Confirmed with Link: Penguins sign Tanev for way too long and way too much

[Gurglesons]

Oh 10 goals, amazing. Tanev cannot compete with that t r a c k r e c o r d

You do realize the irony in this statement?

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

Cap is going up, Roussel had 5.5 seasons of mileage opposed to Tanev’s 2, and this team has a clear window where they can afford to give an extra year.

The cap didn’t go up and isn’t expected to go up next year.

 

[CascadiaPenguin]

The cap didn’t go up and isn’t expected to go up next year.

The cap DID go up, by $2MM. Two weeks ago the best GMs in the business weren't certain where the CURRENT salary cap was going to end up. I, for one, fully expect it to go up next year. And if you want to dispute this, I am fully prepared to go total Slim Whitman. Fear this, and govern yourself accordingly.

 

[Turin]

You do realize the irony in this statement?

No, because the guy just scored 14, and didn’t shoot higher than usual, not did he play with a pivot who could pass worth a damn.

 

[Peat]

I'd like to state that even with those comparables, Tanev still looks somewhat overpaid - particularly as those guys have routinely scored more - but I think it becomes clearer that he's not stupidly overpaid (although that term, yeesh).

Also, amusingly, points don't seem to matter too much when signing these guys, as Roussel had a bad pre-contract season production wise and Calvert a good one.

I think I’m fine with the player. The point of my issue with Tanev isn’t the player. I was with @Empoleon8771 when the idea of JJ first came up.

The issue is giving him and Tanev a contract that purposefully eliminates the opportunity for youth and results in you losing better players.

This is a fair point. I was wondering why the hell we were targeting expensive complimentary wingers when that is the one thing our prospect pipeline does well before the signing; I see the need for the skillset (and don't see it elsewhere in the org) but still find it weird.

This said - we've been packing our roster full at the start of every season, and the kids have kept coming through. I know I'll be complaining at some point about age over seemingly more talent at some point in the coming season, but looking at the whole, it's worked out. And I'm less concerned with talent than I am chemistry and fit, but cross the bridge of him possibly forcing out players who make the team better when we come to it, which I don't think will be this summer.

edit: Particularly if we are lucky enough to somehow move Johnson.

 

[Tacitus Kilgore]

Can't wait to use Tanev in NHL 20

 

[Scandale du Jour]

The biggest problems with role players like Tanev is that once the speed leaves and the bumps and bruises pile up, efficiency goes down in a hurry.

The good thing is that he does not have a lot of mileage. 6 years is still absurd for a role player, no matter how good.

 

[Pens x]

Can't wait to use Tanev in NHL 20

He will be great for 8 mins a night.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

He will be great for 8 mins a night.

Or 14 minutes a night. Give or take.

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

The good...

Fast
Acceptable scoring for his role (maybe a little more juice to squeeze)
Pks well
81 blocks
278 hits
+4 takeaways
+9
Positive relative FF% on a good team
Positive xGF% 50.33
Positive HDSC% 53.79
Only 42% O-Zone Starts

The Bad.

6 years

 

[TooManyHumans]

The good...

Fast
Acceptable scoring for his role (maybe a little more juice to squeeze)
Pks well
81 blocks
278 hits
+4 takeaways
+9
Positive relative FF% on a good team
Positive xGF% 50.33
Positive HDSC% 53.79
Only 42% O-Zone Starts

The Bad.

6 years
3.5 MILLION
10 team NTC

Fixed it.

 

[Hell Yeah!!!]

The good...

Fast
Acceptable scoring for his role (maybe a little more juice to squeeze)
Pks well
81 blocks
278 hits
+4 takeaways
+9
Positive relative FF% on a good team
Positive xGF% 50.33
Positive HDSC% 53.79
Only 42% O-Zone Starts

The Bad.

6 years

I don’t get it, why is six years of a good thing at a declining cap % hit bad? Yah, I know, would feel a lot better if it was 3 or 4, we’ll see how long he produces.

 

[Trade]

Tanev is not like Hagelin the way he plays. Other than having speed, good forechecker, and being a good PKer that’s where the comparables stop.

Tanev is a physical **** stirrer that can jumpstart his team and motivate them with his motor and tenacity on the puck and earnestness to throw out checks.

There is a reason 8-10 GMs were reportedly in on adding Tanev. All the posters flipping out about this deal have obviously never watched the guy play. Keep pointing to his point totals and stats and you keep outing yourselves as people who haven’t watched him a lick.

Tanev is a difference maker who doesn’t show up on the scoreboard frequently. That’s why lots of GMs wanted him. That’s why Winnipeg fans were sorry to see him go. That’s why other fans in the West were upset they didn’t get him but were happy to see him in the East now. He makes positive impacts for your team which doesn’t always show up on the score board.

Comparing him to Hagelin is a joke. Sure the term is a little long for the role player he is but some of you guys are ****ing acting like we signed Jack Johnson 2.0 which is laughable.

Tanev and his contract are not a problem. JMFJ and his contract is the problem. Tanev is a positive player in many ways. JMFJ has nothing positive for us.

The only thing worse would’ve been seeing Tanev get signed by one of the arms race metro teams like Philthy or the Craps and him kamikazing one of our stars and you guys *****ing and moaning about wishing we had a player like Tanev on our team.

What a breath of fresh air,

All the negativity surrounding Tanev is unbearable, especially when everyone was stoked to get him but we’re now crying over term of all things? Term is really such a minuscule thing, especially with a new TV Deal and CBA right around the corner.

He might be overpaid by 500k as the cap stands right now and yeah his term is questionable but we already have Jake, Sid and Letang and (arguably Geno) with sweetheart deals in comparison to the the way contracts are looking in today’s day and age.

I wouldn’t be surprised if some posters are hoping he fails just so their holy opinions are correct and their “I told you so’s” are
plentiful.

 

[HandshakeLine]

I would be absolutely surprised if people weren't rooting for Tanev to fail so they could be correct for a hot second on a dumb hockey message board.

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

I don’t get it, why is six years of a good thing at a declining cap % hit bad? Yah, I know, would feel a lot better if it was 3 or 4, we’ll see how long he produces.

Risk, thats tge long and short of it

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

The cap DID go up, by $2MM. Two weeks ago the best GMs in the business weren't certain where the CURRENT salary cap was going to end up. I, for one, fully expect it to go up next year. And if you want to dispute this, I am fully prepared to go total Slim Whitman. Fear this, and govern yourself accordingly.

And GMs were expecting a much higher raise, which is why the Penguins are in the cap situation they are now. And the same is predicted for next year, a very small raise.

 

[Gurglesons]

No, because the guy just scored 14, and didn’t shoot higher than usual, not did he play with a pivot who could pass worth a damn.

You acted like 10ish goals is easily replaceable. How does that defend Tanev when he has done it once at 27?

You also realize that 12 of his goals came (7 of which came in a 20 game stretch) when he was playing with Matthieu Perreault who has had 20+ assists pretty much his entire career.

 

[Gurglesons]

I'd like to state that even with those comparables, Tanev still looks somewhat overpaid - particularly as those guys have routinely scored more - but I think it becomes clearer that he's not stupidly overpaid (although that term, yeesh).

Also, amusingly, points don't seem to matter too much when signing these guys, as Roussel had a bad pre-contract season production wise and Calvert a good one.



This is a fair point. I was wondering why the hell we were targeting expensive complimentary wingers when that is the one thing our prospect pipeline does well before the signing; I see the need for the skillset (and don't see it elsewhere in the org) but still find it weird.

This said - we've been packing our roster full at the start of every season, and the kids have kept coming through. I know I'll be complaining at some point about age over seemingly more talent at some point in the coming season, but looking at the whole, it's worked out. And I'm less concerned with talent than I am chemistry and fit, but cross the bridge of him possibly forcing out players who make the team better when we come to it, which I don't think will be this summer.

edit: Particularly if we are lucky enough to somehow move Johnson.

We have not had a forward with term like Tanev since Rutherford took over. And those with slight term like Kunitz, Dupuis, etc were never scratched for you.

Even D wise we haven’t seen anyone scratched on D outside of this year when we literally could not scratch Pettersson.

 

[Peat]

We have not had a forward with term like Tanev since Rutherford took over. And those with slight term like Kunitz, Dupuis, etc were never scratched for you.

Even D wise we haven’t seen anyone scratched on D outside of this year when we literally could not scratch Pettersson.

And that hasn't stopped prospects mostly coming through in the end in the past, and won't in the future. A team with our sort of luck with injuries and a more or less consistent need for 8 or so players on minimum or near minimum wage doesn't need to scratch players to find space for kids (albeit sometimes later rather than sooner).

 

[CascadiaPenguin]

And GMs were expecting a much higher raise, which is why the Penguins are in the cap situation they are now. And the same is predicted for next year, a very small raise.

Much higher? They were expecting $83MM and got $81.5MM. That's $1,500,000. So that is "much higher" while a $2,000,000 increase is "a very small raise"? #confused. Anyway, as you just indicated, we're not too good predicting the next cap. Relax.

 

[CascadiaPenguin]

Can anyone clarify how Tanev's limited NMC impacts whether or not he can be exposed for the Seattle expansion draft? If he doesn't waive does that mean he has to be protected?

 

[Jacob]

Is there any way we don’t need to dump salary if we sign MP to a 1 year deal at like $2 million instead of the 3.5x4? Like basically an arbitration deal.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

You acted like 10ish goals is easily replaceable. How does that defend Tanev when he has done it once at 27?

You also realize that 12 of his goals came (7 of which came in a 20 game stretch) when he was playing with Matthieu Perreault who has had 20+ assists pretty much his entire career.

Well, he was on pace for 11 the year before playing with Lowry and Copp. So that's 2 of the 3 years he's been in the league that he's scored at a 10+ goal pace. The only year he didn't was his rookie season when he played 10:40 a night.

And that's not even touching on how dubious it is to suggest that Perreault is the calibre of player we should be worrying about Tanev riding the coattails of. We can give Tanev a linemate as productive as Perreault anywhere we put him in the top 9, and if he's a complementary player in the top 6, exponentially better linemates. This is not some unattainable standard.

 

[Malkinstheman]

Is there any way we don’t need to dump salary if we sign MP to a 1 year deal at like $2 million instead of the 3.5x4? Like basically an arbitration deal.

Nope. We currently have 2.3m with 11F and 7D. Even if ZAR+ Blueger sign for a combined 1.5m, we have to move salary. Another move has to be made.

 

[Gurglesons]

Well, he was on pace for 11 the year before playing with Lowry and Copp. So that's 2 of the 3 years he's been in the league that he's scored at a 10+ goal pace. The only year he didn't was his rookie season when he played 10:40 a night.

And that's not even touching on how dubious it is to suggest that Perreault is the calibre of player we should be worrying about Tanev riding the coattails of. We can give Tanev a linemate as productive as Perreault anywhere we put him in the top 9, and if he's a complementary player in the top 6, exponentially better linemates. This is not some unattainable standard.

If he is in our bottom six there is not a player comparable to Perreault that will be playing with him. Perreault is typically a 50PT+ pace player outside of last year.