Confirmed with Link: Penguins resign Pascal Dupuis for 4 years/$3.75M AAV

[Dipsy Doodle]

except for their lack of success in the recent past.

Very few of our forwards hold up to that scrutiny, though. Including the best player in the world.

 

[Pantokrator]

We knew he'd get a raise but 4 years?
Me no likey.

Welcome to the world of the Flyers. Only Holmgren would have given him 6 years and probably a million per year extra.

 

[Til the End of Time]

I can't believe people are still *****ing about this signing. For $3.75M you usually get a floater who can put up 20 goals and not much else. With Dupuis you get the ultimate utility man, can kill penalties, get shorties, play on any line, and put up points. "But, but, but we got swept by Boston!" So don't re-sign a good player to a good cap hit? I can understand people *****ing about the years but how can you not love Pascal Dupuis? I know pretty much everyone around here did until the Boston series. Short memories.

dump fleury, let dupuis leave.

sign a cheap goalie, then spend your savings on a superior winger for crosby, someone who can do something in the playoffs.

that would have been the best move.

there isnt anything wrong with dupuis per se, but the fact that the penguins can only spend 3.75 on a winger for sid is a direct result of the salary cap black hole that is maf.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Very few of our forwards hold up to that scrutiny, though. Including the best player in the world.

you keep saying that, and it is still a terrible comment every time. You don't replace guys like Crosby when they struggle. You replace the guys around him to try to get him going again. Its the same damn argument you were making for Letang. You build around that kind of player.

 

[SEALBound]

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

This is what we have.

Rowdy, any year this team does not win the Cup is an unsuccessful year. Stop spouting this "successful playoffs" ********. Labeling this last year as "successful" in ANY capacity is part of the problem. It was not in any way successful. We were plagued by the same ol **** - Fleury ***** the bed, horrendous defense, lack of coaching, Sid and Geno get hammered, poor line combinations, and a couple games in which we have a complete and utter meltdown. And then what happens...management says "its okay" and goes about doing the saaaaaame thing.

Don't tell me to become a Bruins fan because you are unable to come to terms with actual problems of this team. Stick your head back in the sand.

Again, this team needs some change...and we are not seeing it. We are seeing the trust that the same old thing will someone do better next time. It hasn't worked since 09...and in pretty dramatic fashion to boot. So if you're all nice and cozy with the players you've bonded with and want to avoid any "big bad scary changes" and be okay with the status quo's of playoff disappointments...then that's fine. But don't criticize those of us who are unsatisfied with early playoff exits and actually want another Cup and are willing to part ways with players to do it.

 

[Scandale du Jour]

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

This is what we have.

Rowdy, any year this team does not win the Cup is an unsuccessful year. Stop spouting this "successful playoffs" ********. Labeling this last year as "successful" in ANY capacity is part of the problem. It was not in any way successful. We were plagued by the same ol **** - Fleury ***** the bed, horrendous defense, lack of coaching, Sid and Geno get hammered, poor line combinations, and a couple games in which we have a complete and utter meltdown. And then what happens...management says "its okay" and goes about doing the saaaaaame thing.

Don't tell me to become a Bruins fan because you are unable to come to terms with actual problems of this team. Stick your head back in the sand.

Again, this team needs some change...and we are not seeing it. We are seeing the trust that the same old thing will someone do better next time. It hasn't worked since 09...and in pretty dramatic fashion to boot. So if you're all nice and cozy with the players you've bonded with and want to avoid any "big bad scary changes" and be okay with the status quo's of playoff disappointments...then that's fine. But don't criticize those of us who are unsatisfied with early playoff exits and actually want another Cup and are willing to part ways with players to do it.

Being disappointed and wanting change is fine and I actually agree that some things have to change, however, wanting stupid changes just for the sake of changing things isn't very bright and that's what I was complaining about.

 

[Coastal Kev]

Being disappointed and wanting change is fine and I actually agree that some things have to change, however, wanting stupid changes just for the sake of changing things isn't very bright and that's what I was complaining about.

There is an old saying; if you are not getting better, you are getting worse. The Pens are stagnant, and guys are getting older. Soon, we look back with lament and wonder why Pens Mangt. Squandered our stars youth. Sad, very sad.
Lastly, the Pens are shaping up to be the softest team in the NHL next year.

 

[Rocket of Russia]

Being disappointed and wanting change is fine and I actually agree that some things have to change, however, wanting stupid changes just for the sake of changing things isn't very bright and that's what I was complaining about.

What is the stupid change you're referring to?

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

dump fleury, let dupuis leave.

sign a cheap goalie, then spend your savings on a superior winger for crosby, someone who can do something in the playoffs.

that would have been the best move.

there isnt anything wrong with dupuis per se, but the fact that the penguins can only spend 3.75 on a winger for sid is a direct result of the salary cap black hole that is maf.

Which UFA winger is a great fit for Crosby that you want to spend a lot of money on this year?

Wanting a better winger for Sid is one thing. But you have to make sure you don't end up paying a lot more money for a lesser player than you already have. Parise was a good example last year. We went for it because that's the sort of winger upgrade you should get behind for big money. David Clarkson? Not so much.

you keep saying that, and it is still a terrible comment every time. You don't replace guys like Crosby when they struggle. You replace the guys around him to try to get him going again. Its the same damn argument you were making for Letang. You build around that kind of player.

Or maybe you look at a few different things besides one series, considering there's no other time during the past 2 years - reg season or playoffs - when the player in question hasn't been very productive.

You look at value for money. You look at the UFA field and see if there are improvements available for anywhere near the same money. You look at trade possibilities and see if the potential upgrade is worth the futures you'd have to part with. You also look at Crosby's individual performance, and whether there were any extenuating circumstances.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

This is what we have.

Rowdy, any year this team does not win the Cup is an unsuccessful year. Stop spouting this "successful playoffs" ********.

If I see that Einstein quote parroted one more time on these boards, I'm probably going to poke my eyes out. Ironically, if the Hawks had followed your interpretation of that quote after their two previous 1st round embarrassments, they never would have won it this year. It can be used to justify any stupid roster decision if not used judiciously. You have to identify just what changes it would be beneficial to make.

The fact is that we will have a considerably different line-up next season than we had last playoffs. It's just not the upheavals of the principals some people wanted.

 

[Coastal Kev]

If I see that Einstein quote parroted one more time on these boards, I'm probably going to poke my eyes out. Ironically, if the Hawks had followed your interpretation of that quote after their two previous 1st round embarrassments, they never would have won it this year. It can be used to justify any stupid roster decision if not used judiciously. You have to identify just what changes it would be beneficial to make.

The fact is that we will have a considerably different line-up next season than we had last playoffs. It's just not the upheavals of the principals some people wanted.

Chicago has Hossa, not Dupuis. Chicago has bright young forwards that played a prominent role in their winning. Chicago has grit. Chicago traded away players after each cup win, because staying the same is never the answer. Other than all of that, your comparison is spot on.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Chicago has Hossa, not Dupuis.

Oh, that's interesting. Do they also have a bunch of lesser players that they retained after their unceremonious 1st round exits who helped them win another Cup?

Chicago has bright young forwards that played a prominent role in their winning.

Not sure what this has to do with the current off-season.

Chicago has grit.

So do we. The narrative going into the Boston series was that they were going to be too physical for us. It sure didn't play out that way. We lost, but it certainly wasn't due to a lack of grit.

Chicago traded away players after each cup win, because staying the same is never the answer. Other than all of that, your comparison is spot on.

Chicago kept virtually exactly the same nucleus from 2011 to 2013. That they traded parts of the team now isn't relevant to the discussion. The point is that they stuck with several bit players through multiple 1st round exits, and reaped the rewards in 2013.

Where would they be now if they had moved guys like Bickell and Bolland after last year's disappointment? I'll tell you where. Eliminated in the 2nd round.

 

[Scandale du Jour]

What is the stupid change you're referring to?

Adding Kulemin/MacCarthur to the top 6. Trading Letang.

 

[stardog]

Chicago has Hossa, not Dupuis. Chicago has bright young forwards that played a prominent role in their winning. Chicago has grit. Chicago traded away players after each cup win, because staying the same is never the answer. Other than all of that, your comparison is spot on.

This isnt accurate in the least.
It is a well known fact that Chicago was forced into trading away players after their first cup win because of salary concerns.
Lets try not to re interpret history to simply fit nicely into your argument.

 

[BrokenStick]

dump fleury, let dupuis leave.

sign a cheap goalie, then spend your savings on a superior winger for crosby, someone who can do something in the playoffs.

that would have been the best move.

there isnt anything wrong with dupuis per se, but the fact that the penguins can only spend 3.75 on a winger for sid is a direct result of the salary cap black hole that is maf.

WHO????

Seriously, who is this "superior winger for Crosby"?

Would you rather we gave out the Clowe contract? Or the Clarkson one? Sorry, I'll take Dupuis for 4 more years at his price long before that.

...and am I the only one who wouldn't want Vokoun playing 65+ games in the regular season? Because if we go for a bargain basement backup that's what would happen. The guy wouldn't be able to stand up come playoff time.

 

[IcedCapp]

WHO????

Seriously, who is this "superior winger for Crosby"?

Would you rather we gave out the Clowe contract? Or the Clarkson one? Sorry, I'll take Dupuis for 4 more years at his price long before that.

...and am I the only one who wouldn't want Vokoun playing 65+ games in the regular season? Because if we go for a bargain basement backup that's what would happen. The guy wouldn't be able to stand up come playoff time.

You raise a great point. No person over 36 has made it as a starting goalie in the NHL.

 

[BrokenStick]

You raise a great point. No person over 36 has made it as a starting goalie in the NHL.

I'm not saying he can't do it. I'm saying I'm not comfortable with it. I guess the last part of my comment made it sound that way, though.

If it were me, I'd dump Fleury and bring in someone who could split time with Vokoun. That would still cost a couple million, which wouldn't save us that much.

He was great for us during the playoffs, but there were stretches last year that he was pretty bad. What happens to us if we have no one else to turn to then?

 

[stardog]

You raise a great point. No person over 36 has made it as a starting goalie in the NHL.

I hear "The Moose" might be available... Since we're bringing everyone back and all!

 

[KHstrike]

Haven't read this whole thread, but I have a question. If they had let Dupuis walk, what realistically would they have done? It leaves a hole in your top 6 and your only young wing is already slotted in the 2nd line.

To me the Pens are stuck, not with old man contracts, but with free agency being overpriced, and our younger guys not quite ready to be relied upon for a contending team. I have no doubt all or most of our young Dmen will be contributors, but not now and probably not for a couple years yet. You rarely see a 19 year old D step up and be a top guy. It takes most years to develop.

 

[lastcupever75]

Oh, that's interesting. Do they also have a bunch of lesser players that they retained after their unceremonious 1st round exits who helped them win another Cup?



Not sure what this has to do with the current off-season.



So do we. The narrative going into the Boston series was that they were going to be too physical for us. It sure didn't play out that way. We lost, but it certainly wasn't due to a lack of grit.



Chicago kept virtually exactly the same nucleus from 2011 to 2013. That they traded parts of the team now isn't relevant to the discussion. The point is that they stuck with several bit players through multiple 1st round exits, and reaped the rewards in 2013.

Where would they be now if they had moved guys like Bickell and Bolland after last year's disappointment? I'll tell you where. Eliminated in the 2nd round.

Wait, what

The series was won in front of both nets. While we did ok in our own end, we failed to have Anyone go in front of the net or the dirty areas in the boston sone to score playoff type goals

That's the definition of grit. And we sorely lacked it vs. the bruins

 

[lastcupever75]

WHO????

Seriously, who is this "superior winger for Crosby"?

Would you rather we gave out the Clowe contract? Or the Clarkson one? Sorry, I'll take Dupuis for 4 more years at his price long before that.

...and am I the only one who wouldn't want Vokoun playing 65+ games in the regular season? Because if we go for a bargain basement backup that's what would happen. The guy wouldn't be able to stand up come playoff time.

I'd take the Clarkson contract over dupuis any day. He would provide a different element in our top 6 that we don't have

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Wait, what

The series was won in front of both nets. While we did ok in our own end, we failed to have Anyone go in front of the net or the dirty areas in the boston sone to score playoff type goals

That's the definition of grit. And we sorely lacked it vs. the bruins

We didn't have great net presence, but we haven't had that since Malone left. We didn't have any trouble going into other dirty areas though (corners, boards, scrums, etc).

 

[Ogrezilla]

We didn't have great net presence, but we haven't had that since Malone left. We didn't have any trouble going into other dirty areas though (corners, boards, scrums, etc).

The net presence was huge against Boston though. Rask was entirely too comfortable and we just couldn't get 2nd scoring chances. Our team is usually really good at sort of doing fly by's to get to those pucks, but we don't have anyone with the size to just park there. Its fair to say that Iginla and Morrow were expected to be better in this regard when they were brought in. Iginla I think simply disappointed as a physical presence and that certainly isn't a Bylsma problem. Morrow did it for a while and I have to think the split knee cap hurt his ability to do it come playoff time.

 

[Shady Machine]

Wait, what

The series was won in front of both nets. While we did ok in our own end, we failed to have Anyone go in front of the net or the dirty areas in the boston sone to score playoff type goals

That's the definition of grit. And we sorely lacked it vs. the bruins

Exactly. We may have outhit the Bruins, but to me that just meant we had the puck less. We were running around trying to prove our manhood while the Bruins were trying to play hockey. When it came time to fight for position if front of Rask, we lost. That was either a poor game plan, lack of effort or heart, or just not enough grit, strength, whatever you want to call it.

 

[Tender Rip]

Not sure what this has to do with the current off-season.
...
Chicago kept virtually exactly the same nucleus from 2011 to 2013. That they traded parts of the team now isn't relevant to the discussion. The point is that they stuck with several bit players through multiple 1st round exits, and reaped the rewards in 2013.

Where would they be now if they had moved guys like Bickell and Bolland after last year's disappointment? I'll tell you where. Eliminated in the 2nd round.

It is quite significant. If we had young solutions on the farm to the very issues we would want addressed, we would be less adamant that changes were needed.
If you have inexpensive guys young guys who you feel can contribute in bigger roles, you are less likely to acquire such abilities from outside. If you do as Chicago, finding good players in numbers through the draft, and at the same time deal players on real wages for budding talent on smaller cap-hits, you can keep a stewing pot of such players. On our team next year.... two first round picks probably getting a real shot this year, and Vitale who is going on UFA. Otherwise no bargains outside the relative ones afforded by elite players who carry the 2nd and 3rd highest cap-hits in the league.

Ultimately we gave up lots of assets to make sure that our like assets didn't play in the important stages. Chicago had a bevy of such players and went in a different direction than we did. They relied on their youngsters and brought in other youngish players through trades for older players (Frolik and Stalberg), experienced role players who could perform in their D-system (Oduya and Rozsival) rather than character vets who couldn't keep up with our skating game. Not to mention that they haven't been signing one-dimensional duds which is what we are usually down with: identify a weakness and try to correct it with someone who is good in that area, but might have several other warts.

So do we. The narrative going into the Boston series was that they were going to be too physical for us. It sure didn't play out that way. We lost, but it certainly wasn't due to a lack of grit.

It certainly was partly because of the grit component that is size. Where it matters. You cannot tell me that Boston were not much better at attacking the front of the net than us, nor that we did not suffer getting traffic in front of Rask, nor can you claim that Boston
were not more effective when cycling than we were.
Our forward group will likely be very short of people who make it their business getting to the net, and have the physique to back up their intention. And that will, once again, be a problem if we cannot address it.

Ultimately - I am tired of the "who would you then get in free agency" argument. It is the GMs job to find the needed qualities, and if they are crucial and the right deal isn't there in free agency, then you have to get it done by trade. The results matter, the process less so.