Olli Määttä is Ready (Orpik Believes, Ignore Lying Burg Media Swine)

[BumFortyOne]

Yes, but I'd rather delay his cost-controlled seasons another year.

I think this is the best answer. Maatta has looked like he is capable of playing the full season in the NHL, but getting sent down shouldn't hurt his development any. He'd be playing huge minutes on a strong team and have the ability to be a leader for them.

Also, it doesn't hurt to delay burning a year of his ELC. Now, if there weren't already two other NHL-ready players in WBS in Despres and Dumoulin maybe things would be more clear. He's looked great so far and at this rate may force managements hands.

Either way, someone has to be moved when Letang is ready to return, and my expectation is that Maatta will be sent down then.

 

[member 51464]

I want him up for the 9 games playing in every given situation. I hope he has a few rookie mistakes and realizes he has room to improve. Then I hope he goes back to London and plays lights out. If the Penguins stay in the playoffs longer than his junior team, can't he come up in the playoffs for the big club anyway? Give him a taste. Then let the thirst fuel him the rest of the year.

 

[Pancakes]

If he keeps it up, I don't want to send him down. I'm a big believer in rewarding guys for strong play, and I think it sends the wrong message to send him down if he's playing like he belongs.

 

[Speaking Moistly]

If he keeps it up, I don't want to send him down. I'm a big believer in rewarding guys for strong play, and I think it sends the wrong message to send him down if he's playing like he belongs.

Normally I'd agree with that, but I think this goes beyond that. You have to worry about his body being able to handle the season and postseason, and it's burning a year off his ELC. There's also no need to rush him.

 

[KIRK]

Normally I'd agree with that, but I think this goes beyond that. You have to worry about his body being able to handle the season and postseason, and it's burning a year off his ELC. There's also no need to rush him.

Interesting parallel to Staal.

The Pens didn't NEED to burn a year. But, by giving him that year, they got more from him in 2008 and 2009 than they would've IF he'd been a rookie to start the 2007-2008 season.

And, want to know if Orpik is expendable after the season? I'd feel a lot better answering that question IF I thought Maatta had a season already under his belt.

So, it really does cut both ways even on this question.

BTW, one big difference between Letang at 19 and Maatta at 19. Letang's defense was nowhere near where Maatta's is.

 

[Nietzsche Zone Play]

totally agree he needs to go down. he could get 2 assists in games 4-9 and I'd still say that. depth-wise they don't need him (Vlasic has come up a lot, but it's worth noting that that Sharks teams was basically playing 3 rookies in Vlasic, Carle, and Gorges and Ehrhoff only had 100 games under his belt to that point) and the extra year on his ELC is pretty big. probably looking at $2-3M difference that can be delayed a year, and I feel pretty confident saying the level of his play will only be better next season. this experience is huge for him either way.

 

[Fordy]

The cap is going to continue to rise and they have plenty of other D that will playing on ELCs in the next few years. Is it really that big of an issue?

 

[Pancakes]

Normally I'd agree with that, but I think this goes beyond that. You have to worry about his body being able to handle the season and postseason, and it's burning a year off his ELC. There's also no need to rush him.

Burning a year off the ELC isn't a bad thing if Maatta is going to play like he has. If he's a good, productive, player, who cares if we had to burn a year off his ELC? The way he's playing right now, he's not just holding his own, he's making the team better.

There is definitely a concern as to whether or not he can handle the rigors of 82 games and playoff hockey as well. But that concern is always going to be there with a young player.

If he plays like this I don't know if we can say we're rushing him by keeping him in the lineup. If you're ready, you're ready. Just because Maatta appears to be ahead of the usual prospect curve doesn't mean you automatically just send him down because prospects simply must play in juniors [x] years and then the ahl [x] years. I don't think the team expected Bennett to fast track his way to the NHL like he did last year, but he did, and keeping him up in the NHL was the right move, even though the normal prospect logic would have been to let him have a full year down in the A.

 

[KIRK]

totally agree he needs to go down. he could get 2 assists in games 4-9 and I'd still say that. depth-wise they don't need him (Vlasic has come up a lot, but it's worth noting that that Sharks teams was basically playing 3 rookies in Vlasic, Carle, and Gorges and Ehrhoff only had 100 games under his belt to that point) and the extra year on his ELC is pretty big. probably looking at $2-3M difference that can be delayed a year, and I feel pretty confident saying the level of his play will only be better next season. this experience is huge for him either way.

If Staal had been a rookie to start the 2007-2008 season instead of getting the previous season's NHL experience, then what would his contribution have been like during the 2008 and 2009 cup runs? As big as it was?

Personally, I'd prefer Maatta better able to make an impact when Orpik walks and when Sid and Geno are in their late 20's then worry about maybe losing him a year earlier when Sid and Geno are about to hit their mid 30's.

 

[mpp9]

The sequence in the third with Maatta and Sid's line was the best of the season thus far. He can help this roster right now. Just depends what Shero is planning with Nisky and Despres.

Honestly, is it so bad to keep Despres in the minors? You burn a year of his elc yes, but it means you have an NHL quality D-man to call up when injuries occur and possibly make it cheaper to re-sign him if not.

Maatta has played far better defensively than Despres has from what I've watched. Give him more games. If he wilts, then send him back. But after watching him live tonight, I don't think that's going to happen. He's starting to showcase what he can bring in transition and maintaining zone time.

 

[Speaking Moistly]

Burning a year off the ELC isn't a bad thing if Maatta is going to play like he has. If he's a good, productive, player, who cares if we had to burn a year off his ELC? The way he's playing right now, he's not just holding his own, he's making the team better.

There is definitely a concern as to whether or not he can handle the rigors of 82 games and playoff hockey as well. But that concern is always going to be there with a young player.

If he plays like this I don't know if we can say we're rushing him by keeping him in the lineup. If you're ready, you're ready. Just because Maatta appears to be ahead of the usual prospect curve doesn't mean you automatically just send him down because prospects simply must play in juniors [x] years and then the ahl [x] years. I don't think the team expected Bennett to fast track his way to the NHL like he did last year, but he did, and keeping him up in the NHL was the right move, even though the normal prospect logic would have been to let him have a full year down in the A.

Him not being able to handle 82 games would potentially be burning a year. I think he's ready mentally, but I'm not sure about his body. It would suck for Maatta to be negatively impacted through not physically being ready. It's why I'm torn. I was just saying there's more to consider than just him earning his spot. Bennett has also been jerked around by Bylsma, imo.

There is a part of me that says if we want to trade Despres then he gets brought up to increase his experience and up his value. So, use this year or a good portion of the season to do that for a forward prospect. Then, Maatta comes up.

 

[KIRK]

Burning a year off the ELC isn't a bad thing if Maatta is going to play like he has. If he's a good, productive, player, who cares if we had to burn a year off his ELC? The way he's playing right now, he's not just holding his own, he's making the team better.

There is definitely a concern as to whether or not he can handle the rigors of 82 games and playoff hockey as well. But that concern is always going to be there with a young player.

If he plays like this I don't know if we can say we're rushing him by keeping him in the lineup. If you're ready, you're ready. Just because Maatta appears to be ahead of the usual prospect curve doesn't mean you automatically just send him down because prospects simply must play in juniors [x] years and then the ahl [x] years. I don't think the team expected Bennett to fast track his way to the NHL like he did last year, but he did, and keeping him up in the NHL was the right move, even though the normal prospect logic would have been to let him have a full year down in the A.

1. Agree that there is a benefit to playing Maatta now. The experience translates sooner, something amplified in importance if Orpik walks.

2. It's not as if you're going to sit Engo for 82 games. Let Engo spell Maatta, and recall Despres if someone gets hurt.

3. Really, the arguments now are 'can he handle the 82 games' and 'you burn a year now'. Those were the same arguments against Staal, because, like Maatta, his play eliminated the other ones.

 

[KIRK]

Him not being able to handle 82 games would potentially be burning a year. I think he's ready mentally, but I'm not sure about his body. It would suck for Maatta to be negatively impacted through not physically being ready. It's why I'm torn. I was just saying there's more to consider than just him earning his spot. Bennett has also been jerked around by Bylsma, imo.

There is a part of me that says if we want to trade Despres then he gets brought up to increase his experience and up his value. So, use this year or a good portion of the season to do that for a forward prospect. Then, Maatta comes up.

So what if you give Engo 17 games? Just throwing out a number there. The coaches can monitor this.

And, lest we forget, even though Letang sort of ran out of steam in his first full year. BUT, what he learned from that made the Whitney trade and his 2009 impact possible.

 

[cheesedanish87]

Maatta has played great these 3 games, but these young def are weird, they can play good for a while then look completely lost out there, Look at Dougie Hamilton, played good at the beginning of the year. by the end of the year he was getting benched every game, same thing with Jake Gardiner.

No matter what they do with Maatta this year hes most likely locked himself up a spot in the top 6 next year.

 

[Speaking Moistly]

So what if you give Engo 17 games? Just throwing out a number there. The coaches can monitor this.

And, lest we forget, even though Letang sort of ran out of steam in his first full year. BUT, what he learned from that made the Whitney trade and his 2009 impact possible.

The number of games could be the problem, 17, 25, 35, who knows?

Letang is also injury prone, who's to say that coming in too early has nothing to do with that. I know, it may not and there are other reasons, but I'm just saying. Maybe Letang would be less injury prone and/or a better player.

I'm not against it, I just have concerns over it. I would love for him to flourish, I would hate for him to be messed up.

 

[KIRK]

The number of games could be the problem, 17, 25, 35, who knows?

Letang is also injury prone, who's to say that coming in too early has nothing to do with that. I know, it may not and there are other reasons, but I'm just saying. Maybe Letang would be less injury prone and/or a better player.

I'm not against it, I just have concerns over it. I would love for him to flourish, I would hate for him to be messed up.

I have concerns too. It's just with each passing shift, I have fewer concerns about him than I do about Nisky or even Despres.

Added thought: To what degree does the new hybrid icing rule lessen the potential wear and tear?

 

[Pancakes]

1. Agree that there is a benefit to playing Maatta now. The experience translates sooner, something amplified in importance if Orpik walks.

2. It's not as if you're going to sit Engo for 82 games. Let Engo spell Maatta, and recall Despres if someone gets hurt.

3. Really, the arguments now are 'can he handle the 82 games' and 'you burn a year now'. Those were the same arguments against Staal, because, like Maatta, his play eliminated the other ones.

As far as point 1 goes, I'd also like to address the argument that keeping Maatta up will somehow impact his development as an offensive player. Letang took a while to be given powerplay responsibilities and more minutes and it doesn't seem to have hurt his offensive game any. I especially don't think this is too relevant as Disco has been giving Maatta second powerplay unit responsibilities anyways. He's also getting shifts sometimes with our top lines who are not shy at all about feeding the puck to our blueliners.

So I don't think him being up and playing lower minutes than he would in junior will necessarily hurt his offensive game. And of course for every minute he's with the NHL team he's practicing with and against NHL players and seeing how they comport themselves. A smart kid like OM is probably absorbing tons of good habits just by watching how guys like Paul Martin and Rob Scuderi practice.

 

[KIRK]

Maatta has played great these 3 games, but these young def are weird, they can play good for a while then look completely lost out there, Look at Dougie Hamilton, played good at the beginning of the year. by the end of the year he was getting benched every game, same thing with Jake Gardiner.

No matter what they do with Maatta this year hes most likely locked himself up a spot in the top 6 next year.

I think that's really where this debate is at: He might tail off later. He might not be able to handle 82 games and a cup run physically.

Of course, none of this might happen. And, he might be positioned because of this experience to help lessen the blow of Orpik walking. And, he might end up continuing on this trajectory and be an impact player.

Let's see the two away games against Tampa and Philly and the three home games against the Nucks, Avs, and Isles.

My position at this point is if he earns it like Staal earned it, then he should stay. This team could use some more young blood in that event.

 

[Ragamuffin Gunner]

Burning a year off the ELC isn't a bad thing if Maatta is going to play like he has. If he's a good, productive, player, who cares if we had to burn a year off his ELC? The way he's playing right now, he's not just holding his own, he's making the team better.

Because we have Des and Dumo waiting in the A, ready to play. There is nothing to suggest that Olli would be better than Des when we go into the POs. And there is def nothing to suggest that he will be so much better than Des that it's worth using up a year of his ELC.

 

[KIRK]

As far as point 1 goes, I'd also like to address the argument that keeping Maatta up will somehow impact his development as an offensive player. Letang took a while to be given powerplay responsibilities and more minutes and it doesn't seem to have hurt his offensive game any. I especially don't think this is too relevant as Disco has been giving Maatta second powerplay unit responsibilities anyways. He's also getting shifts sometimes with our top lines who are not shy at all about feeding the puck to our blueliners.

So I don't think him being up and playing lower minutes than he would in junior will necessarily hurt his offensive game. And of course for every minute he's with the NHL team he's practicing with and against NHL players and seeing how they comport themselves. A smart kid like OM is probably absorbing tons of good habits just by watching how guys like Paul Martin and Rob Scuderi practice.

Agreed on all counts. Every philosophical argument against him staying can be countered by an argument as compelling or more compelling, which is why I just said if he earns it, then he earns it, and that should be that.

 

[Pancakes]

Because we have Des and Dumo waiting in the A, ready to play. There is nothing to suggest that Olli would be better than Des when we go into the POs. And there is def nothing to suggest that he will be so much better than Des that it's worth using up a year of his ELC.

Olli has looked better than both of those guys, hence why he's in the lineup and they aren't.

 

[Speaking Moistly]

I have concerns too. It's just with each passing shift, I have fewer concerns about him than I do about Nisky or even Despres.

Added thought: To what degree does the new hybrid icing rule lessen the potential wear and tear?

My concerns for Maatta are pretty purely physical (sounds dirty), where as with Niskanen it's mental. Despres and Maatta have more upside, and I wouldn't hesitate to unload Niskanen.

I do think that Despres is farther along the development path physically, obviously, but Maatta is the better mentally, imo; it's got to be one of them. I'm just not sure which one, but they could both do it. Plus, if we want to trade one of these defensemen for a forward, then they need experience to boost their value.

I think it will lessen it to a degree but I'm not sure by how much, or by how consistent it would be.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Olli Maatta's is that he gets the experience he needs to go back and be a beast in his final year and can come back next camp and be even better, the thought of that should scare some of the guys that think they have a shot next year.

 

[KIRK]

Olli Maatta's is that he gets the experience he needs to go back and be a beast in his final year and can come back next camp and be even better, the thought of that should scare some of the guys that think they have a shot next year.

So would Maatta staying.

And the thought of that would give Maatta the experience he'll need to help lessen whatever blow their might be losing Orpik.

 

[billybudd]

I don't like this "there are other guys who have been with the organization longer; we can't keep Maata" reasoning at all. I don't like it when Dan does it and I don't like it when people on here do it.

It's the same reasoning that's got Sill twiddling his thumbs in Wilkes-Barre (though, to be fair, Glass had probably his first good game in this uniform tonight).

If Despres had earned the job over Maata, he'd have been here. He didn't. Dumoulin was hurt, but them's the breaks.

You can't give out roster spots because a guy's next in line and expect to have success that way. It didn't make sense when people wanted Tangradi on Malkin's wing (despite doing nothing to indicate he could handle that), it didn't make sense when Beech was whining about Kennedy getting more ice time (someone should call switzerland or wherever and ask him if he still thinks draft year should trump everything) and it doesn't make sense now. A guy puts himself next in line by going out and forcing the team to give him the job. That's what Maata's doing.

If Maata still looks like this in game 9, they should keep him and play him, depth chart be damned. If he starts wearing down by game 60 (which is a distinct possibility), cross that bridge when we get there. It's not like there aren't any other guys to fall back on, and he's going to learn more from Martin and Scuderi in practice than he would sleepwalking through the OHL against competition he's lapped.