Salary Cap: Pittsburgh Penguins Salary Cap Thread - Level of Interest Meter Pegged At Zero

[JackFr]

lol -- Malkin signed at 9.5M a "B-"

Recency bias is a hell of a thing.

He didn't personally grade it, it's based on a logarithm. It judges him to be worth it these next two seasons and then fall below in the third and final season. Not so crazy to think that Geno might not be a superstar when he's 37.

 

[JackFr]

Also with how f***ed the Metro is getting I'm so glad the Isles have navigated themselves into cap hell for no reason. Their outlook is rough outside of Barzal.

 

[Peat]

lol -- Malkin signed at 9.5M a "B-"

Recency bias is a hell of a thing.

I think it's including projected value for money throughout the contract - both Malkin and Hornqvist are marked down as being projected to provide negative value in the last years of their contract.

 

[Andy99]

Have you actually looked at capfriendly and gone through each team or just pulling a Ryan Wilson.

Not a chance Pettersson isn’t signed and there are quite a few teams that could make deals without taking cap back and even more that could do it sending a little back. Yeah JJ was always a hard one to move but someone like Rust would be particularly easy.

At this stage I think the only teams that have to move anything to sign their RFA’s and fill out their roster are Toronto and Washington (Caps need very small move).

Nope...NYR are looking for space, Calgary, Tampa depending on Point's ask, Winnipeg with their RFAs, Vegas, and then there are the teams that are right up against the cap, Arizona, Chicago, Dallas, San Jose who still have to sign Thornton and maybe Marleau, Florida, Canucks still have to sign Boeser and are thinking of trading someone, COL has to sign Rantanen, ...there's really only BUF, LA, ANA, Wild, OTT and then teams in our division like NJD, CBJ and Philly, who we might not want to deal with...our options are limited

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

He didn't personally grade it, it's based on a logarithm. It judges him to be worth it these next two seasons and then fall below in the third and final season. Not so crazy to think that Geno might not be a superstar when he's 37.

I know... it doesn't matter at all. It's just funny.

 

[Tom Hanks]

I really hope Simon starts the season cold so we can extend him for 2 years at like 0.9.

Here’s some stuff on Sid’s line and I love this quote

“We get so caught up in this idea that players have to score goals to be "good" and ignore the process that goes into consistently and effectively scoring goals. Simon may have only scored on 5.98% of his 5v5 shots, but he does *a lot* to put others in a position to score too.”

*Note that Simon’s S% was fine until February onwards (played with Bjug, Horny mainly after that). He was above 10% before that.

 

[JackFr]

Here’s some stuff on Sid’s line and I love this quote

“We get so caught up in this idea that players have to score goals to be "good" and ignore the process that goes into consistently and effectively scoring goals. Simon may have only scored on 5.98% of his 5v5 shots, but he does *a lot* to put others in a position to score too.”

*Note that Simon’s S% was fine until February onwards (played with Bjug, Horny mainly after that). He was above 10% before that.

Yep I 100% favour Simon being on Sid and Jake's line. Let the twitter/Facebook/HF people complain. The fact that Sullivan can identify that Simon makes them better is a very good sign to me.

 

[Tom Hanks]

Nope...NYR are looking for space, Calgary, Tampa depending on Point's ask, Winnipeg with their RFAs, Vegas, and then there are the teams that are right up against the cap, Arizona, Chicago, Dallas, San Jose who still have to sign Thornton and maybe Marleau, Florida, Canucks still have to sign Boeser and are thinking of trading someone, COL has to sign Rantanen, ...there's really only BUF, LA, ANA, Wild, OTT and then teams in our division like NJD, CBJ and Philly, who might not want to deal with...our options are limited

Your not including LTIR and if teams have more than 21 skaters. There’s more than you’re list but even still if JR asked the ones you listed if they are interested in Rust for a pick or prospect. I imagine at least 1 (because that’s all it takes) says yes.

We’ll be able to sign Pettersson before the start of the season.

 

[Shady Machine]

lol -- Malkin signed at 9.5M a "B-"

Recency bias is a hell of a thing.

Yeah that's embarrassing.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

Yeah that's embarrassing.

I mean... it's just kind of another example of how feeding this sport into a spreadsheet and spitting out some numbers is steering you the wrong direction before you even start.

 

[Tom Hanks]

Yep I 100% favour Simon being on Sid and Jake's line. Let the twitter/Facebook/HF people complain. The fact that Sullivan can identify that Simon makes them better is a very good sign to me.

I love Simon but I’d be trying Kahun there first. After that I think Simon is the best option. Good news is for pretty much anyone is if players aren’t performing there’s a bunch of guys who can fit. That goes for any line.

 

[Andy99]

Your not including LTIR and if teams have more than 21 skaters. There’s more than you’re list but even still if JR asked if they are interested in Rust for a pick or prospect. I imagine at least 1 (because that’s all it takes) says yes.

We’ll be able to sign Pettersson before the start of the season.

It depends on whether those with space plan on trying to offer sheet and also other teams may need to do the same as the Pens with their players and better players may be available for cheap prices because it's a buyers market--if you're a team with space in need of a forward, for example, would you rather have Ehlers and/or Kreider, or Rust, even if the former cost a little bit more...I'm not saying it's impossible for the Pens to trade someone and sign Petts before the start of the season, just that there's a reasonable chance that they can't...

 

[Shady Machine]

I think it's including projected value for money throughout the contract - both Malkin and Hornqvist are marked down as being projected to provide negative value in the last years of their contract.

Malkin is going to provide "negative value" for his contract? That's just insane to me and shows how stats like this are interesting, but can be very misleading.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Here’s some stuff on Sid’s line and I love this quote

“We get so caught up in this idea that players have to score goals to be "good" and ignore the process that goes into consistently and effectively scoring goals. Simon may have only scored on 5.98% of his 5v5 shots, but he does *a lot* to put others in a position to score too.”

*Note that Simon’s S% was fine until February onwards (played with Bjug, Horny mainly after that). He was above 10% before that.

Yes but completely irrelevant as Tanev is obviously slotted into that spot.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

Malkin is going to provide "negative value" for his contract? That's just insane to me and shows how stats like this are interesting, but can be very misleading.

What he means is they have it weighted in such a way that the end of his contract brings down the overall grade due to the assumption that he will tail off into like 40 point territory in that last season at a 9.5M dollar rate which is not a good bargain. I understand the math I just think it's kinda silly.

You're right that a shitload of this stuff is very misleading, removes a ton of context and can often be manipulated however you wish to fit the narrative you are pushing.

Like, say... charts showing how Malkin and Hornqvist are actually terrific together, eh @Peat?

 

[Peat]

Malkin is going to provide "negative value" for his contract? That's just insane to me and shows how stats like this are interesting, but can be very misleading.

Last year only. Can't see it being all that insane to project that 36 year old Malkin mightn't provide as good value for money as 9.5m spent on average on other things. Not sure I agree with it, and curious to see if it includes projected cap rises in its model, but it seems a plausible enough possibility.

 

[Riptide]

It depends on whether those with space plan on trying to offer sheet and also other teams may need to do the same as the Pens with their players and better players may be available for cheap prices because it's a buyers market--if you're a team with space in need of a forward, for example, would you rather have Ehlers and/or Kreider, or Rust, even if the former cost a little bit more...I'm not saying it's impossible for the Pens to trade someone and sign Petts before the start of the season, just that there's a reasonable chance that they can't...

Jesus I thought I occasionally used runon sentences...

Just an FYI... the "formers" are going to cost a lot more than "a little bit more". Getting Ehlers or Kreider will be significantly more expensive then Rust. Not only because of the talent difference, but because neither of those teams NEED to move those specific players.

 

[Tom Hanks]

Yes but completely irrelevant as Tanev is obviously slotted into that spot.

You edited too quickly I had a Taken gif ready to go “good luck”

 

[JackFr]

Malkin is going to provide "negative value" for his contract? That's just insane to me and shows how stats like this are interesting, but can be very misleading.

No, that's not what it said. Drawing a conclusion based on a mis-read interpretation of an article you didn't read?

It projects Malkin to provide an overall positive value for his contract over the next three years. It just says that based on expected age effects he will more than likely not be a 9.5 million dollar player when he's 37. Which is not that insane to think.

But yeah man, it's embarrassing for sure. The Athletic should fire this guy.

 

[Shady Machine]

Last year only. Can't see it being all that insane to project that 36 year old Malkin mightn't provide as good value for money as 9.5m spent on average on other things. Not sure I agree with it, and curious to see if it includes projected cap rises in its model, but it seems a plausible enough possibility.

Unless it compares what you could get for 9.5MM at that time, I'm not sure it is plausible. And for that matter, how does it rank Crosby at the end of his contract? Obviously he's a better player than Malkin, but Crosby at 37-38 for 8.7MM vs Malkin at 35-36 for 9.5MM shouldn't be a materially different answer in Crosby's direction. I'd actually bet Malkin gives you more value in his final contract year vs Crosby in his.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

A) I understand it fully, but thank you for trying to nullify my responses by going there.

Clearly not.

B) You're moving the goal posts and did so fairly early on once it was obvious that the math wasn't on your side. In post that started this all (#569) you were complaining about Reese being put in "scoring roles", which most identify as a top 6 role. In post #597 you moved the goal posts from "top 6" or "scoring roles" to "top 9".

I've been consistent and your links don't lead anywhere. Please quote so I can respond.

C) Despite what you want to say about how TOI doesn't matter because you're not talking about his icetime and are instead talking about where he played... you're still ignoring the fact that if the TOI doesn't support what you're saying, then he couldn't have been playing the role you're crying about him having played.

See my first response. You don't understand what I'm arguing.

This is not based on icetime. Its about where he was playing.

Looking even closer at the breakdown, the only time he saw any consistent time with Malkin was when Hornqvist and Simon were injured in December and then for the stretch in late Feb/early March where he actually helped Kessel and Malkin suck less. That's it. Everything else had him on L3/L4, where he was consistently the 10th or 11th F in ESTOI. You don't have to like it, but the bottom line is he wasn't being used how you're saying he was being used, and his linemate TOI and overall ESTOI supports this.

Newsflash:

L3 = Top 9

When you keep bringing up TOI and how ZAR performed into this conversation, it only reinforces that you don't understand what's being talked about.

It's. About. Where. He. Played.

 

[Shady Machine]

No, that's not what it said. Drawing a conclusion based on a mis-read interpretation of an article you didn't read?

It projects Malkin to provide an overall positive value for his contract over the next three years. It just says that based on expected age effects he will more than likely not be a 9.5 million dollar player when he's 37. Which is not that insane to think.

But yeah man, it's embarrassing for sure. The Athletic should fire this guy.

I based my conclusion off of @Peat statement that Malkin would provide negative value in the last year. I'm not lambasting the writer and you're right I didn't read it as I don't have the Athletic subscription.

I'm sure the numbers are legit. Just questioning conclusions like that but obviously I misinterpreted the authors conclusions since I didn't read it.

 

[Andy99]

Jesus I thought I occasionally used runon sentences...

Just an FYI... the "formers" are going to cost a lot more than "a little bit more". Getting Ehlers or Kreider will be significantly more expensive then Rust. Not only because of the talent difference, but because neither of those teams NEED to move those specific players.

Well both WPG and NYR are going to need to move SOMEONE most likely unless Laine or Connors goes in an OS. NYR may move Names, they don't have to move Kreider...and neither do the Pens have to move Rust, there are other options...but if several other teams feel they have to move someone too and they make a better player available, the Pens might not find a partner...given what's happening rn, I don;t see that as unrealistic

 

[Peat]

Unless it compares what you could get for 9.5MM at that time, I'm not sure it is plausible. And for that matter, how does it rank Crosby at the end of his contract? Obviously he's a better player than Malkin, but Crosby at 37-38 for 8.7MM vs Malkin at 35-36 for 9.5MM shouldn't be a materially different answer in Crosby's direction. I'd actually bet Malkin gives you more value in his final contract year vs Crosby in his.

Well that's why I wondered if they included cap raises in their model. That said, I don't think it's going to change dramatically in the next couple of years and even if it does, very few of the comparable contracts will. The latter part of that is certainly less true with Sid 6 years down the line. That'd be one big advantage for him.

Still, it's an interesting question as to why they think Geno might be a little far gone for his money in 3 years and Sid will stick with his contract in 6. Might ask it in the comments section.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

Unless it compares what you could get for 9.5MM at that time, I'm not sure it is plausible. And for that matter, how does it rank Crosby at the end of his contract? Obviously he's a better player than Malkin, but Crosby at 37-38 for 8.7MM vs Malkin at 35-36 for 9.5MM shouldn't be a materially different answer in Crosby's direction. I'd actually bet Malkin gives you more value in his final contract year vs Crosby in his.