Salary Cap: Pittsburgh Penguins Salary Cap Thread: Where Gods are born & Old Ones Go To Valhalla..

[Gurglesons]

Depends on Pettersson and what their plans are with the defense going forward.

I was trying to write out some if statements to make my opinion, but it's just very complicated and depends on a lot of factors. Let's say that Pettersson is amazing this year (like he has been so far) and Matheson is also amazing, what you do with Matheson depends on what your plans are with Letang IMO.

Letang and Matheson are much different players. Matheson is likely only playing half the season with the injury (if playing at all). Pettersson has proven to be a top four D here and is much younger and produces about the same offensively as Matheson point wise.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Letang and Matheson are much different players. Matheson is likely only playing half the season with the injury (if playing at all). Pettersson has proven to be a top four D here and is much younger and produces about the same offensively as Matheson point wise.

That's not really relevant to my point, though. If you're not committed to Letang, you only have 3 top-4 D long term. If Matheson has an excellent year and you're thinking of moving on from Letang, you absolutely keep Matheson and plan on running with Dumoulin-Marino and Pettersson-Matheson.

 

[Big McLargehuge]

So we knew going into the season that Matheson would be a project. Now, we’re finished with the evaluation after a limited training camp and 3 games? That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.

This assumes we all bought into Matheson being a worthwhile project.

For me a project is someone you get for a nominal cost in the hopes they can provide value, not someone on the books for ~$30 million regardless of how things work out.

 

[Peat]

I think that is the mistake. We shouldn't be trying to teach Matheson how to play defense. We need to just embrace what he does well and slot him in a role where the defensive miscues are not killing us.

I agree with this a lot but with the caveat that Matheson has to clean up the miscues that has him playing too much defence. It's one thing to be a bit defensively inept like good Schultz, but be smart about keeping himself out of such situations, and another to be a bit inept and careless with possession.

Depends on Pettersson and what their plans are with the defense going forward.

I was trying to write out some if statements to make my opinion, but it's just very complicated and depends on a lot of factors. Let's say that Pettersson is amazing this year (like he has been so far) and Matheson is also amazing, what you do with Matheson depends on what your plans are with Letang IMO.

Here's the simplest way I can say it:

1. If Matheson and Pettersson are great and you're not committed to Letang, keep Matheson and trade Letang
2. If Matheson and Pettersson are great and you're going to re-sign Letang, trade whichever of Matheson or Pettersson brings back a higher return
3. If Matheson isn't good enough where you think he can be a stable 2nd pair D for the duration of his contract, either trade Matheson or lose him in expansion

Which doesn't even cover the possibility now might be a good time to move on from Dumo - and, tbh, I don't see how both Matheson and Pettersson have great seasons without taking minutes and duties currently going to Dumo.

In any case - if Matheson looks great this year, how likely do you think you are to trust him again?

 

[DesertPenguin]

How does a 5 million dollar contract at 5 more seasons hurt less than one for 2 more seasons.

Makes no sense at all. Matheson will never live up to that contract, He'll never be more than a guy who can give you a little bit of offense as your #6.

Moving Horny out was probably the right move. He no longer had a role in the top 6, and you see how much better L3 looks now with McCann - Jankowski - Tanev than last year's black hole of Marleau - McCann - Horny. He didn't have a role here anymore.

The problem was the return. We took a gamble on Matheson and so far it doesn't look like a good one. It's early though, and Matheson now gets to go on IR a while and learn without the pressure of playing every other night. Fingers crossed it gets better.

 

[T1K]

This assumes we all bought into Matheson being a worthwhile project.

For me a project is someone you get for a nominal cost in the hopes they can provide value, not someone on the books for ~$30 million regardless of how things work out.

Yeah, I agree this is not the same situation as when we traded for Schultz. That was a low risk, high reward project.

We all know that Hornqvist was traded for non-hockey reasons. Technically we’ve already seen the benefit from a financial perspective (dumping of an uninsured contract). Obviously JR thought we’d be able to turn MM’s game around to make him a usable player. If he isn’t, JR deserves all the blame for the risk he assumed, but I do think it’s too early to make that call just yet.

 

[Tom Hanks]

@Soggy Biscuit

More like
@Soggy Biscuit

 

[Gurglesons]

That's not really relevant to my point, though. If you're not committed to Letang, you only have 3 top-4 D long term. If Matheson has an excellent year and you're thinking of moving on from Letang, you absolutely keep Matheson and plan on running with Dumoulin-Marino and Pettersson-Matheson.

Nah. If you can get Seattle to cover the Matheson deal you jump on it.

I'd rather overpay in UFA than retain that contract. (Especially considering what happened with UFAs this year).

Same deal with Tanev. If we can get Seattle to take that contract you look into it.

 

[T1K]

Nah. If you can get Seattle to cover the Matheson deal you jump on it.

I'd rather overpay in UFA than retain that contract. (Especially considering what happened with UFAs this year).

Same deal with Tanev. If we can get Seattle to take that contract you look into it.

I hate Tanev’s contract, but love what he brings to the table. I fully expect that he’ll get claimed in the expansion draft.

 

[Andy99]

Sprong gets a promotion lol...

 

[ownal]

Surprised the Capitals don't know Sheary is an automatic goal against us each game.

 

[Pens x]

we've turned around players before. you never stop learning.

Here we go with the we can fix every dman garbage.

For every Niskanen (who we acquired literally 10 years ago), you have a Jack Johnson or a Hunwick.

 

[Turin]

Although I said I’m not a big Roslovic guy I would definitely deal ZAR for him if that’s the framework.

 

[Randy Butternubs]

Nah. If you can get Seattle to cover the Matheson deal you jump on it.

I'd rather overpay in UFA than retain that contract. (Especially considering what happened with UFAs this year).

Same deal with Tanev. If we can get Seattle to take that contract you look into it.

What if Dumoulin continues to suck and both Pettersson and Matheson out play him significantly?

 

[Gurglesons]

What if Dumoulin continues to suck and both Pettersson and Matheson out play him significantly?

I still bet on Dumoulin rounding out his game over Matheson.

 

[Randy Butternubs]

I still bet on Dumoulin rounding out his game over Matheson.

I do too. But you didn't answer the question. I'm not sure what I'd do.

 

[EVGENIMERLIN]

What if Dumoulin continues to suck and both Pettersson and Matheson out play him significantly?

You have POJ too clogging up the left side, whom the team is very high on. Something the team will have to think about. I could see Matheson getting exposed to the expansion draft however

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

You can only if you accept you're a massive hypocrite and don't mind talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Or, you know, if I have a different idea of what productive big changes consist of.

 

[Ugene Magic]

Sometimes you have to part ways with a good player to get better.

Neal for Horny type.

I do too. But you didn't answer the question. I'm not sure what I'd do.

 

[66-30-33]

Surprised the Capitals don't know Sheary is an automatic goal against us each game.

Shhhh.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Yeah, I agree this is not the same situation as when we traded for Schultz. That was a low risk, high reward project.

We all know that Hornqvist was traded for non-hockey reasons. Technically we’ve already seen the benefit from a financial perspective (dumping of an uninsured contract). Obviously JR thought we’d be able to turn MM’s game around to make him a usable player. If he isn’t, JR deserves all the blame for the risk he assumed, but I do think it’s too early to make that call just yet.

I mean game 1 Matheson looked very new to the team as normal but by the second game he looked a lot better. So there's hope in that. It's a shame he's injured right now.

 

[SherogoesHAM]

Would trade Dumo+ for Laine.

 

[Gurglesons]

Would trade Dumo+ for Laine.

Shocking take.

I would trade every player on our roster not named Sid or Malkin for Laine.

 

[SherogoesHAM]

Shocking take.

I would trade every player on our roster not named Sid or Malkin for Laine.

Dumo+Rust?

 

[LRS87]

Dumo+Rust?

Yes. Pretty quick