Salary Cap: Pittsburgh Penguins Salary Cap Thread: Clever Thread Title Needed

[Tom Hanks]

I think some people won't understand what I'm saying. I'm not saying anything different than Jesse when it comes to defense. What I am saying is the stuff that goes on away from the puck. I would encourage, while we have the week off, for people to just watch a random game and check out how often Ceci is working his ass off up the ice to push the defense back for our forwards to get a rush. It's insane. And what I find crazier is that Matheson/Letang will more likely get caught up the ice and Ceci always seems to be back or know he has support.

Hands down I would take Ceci and it's not even close. I don't even think we have to pay that much.

I know exactly what your saying, you hate Pettersson.

 

[Peat]

I think some people won't understand what I'm saying. I'm not saying anything different than Jesse when it comes to defense. What I am saying is the stuff that goes on away from the puck. I would encourage, while we have the week off, for people to just watch a random game and check out how often Ceci is working his ass off up the ice to push the defense back for our forwards to get a rush. It's insane. And what I find crazier is that Matheson/Letang will more likely get caught up the ice and Ceci always seems to be back or know he has support.

Hands down I would take Ceci and it's not even close. I don't even think we have to pay that much.

I think you missed Hanks' point, which is one I'd make myself.

This year's Ceci? Yeah, great. Well worth 4m although there's some real questions about paying the RD 15m. Big benefit. Doing the things you say.

The Cody Cecis of years gone by, laughing stock of Canada and notoriously bad with the puck on his stick? Next JJ at 4m.

Next year's Ceci? Who knows. You 100% certain that this year's Ceci is next year's Ceci, and not something from which he'll heavily regress?

 

[Empoleon8771]

I think the main argument for keeping Ceci is that he works very well with Matheson, which has been our defacto second pairing. That said, if you don't believe that Ceci is solely responsible for Matheson's turnaround (and I kind of am in that camp myself), or you think that Matheson has a bigger role in helping Ceci turn things around... I guess that would change things.

I dunno, personally I don't really care which defenseman gets exposed, but I suspect Pettersson will get protected anyway, because he's pretty much the 4th best option and Matheson has an unattractive contract for the Kraken.

I don't think this idea works unless you don't plan on Marino being your #3 defenseman anymore. It's like keeping HBK as a 3rd line. Yeah, it may have worked, but it's not exactly a sustainable model that you can run with long term.

Ceci as the anchor for your bottom pair may make sense, but I'd rather just look elsewhere because of Ceci's past history. If he's legit now, good for him. I'd rather not make the gamble on an overall unnecessary player, considering the Penguins have Letang and Marino above him on the depth chart.

 

[HandshakeLine]

I don't think this idea works unless you don't plan on Marino being your #3 defenseman anymore

But Marino isn't the #3 anymore? Like I get what you're saying here, Emp, there's just pros and cons for both as I see it. Anyhow, I'll wait to see how they do in the postseason before I choose who to protect. In the end, it'll probably be Matheson that gets exposed, Zucker that gets taken, and I expect to lose no sleep over any of that.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

Re: Petts

It's many things, for me. I f***ing hate how abused he gets physically. I don't think it's wise to commit to ~$8.5 million for the bottom pair when both of the guys on it have struggled, at times badly, for long periods this season. I think we have to make room at LD for POJ sooner than later, and the bottom pairing is where I'd like to ease POJ into the NHL at. I think we have in-house options to adequately replace Petts' role on this team, both with Friedman and POJ, and to a lesser extent Riikola.

That's why I'm so adamant about Petts being dealt. It's not a SouthGeorge hates Letang thing, though I admit I don't like Petts' game at all. It's about a whole laundry list of issues revolving around Petts.

 

[Peat]

But Marino isn't the #3 anymore? Like I get what you're saying here, Emp, there's just pros and cons for both as I see it. Anyhow, I'll wait to see how they do in the postseason before I choose who to protect. In the end, it'll probably be Matheson that gets exposed, Zucker that gets taken, and I expect to lose no sleep over any of that.

If Marino's not the #3, why's he getting 4.4m from next season? He's in the same boat as Pettersson there. If he's bottom pairing, you're asking why he's here on that money.

 

[HandshakeLine]

If Marino's not the #3, why's he getting 4.4m from next season? He's in the same boat as Pettersson there. If he's bottom pairing, you're asking why he's here on that money.

Because he, like Petts signed that contract under the idea that past performance would continue to improve? I mean, that was the hope at the time. Maybe they'll be worth it next season, or in the post-season, but at the moment, they're not the second pairing in terms of usage and responsibility.

And to the bolded, yes, I do think that is what people are saying. That is, in fact, the whole crux of their argument?

I'm a bit agnostic on it both ways simply because I don't care which one stays. But I do not think we need both Pettersson and Matheson on the team.

 

[Gurglesons]

Because he, like Petts signed that contract under the idea that past performance would continue to improve? I mean, that was the hope at the time. Maybe they'll be worth it next season, or in the post-season, but at the moment, they're not the second pairing in terms of usage and responsibility.

And to the bolded, yes, I do think that is what people are saying. That is, in fact, the whole crux of their argument?

I'm a bit agnostic on it both ways simply because I don't care which one stays. But I do not think we need both Pettersson and Matheson on the team.

I like the idea of our defense next year having Petts anchor our bottom pairing versus paying Ceci.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

You definitely have to be careful when negotiating with Ceci, and odds are he explores FA and gets several offers better than we can/should commit to. But the idea that him walking isn't gonna be felt is wrong, imo. He's been very good for us, especially for the price point. At worst, our third best blueliner, arguably second best with Dumo missing like a dozen games or so.

I'm kind of worried a Ceci-less Matheson is more of a problem than he's worth.

 

[Peat]

Because he, like Petts signed that contract under the idea that past performance would continue to improve? I mean, that was the hope at the time. Maybe they'll be worth it next season, or in the post-season, but at the moment, they're not the second pairing in terms of usage and responsibility.

And to the bolded, yes, I do think that is what people are saying. That is, in fact, the whole crux of their argument?

I'm a bit agnostic on it both ways simply because I don't care which one stays. But I do not think we need both Pettersson and Matheson on the team.

Let me rephrase this -

If the projected future for this team doesn't contain Marino on the 2nd pairing sooner rather than later - a lot sooner - why should this team be the one to give him 4.4m from next season? Surely, logically, either this team thinks he's a 2nd pairing dman, or they should be moving him on?

And if it's the former, why are we making decisions based on what Ceci has been with Matheson, which can't survive in a Marino 2RD world without a lot of cap spent or a lot of luck getting players?

 

[Jesse]

I think some people won't understand what I'm saying. I'm not saying anything different than Jesse when it comes to defense. What I am saying is the stuff that goes on away from the puck. I would encourage, while we have the week off, for people to just watch a random game and check out how often Ceci is working his ass off up the ice to push the defense back for our forwards to get a rush. It's insane. And what I find crazier is that Matheson/Letang will more likely get caught up the ice and Ceci always seems to be back or know he has support.

Hands down I would take Ceci and it's not even close. I don't even think we have to pay that much.

Ceci's riding the coattails of early season reputation the last few weeks. His results have been meh or worse, by and large, since shortly before Matheson went down. Surprised it isn't a bigger talking point, to be honest.

 

[Gurglesons]

You definitely have to be careful when negotiating with Ceci, and odds are he explores FA and gets several offers better than we can/should commit to. But the idea that him walking isn't gonna be felt is wrong, imo. He's been very good for us, especially for the price point. At worst, our third best blueliner, arguably second best with Dumo missing like a dozen games or so.

I'm kind of worried a Ceci-less Matheson is more of a problem than he's worth.

He’s not though as I’ve pointed out every time you bring this up.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

A lot depends on the playoffs this year and how the ED shakes out, but because I want Reinhart I threw this proposal out on the main board:

To Pittsburgh: Reinhart
To Buffalo: Rust, one of Blueger/Pettersson/POJ, and a 2022 1st

We could make it work if Gaudreau came back as 4C next year. It'd also give us an excellent fallback if Malkin decides not to come back after next year, or his injury issues become untenable.

 

[Gurglesons]

A lot depends on the playoffs this year and how the ED shakes out, but because I want Reinhart I threw this proposal out on the main board:

To Pittsburgh: Reinhart
To Buffalo: Rust, one of Blueger/Pettersson/POJ, and a 2022 1st

We could make it work if Gaudreau came back as 4C next year.

Seems like a huge package for a moderate improvement.

I’d do McCann + for him. That is about it.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Seems like a huge package for a moderate improvement.

Reinhart's also 3 years younger - I know one of your points about re-signing Rust is that he's hitting the age where players fall off - and Reinhart's been killing it at C down the stretch, which would be a great fallback option if Malkin isn't able to continue as 2C here for whatever reason.

 

[ColePens]

Ceci's riding the coattails of early season reputation the last few weeks. His results have been meh or worse, by and large, since shortly before Matheson went down. Surprised it isn't a bigger talking point, to be honest.

Jesse.. it's an NHL defender. They are going to have ups/downs.

I think my intent on TH's initial post is that two things can both be true. I think Pets is a solid dman with a high floor/very low ceiling. He's consistent. I think for the Pittsburgh Penguins, the way they want to play, and how they structure their game... it would not be worth letting Ceci walk and keeping Pets at 4m.

I think it would really benefit the Pens to encourage Seattle to take Pets and incentivize it. Then use money to spread around but offer Ceci something fair because he fits here in that 3rd pairing. We got POJ on his way and I would like to see him play next year.

 

[KIRK]

Oh jeez, you're right. I thought this was his last season for some reason.

Either way, Petts is the absolute correct answer. No question about it. Blocking POJ's spot, similar options for a fraction of the price, and four years left on his deal. Blergh.

Why not just bribe Seattle to take them both?

 

[Peat]

A lot depends on the playoffs this year and how the ED shakes out, but because I want Reinhart I threw this proposal out on the main board:

To Pittsburgh: Reinhart
To Buffalo: Rust, one of Blueger/Pettersson/POJ, and a 2022 1st

We could make it work if Gaudreau came back as 4C next year. It'd also give us an excellent fallback if Malkin decides not to come back after next year, or his injury issues become untenable.

Those middle three aren't the same thing and my willingness to add a 1st to that deal slides drastically from player to player.

A lot would depend on what Reinhart wanted on his next contract too.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

Why not just bribe Seattle to take them both?

Bribe Seattle to take Petts with ZUCKER as the payment! GENIUS!

 

[KIRK]

I know exactly what your saying, you hate Pettersson.

Not as much as he hates Skechers though.

 

[KIRK]

Bribe Seattle to take Petts with ZUCKER as the payment! GENIUS!

I'm not sure Ron Francis will be as inspired by my suggestion as you were, but who knows . . . a coordinated phone call and slipped mickey . . .

 

[brewski420]

Jesse.. it's an NHL defender. They are going to have ups/downs.

I think my intent on TH's initial post is that two things can both be true. I think Pets is a solid dman with a high floor/very low ceiling. He's consistent. I think for the Pittsburgh Penguins, the way they want to play, and how they structure their game... it would not be worth letting Ceci walk and keeping Pets at 4m.

I think it would really benefit the Pens to encourage Seattle to take Pets and incentivize it. Then use money to spread around but offer Ceci something fair because he fits here in that 3rd pairing. We got POJ on his way and I would like to see him play next year.

Who are we protecting to incentivize Seattle taking Pets? I understand that you are trying to get him taken off the roster but I do not like the idea of sweetener to do it. Could he not be traded for something if Seattle doesn't take him? I guess it depends on who else is made available and who isn't. As long as Blueger and McCann are protected I think we should be OK with whomever the Kraken take. Unless I am missing something.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

I'm not sure Ron Francis will be as inspired by my suggestion as you were, but who knows . . . a coordinated phone call and slipped mickey . . .

 

[Tom Hanks]

 

[KIRK]

Who are we protecting to incentivize Seattle taking Pets? I understand that you are trying to get him taken off the roster but I do not like the idea of sweetener to do it. Could he not be traded for something if Seattle doesn't take him? I guess it depends on who else is made available and who isn't. As long as Blueger and McCann are protected I think we should be OK with whomever the Kraken take. Unless I am missing something.

1. @ColePens believes we must protect his boy ZAR at all costs.

2. I think part of the reason for the incentive is cap/depth related . . . lot of money tied up in the defense with Marino's raise and presumably trying to keep Ceci. Combined with POJ waiting in the wings and depth like Friedman and Run, I think he (correctly) thinks it's in the Pens best interest if Seattle takes their 4M bottom pairing defenseman.