GDT: NHL Trade Deadline Thread Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

KIRK

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
109,700
51,216
There is one thing I learned in life.... focus on the things you can control. JR going savage psycho old man is something I cannot control. I love hockey. I love the Pens. But if he wants to go full psycho, I'll spend my time wisely and less invested.

Off to the gym I go. @KIRK - i expect you to text me details of how we got Lucic and McQuaid soon. @DegenX - i expect you to ban 5 people instantly.

You know I won't let you down.

Even if nothing happens, you KNOW a text is coming, if only to screw with you a little because, well, you know . . . I really am a heartless bastard. :laugh:
 
  • Like
Reactions: ColePens

DegenX

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Aug 14, 2011
14,622
5,683
Meh we thought it was bare before, too, and out popped Sheary/Guentzel/Rust/Dumo/etc.
We have a few guys with some promise now, sure, but we aren't well stocked. And we're in that stage where we need to balance out 'win now' with not sucking a couple years down the road. I'd also add we don't really know what we have if we never play them, but I'm sure someone will point out that all coaches love vets and 'their guys'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy99

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
81,546
79,720
Redmond, WA
Well a couple things to negate what you are saying.

1) They had to battle through crazy amount of injuries. So at times they didn't have a say.

2) Cully played almost the full game (lol) against Nashville and Rowney sat a lot. Rowney was only brought in when Ottawa started clogging everything up.

3) How did they play? They transitioned with speed. It was impressive. They all had a sense of urgency for speed on the backcheck and it drove teams NUTS. And then they transitioned back to offense with speed.


Sure.. it wasn't as aggressive as 2016 but that was due to a lot of injuries. They still played plenty fast. Faster than this current team is playing by a country mile.

Unless I'm remembering wrong, that team got absolutely caved in a majority of the playoffs, and only won because of excellent goaltending and opportunistic scoring. That team didn't play fast from what I remember, they were opportunistic and lucky.
 

KIRK

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
109,700
51,216
I will flip my ****ing desk....

They better not ****ing dare.

giphy.gif
 

66-30-33

Registered User
Jan 24, 2006
63,341
16,320
Victoria, BC
If Jets wanna change some things around in the off season and we wanna be a team to not mess with, what about a big time trade for Trouba and Big Buf? What would the cost be?
 

Turin

Registered User
Feb 27, 2018
22,346
25,905
Unless I'm remembering wrong, that team got absolutely caved in a majority of the playoffs, and only won because of excellent goaltending and opportunistic scoring. That team didn't play fast from what I remember, they were opportunistic and lucky.

They were very fast on the counter attack. They didn’t have Letang to send wave after wave of possession but the speed and skill of the Penguins forwards is the biggest why they outlasted teams like Nashville, even when they didn’t have the puck a lot. It was literally the same team plus Guentzel and Hainsey, minus Lovejoy and Letang.
 

Turin

Registered User
Feb 27, 2018
22,346
25,905
If Jets wanna change some things around in the off season and we wanna be a team to not mess with, what about a big time trade for Trouba and Big Buf? What would the cost be?

For both? Not worth it at all for either team.
 

BlindWillyMcHurt

ti kallisti
May 31, 2004
34,394
28,492
I'm sorry but anyone arguing that this team's prospect pool is anything other than extremely shallow are deluding themselves. I appreciate that a few guys have sorta come outta nowhere in the recent past. Particularly Guentzel. But that's not at all common when you consider where this team has been drafting. Or more accurately not drafting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KIRK

KIRK

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
109,700
51,216
Unless I'm remembering wrong, that team got absolutely caved in a majority of the playoffs, and only won because of excellent goaltending and opportunistic scoring. That team didn't play fast from what I remember, they were opportunistic and lucky.

They got caved pretty badly at times and they certainly were opportunistic. That said, I think they played slower than 2016 but definitely a lot faster than this team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy99

Pancakes

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 4, 2011
26,350
18,334
Unless I'm remembering wrong, that team got absolutely caved in a majority of the playoffs, and only won because of excellent goaltending and opportunistic scoring. That team didn't play fast from what I remember, they were opportunistic and lucky.

From what I recall our possession metrics were a mixed bag against Columbus, terrible against Washington (except for game 7, where we dominated), good against Ottawa, and terrible against Nashville for the first 4 before we turned the tables on them in games 5 and 6 which we mostly dominated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy99 and KIRK

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
81,546
79,720
Redmond, WA
I'm sorry but anyone arguing that this team's prospect pool is anything other than extremely shallow are deluding themselves. I appreciate that a few guys have sorta come outta nowhere in the recent past. Particularly Guentzel. But that's not at all common when you consider where this team has been drafting. Or more accurately not drafting.

My comment was more that I don't see it as a huge problem, not that it wasn't shallow. It's the same stance I've had for years, the Penguins have all of their top guys cost controlled, so I don't see it as being a problem that they lack top end talent in their prospect pool.
 

WheresRamziAbid

Registered User
Oct 31, 2013
7,244
2,093
They got caved pretty badly at times and they certainly were opportunistic. That said, I think they played slower than 2016 but definitely a lot faster than this team.

I think the issue isnt foot speed but the ability to be crisp enough to utilize the speed the have and the aggression they want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KIRK

KIRK

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
109,700
51,216
My comment was more that I don't see it as a huge problem, not that it wasn't shallow. It's the same stance I've had for years, the Penguins have all of their top guys cost controlled, so I don't see it as being a problem that they lack top end talent in their prospect pool.

I'm not sure a shallow prospect pool absent some heavy hitters qualifies as anything but a problem (unless you meant something else).
 

Pancakes

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 4, 2011
26,350
18,334
I think the biggest indictment on JR right now is that we have Malkin, Crosby, and Kessel, and we're a one line team. How is that possible?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlindWillyMcHurt

Pete Gas

Registered User
Jul 10, 2012
1,336
232
The pens need D esp in light of the injury situation. Trading D would make no sense.
 

KIRK

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
109,700
51,216
I think the biggest indictment on JR right now is that we have Malkin, Crosby, and Kessel, and we're a one line team. How is that possible?

Calling us a one line team is charitable.

Is the Crosby line out there tilting the ice against legit playoff teams (or dominating anyone aside from the worst)?

THAT is the part that worries me.
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
81,546
79,720
Redmond, WA
They got caved pretty badly at times and they certainly were opportunistic. That said, I think they played slower than 2016 but definitely a lot faster than this team.

Was that from having a team better capable of playing fast, though? The forwards on the team today aren't any less capable of playing fast. The defense is way worse in terms of playing fast, but everyone knows that. Is that a shift in philosophy by JR or just JR making bad moves with his defense?

I feel like if you can justify something based on incompetence, it's likely the correct answer.

I'm not sure a shallow prospect pool absent some heavy hitters qualifies as anything but a problem (unless you meant something else).

Not having high end prospects isn't a problem if you already have those high end spots filled with players who aren't going anywhere anytime soon. I don't care that they don't have any 1C prospects because they have Crosby and Malkin for the foreseeable future. I don't care that they don't have any 1D prospects because they have Letang for the next couple of years.
 

Turin

Registered User
Feb 27, 2018
22,346
25,905
Calling us a one line team is charitable.

Is the Crosby line out there tilting the ice against legit playoff teams (or dominating anyone aside from the worst)?

Probably, yea.
 

Pancakes

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Mar 4, 2011
26,350
18,334
Calling us a one line team is charitable.

Is the Crosby line out there tilting the ice against legit playoff teams (or dominating anyone aside from the worst)?

I imagine so. I haven't checked the stats team by team but overall on the year the Crosby line dominates opponents and our other three....not so good.
 

BlindWillyMcHurt

ti kallisti
May 31, 2004
34,394
28,492
I think the biggest indictment on JR right now is that we have Malkin, Crosby, and Kessel, and we're a one line team. How is that possible?

You have to try hard for this level of incompetence. He and Sullivan have been working night and day the last two years to come up with a joint plan of attack to completely neuter this team's competitive advantage. They scored a major victory to accelerate their plan this past offseason. And now they are just a TDL away from really f***ing the dog for the foreseeable future.

Hey everyone says once your window is closed you might as well suck BAD for a few years to rebuild. Welp... these guys are doing us a favor and simply stepping up the timeline!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy99

MrBrightside

Registered User
May 5, 2010
5,266
3,082
Franklin Park, PA
From what I recall our possession metrics were a mixed bag against Columbus, terrible against Washington (except for game 7, where we dominated), good against Ottawa, and terrible against Nashville for the first 4 before we turned the tables on them in games 5 and 6 which we mostly dominated.

That's about right. Not sure it was really a mixed bag against Columbus - CBJ carried the play in most respects, although score effects played into it a bit as Bob was terrible and the Pens got up big early in the 3 games here.

5-on-5 CF% for the Pens against CBJ:

Game 1 - 41.5%
Game 2 - 44.5%
Game 3 - 55.3%
Game 4 - 47.7%
Game 5 - 40.0%

I think relying on Corsi as significant has issues with a team like the Pens, but they won the first two rounds because Fleury was good and Bob/Holtby weren't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pancakes
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad