonino, so I can't see him wanting to do it. Marleau couldn't handle it, and won't want the job. Hanzal may be the only one that may be willing to do it and capable of doing it, and he's a big injury risk, and he's going to get 4M+ and term and he's older, that's probably a downgrade for more money. If we can find a way to get Jarnkrok then I suppose that's cool, but how are we going to pull that off? He's on a sweetheart deal forever. He'll be a Pred or on LV.

One reason for overpaying Bonino to do what he does is that no one with much skill really wants to do it. And if we lose him and bring in a Thornton, you're going to have to give the guy some O zone starts, and that means Geno and Sid taking more tough minutes going into their 30's.

It's not just about paying Bonino 4M in a vacuum, it's about how he fits on this team, and he's worth it to us.