Salary Cap: Pittsburgh Penguins Salary Cap Thread - Marc my words, they'll get him signed

[Empoleon8771]

Wonder if theres a trade out for there for an expiring or 1-2 years left 3.5mil+ player that we could swap JJ for and then buyout. Havent checked numbers but is that a route?

No, the buyout window has been closed for a while.

The best case solution is that they waive Johnson and stash him in WBS. They don't treat veterans that way, which is why that almost definitely won't happen. The only veteran I can recall that got waived and demoted to the AHL while on a sizable contract was Satan.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

And if that was the case, it would take you a grand total of 3 minutes to throw together an actual argument for it. Spare me this "it's so obvious" crap, if you're going to reply to one of my arguments, actually bring something to the table beyond "because I say so".

It's really not that hard of a concept. If someone takes the time to throw together a stats based argument, don't reply to them if you're just going to lazily brush them off. If I'm going to spend time throwing together stats that suggest that they're not that far apart, and your reply is "nah you're wrong, Cole is obviously better", I'm just going to consider you an ass. Not because you disagree, but because you're giving me a middle finger for brushing aside a backed up argument just because it doesn't agree with your opinion. If that's asking too much, literally just don't reply.

Both JJ and Cole have had similar TOI the last couple years and Cole actually had worse OZ deployment. JJ got caved in possession-wise both years while Cole did fine.

Cole also outproduced JJ over that timeframe with 35 points in 138 games vs. 24 in 159.

So outside of JJ's one-off '16-'17, I don't see how Cole doesn't take this handily. Prior to that season, their minutes were so different that it's hard to compare.

 

[Ugene Magic]

I read on Twitter that it's a short term deal. If true, that's disappointing. I would've liked to lock him up for the next 4-5 years at a reasonable cap hit.

They'll compensate him on the new deal after the year turns over.

Like:

Give him 1.5 for this season and then next year during the season sign him to a 4 year term and front load bonuses in the first couple years like 5.0/4.5/3.5/3.5 to come away with a 4.125 cap hit. Those are signing bonuses of 1.5 in year one and 1.0 in year two. They over pay him .500 to wait 4 to 6 months to sign the permanent deal. That's where the .125 comes in over 4 years.

Fair for both sides.

 

[SEALBound]

No, the buyout window has been closed for a while.

The best case solution is that they waive Johnson and stash him in WBS. They don't treat veterans that way, which is why that almost definitely won't happen. The only veteran I can recall that got waived and demoted to the AHL while on a sizable contract was Satan.

Theres a special rule if you have arbitration cases open. We did when I looked into it. We dont now, forgot that was the requirement.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Both JJ and Cole have had similar TOI the last couple years and Cole actually had worse OZ deployment. JJ got caved in possession-wise both years while Cole did fine.

Cole also outproduced JJ over that timeframe with 35 points in 138 games vs. 24 in 159.

So outside of JJ's one-off '16-'17, I don't see how Cole doesn't take this handily. Prior to that season, their minutes were so different that it's hard to compare.

Cole did? Taking JJ out of the equation for a second, Cole had a negative xGF%Rel and CF%Rel in 3 of the last 4 years (positive CF%Rel in 18-19, slightly positive xGF%Rel in 16-17). Cole has never been a good possession player, with having a -2.04% CF%Rel and a -2.12% xGF%Rel from 2015-2018 on the Penguins.

Adding JJ back into the conversation, the original comment was that JJ from 2015-2018 was basically the same as Cole from 2015-2018 analytically. Johnson has a worse CF% and GF% but a better xGF% and HDCF% (rel for all of those stats), and I feel as if that paints them as pretty similar over that window. Johnson was better in 15-16, they were about equal in 16-17 and Cole was dramatically better in 17-18, but those overall end up about equaling each other out.

However, the point of that comment was to say that people on here would say that Johnson sucked before coming to Pittsburgh, so I don't see how Cole was also anything special while in Pittsburgh. The original debate was how high of a ceiling Johnson could realistically have if he rebounded, and I said similar to what Cole was in Pittbsurgh. I still think that's fair, because Cole was kinda crappy analytically but helped the PK, played physically and blocked a bunch of shots.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

On one hand I am happy and relieved that they will have MP signed very soon and the team doesn't have to basically give away a perfectly good forward to make room because JR is kind of a lunatic and can't help himself.

On the other hand I'm really, really disappointed that they could not come to terms on a multi-year contract with MP as I am a big believer in him and can't help but feel like they just burned a few million dollars in cap because they couldn't/wouldn't move JJ and/or got a massive hard on for a 3rd/4th liner. I firmly believe locking up MP for a few years after what he showed last season should have been a top priority. But they obviously thought otherwise.

 

[billybudd]

Okay, then don't reply to my posts then. There you go, easy solution. If I'm going to put in effort into making an argument and you're not going to put in effort to make a rebuttal, don't respond. You're just being a jerk to whoever took the time to come up with the argument, even if you don't agree with it.

Like for real, how much effort would it take to make a rebuttal to that? "Here are some xGA/60 stats on the PK, those show that Cole is better on the PK". Okay, that's one argument. "Here's a clip of Johnson running out of position to make a big hit, only to get burned. Here's a clip of Cole playing the body smartly". Okay, that's another argument. Expecting people to give even a shred of effort in reply to arguments you took time to make really isn't asking too much.

"You are a jerk and wasting my time for not writing a dissertation proving to me something that I already know."

Okay, then.

Maybe log off and come back in a day or two. Little bit of time and maybe a better mood and I think you'll understand just how irrational much of what you're saying is.

 

[Ugene Magic]

On one hand I am happy and relieved that they will have MP signed very soon and the team doesn't have to basically give away a perfectly good forward to make room because JR is kind of a lunatic and can't help himself.

On the other hand I'm really, really disappointed that they could not come to terms on a multi-year contract with MP as I am a big believer in him and can't help but feel like they just burned a few million dollars in cap because they couldn't/wouldn't move JJ and/or got a massive hard on for a 3rd/4th liner. I firmly believe locking up MP for a few years after what he showed last season should have been a top priority. But they obviously thought otherwise.

Who say's they don't?

Hand shake deals work too. Just remember neither side is worried, and neither should we. Just a timing thing.

 

[Empoleon8771]

"You are a jerk and wasting my time for not writing a dissertation proving to me something that I already know."

Okay, then.

Maybe log off and come back in a day or two. Little bit of time and maybe a better mood and I think you'll understand just how irrational much of what you're saying is.

Yeah, I really don't view it as irrational to expect someone to put in even a shred of effort in a reply to someone you put effort in. If you do, well that's a you problem. You can make a no effort reply to a post that actually made some effort, and I can think you're a jerk for doing so. Is that fine?

Let's make an analogy here, let's say you do a little bit of research for your company on an idea that is viewed as unpopular, and when you show your findings to a coworker, their reply is "nah you're wrong, your idea is wrong because it's obviously a bad idea". Do you think the coworker is being a jerk?

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

Um... so you are implying that if MP has a big year he'll just sorta say "nah bro, we're good" when it comes to maximizing his contract?

Sure thing. Believe it when I see it.

 

[Gurglesons]

The hate on this forum has become a comforting numbness.

Hey, @Peat. f*** you.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

Ok with short-term on MP given where we stand now. Protects our forward depth and insulates us from a scenario where we locked Pettersson in only to see him regress.

Plus I don’t think that even with a very strong performance this season his long term price tag will be drastically higher in 2020 than it could have been this summer.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

I sure hope so.

Either way I hope they really set him loose this year and trust him with even more responsibility. I think he's ready to be a full time second pairing guy.

 

[Peat]

Ok with short-term on MP given where we stand now. Protects our forward depth and insulates us from a scenario where we locked Pettersson in only to see him regress.

Plus I don’t think that even with a very strong performance this season his long term price tag will be drastically higher in 2020 than it could have been this summer.

My guess is probably only a million or so but watch him find a new offensive ceiling none of us thought he had and go on to put mad points and get like 5m a year... only to never put up the same points again.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Giving Pettersson a short term deal takes his next contract from about a 5 year, $3 million deal to a 5 year, $4.25 million deal. Pettersson is 100% going to benefit financially by taking the 1 year deal, because he's really damn good and he's going to prove it again this year. There is no handshake agreement, rather just the common knowledge that both sides want a long-term deal after this year.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

Giving Pettersson a short term deal takes his next contract from about a 5 year, $3 million deal to a 5 year, $4.25 million deal. Pettersson is 100% going to benefit financially by taking the 1 year deal, because he's really damn good and he's going to prove it again this year. There is no handshake agreement, rather just the common knowledge that both sides want a long-term deal after this year.

Yup. I don't at all like it but it is what it is.

Honestly I hope he tears it up. That defense needs it bad.

 

[Randy Butternubs]

no you

 

[Empoleon8771]

Yup. I don't at all like it but it is what it is.

Honestly I hope he tears it up. That defense needs it bad.

I like it because I'd take a better chance at a cup this year in exchange for paying Pettersson $1 million more a year on his next deal. Giving Pettersson a long term deal required one of Rust or Bjugstad to be traded (or for Tanev to not be signed in the first place), and I think the Penguins are better with all of those guys on the team.

I'd prefer to trade one of Gudbranson or Johnson (prefer Johnson but Gudbranson is probably more movable) and sign Pettersson long-term right now, but that's not exactly feasible with the current RFA situation in the NHL. The league is just frozen.

 

[Ugene Magic]

Um... so you are implying that if MP has a big year he'll just sorta say "nah bro, we're good" when it comes to maximizing his contract?

Sure thing. Believe it when I see it.

Just because I gave an example (That's all it was) doesn't mean it can't be more. It was more about showing how they can get it done by way of bonuses to make up for losses this year signing a 1 year very cheap deal.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

For the record I think they'd have been just fine passing on Tanev (and I like his game just fine) and seeing how the rest of the offseason shaped up but I agree with the rest.

Just because I gave an example (That's all it was) doesn't mean it can't be more. It was more about showing how they can get it done by way of bonuses to make up for losses this year signing a 1 year very cheap deal.

Maybe maybe not. My main point is all this fuzzy math and contract scrambling was totally needless and even with MP signed leaves them in a rather precarious (though workable) spot.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

My guess is probably only a million or so but watch him find a new offensive ceiling none of us thought he had and go on to put mad points and get like 5m a year... only to never put up the same points again.

I think we’ll end up losing like 500k-1.25M per year this way. Which is worth it IMO if it means we get to make a more informed decision on who to jettison from the forward group.

Not sure I see a big spike in Petts production given his style of play and having Schultz/Letang in front of him for PP duty but....

If he goes nuts offensively then it’ll probably mean a few things: Pettersson was effective in helping drive the 2nd pair, Malkin had a big year, and Pettersson took a big step in his development. Regardless of the consequences next summer cap-wise I will take those things happening every single day haha.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Now that we're on the topic, what exactly was the point of also signing Tanev but not subtracting anyone else? I know what Tanev adds and I definitely think he brought things to the table that the bottom-6 lacked, but you were already 12 deep in forwards before you signed him. I'd like to think that their plan all along was to trade one of their more expensive forwards, but nothing ever materialized out of that. I don't know how crazy I am about JR not taking that possibility more seriously, that he could be signing Tanev to a huge contract when he may struggle to clearing up cap space and a roster spot for him.

If it all works out then no harm, no foul, but that's not really guaranteed to happen. JR seemed more conscious of that impact in the past, when he waited for the Sutter-Bonino trade to go through before signing Fehr as a free agent.

 

[Khelandros]

Wonder if theres a trade out for there for an expiring or 1-2 years left 3.5mil+ player that we could swap JJ for and then buyout. Havent checked numbers but is that a route?

Trevor Daley

 

[Gurglesons]

Now that we're on the topic, what exactly was the point of also signing Tanev but not subtracting anyone else? I know what Tanev adds and I definitely think he brought things to the table that the bottom-6 lacked, but you were already 12 deep in forwards before you signed him. I'd like to think that their plan all along was to trade one of their more expensive forwards, but nothing ever materialized out of that. I don't know how crazy I am about JR not taking that possibility more seriously, that he could be signing Tanev to a huge contract when he may struggle to clearing up cap space and a roster spot for him.

If it all works out then no harm, no foul, but that's not really guaranteed to happen. JR seemed more conscious of that impact in the past, when he waited for the Sutter-Bonino trade to go through before signing Fehr as a free agent.

I mean, Empo. This is our issue with the Tanev contract LOL.

In a vacuum, whatever if it is the worst contract on the team. Given us having Gudbranson and JJ tying up 7 mil as our two least used D when healthy and then adding a 3.5 mil winger to play on the 4th line was just asisine.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

Now that we're on the topic, what exactly was the point of also signing Tanev but not subtracting anyone else? I know what Tanev adds and I definitely think he brought things to the table that the bottom-6 lacked, but you were already 12 deep in forwards before you signed him. I'd like to think that their plan all along was to trade one of their more expensive forwards, but nothing ever materialized out of that. I don't know how crazy I am about JR not taking that possibility more seriously, that he could be signing Tanev to a huge contract when he may struggle to clearing up cap space and a roster spot for him.

Well I suppose this way they can at least assess the group of forwards with some games under their belt, preseason or otherwise. Give some guys they see as trade possibilities time in some varied roles, etc. Then make an informed decision. But like... what if Tanev or Kahun are the obvious odd men out when they get through this assessment process? What if Rust and Bjugstad (the names floated consistently) absolutely light it up? Where do they go from there?

I understand how these things can be handwaved away by the team but it honestly doesn't make much sense to me, either. They have too many NHL caliber forwards. A good problem to have in some ways but like you said it sort of creates this weird situation where something obvious has to be done but what, exactly?

I'm sorry but signing Tanev was a silly, kneejerk reaction. He's a nice enough player to have... but just... silly.