Salary Cap: Salary Cap + Roster Building | Well, now what?

[Gurglesons]

He's still probably our 3rd best LW.

Isn’t saying much..

 

[Honour Over Glory]

It's like it's way easier to break into the league on a poop team. Weird.

Stars weren't as bad as you think.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Neal was also proven to be an NHL contributor by having 72 goals before even coming to the Penguins. Neal was a proven ~30 goal scorer when the Penguins got him, Sprong hasn't even proven he's a NHLer yet.

Neal was a power forward who had proven he could score goals, and the Penguins turned him into a 40 goal pure sniper. To compare his usage to Sprong's usage is nonsensical. Even if you're comparing Sprong to 2008 Neal, the comparison doesn't work because the 2018 Penguins are way better than the 2008 Stars were. Neal got top-6 minutes immediately because his team sucked.

Kind of a double edged sword there isn't it?

Would Neal be any good if he was on a good team and didn't get those chances to prove he can score and was stuck playing 4th line and 6-7 mins on average and benched for 3rd periods or was it better for him to get that shot right away and show what he can do.

Because the funniest shit is the argument that he was on a bad team and thats why he got top 6 Mins. And that he earned it in Dallas to get the shot with us.

Lost in that is the whole thing of "was given top 6 minutes..." Had he not had that chance he wouldn't be shit.


Imagine that.

 

[Tender Rip]

It just seems like a real half-assed way to use an asset we had to pay through the teeth for. At least give the guy the building blocks for success.

People rightfully *****ed about Iggy to LW back in Disco Dan's day. This is bordering on that, except if they don't figure it out it'll be a whole year of mismanagement instead of just a playoff run.

Kessel was playing with a healthy Brassard for 14 games? I think there might be some crossed lines here.

I think we agree on what Brassard's best potential usage is, and with how HMH worked last year, I think it was certainly also what JR had in mind when acquiring him. Usage when he arrived suggested the same.

Now there are certainly potential explanations for Brassard not having been successful so far, chief among those his injury last season, and the fact that Kessel seemed injured also.
But at the same time you cannot say or suggest that Brassard has no responsibility. He is not a 3C, he cannot be measured like that, just like Geno is not measured as a 2C. Brassard is a 2C being acquired and asked to make a third line effective - against weaker opposition than he is used to seeing. If he absolutely requires top6 level wingers to do that, then we have an issue.
I'm curious how it will work with Horny and Simon though. In theory I like the complimentary qualities on that line - ought to be a strong 3rd line.
If it is not, then that brings one closer to the point where you have to say that it was a decent idea, but you might want to move on from it anyway.

That is, unless it is tried again with healthy Brassard and Kessel which would be my preference for many reasons. At least to see if it would work before deciding to do something else.
Again - if that is just not going to happen because it is Geno's line getting it done; because Kessel doesn't like it etc., then those are more reasons you'd want to move on from the idea.
As said before, there should be no panic on this, there's time to try things out, but at the same time you do need to find something that works or establish that it does not, and if it doesn't then it really doesn't matter what they might have thought or wanted last season. Then its about getting as much value from the asset in the here and now as we can. Whether that is a swap for a suitable asset for us or futures that can realistically be used to get such an asset, I don't care.

NB: for those talking about "its only six games, why even talk about this before we've played 25/30 games"..... I have kids who are 4½ and 1½ years old..... time flies. You're talking about 1½ month of hockey.... I need that amount of time just to plan for a night out with the guys.... .

 

[Tom Hanks]

Kind of a double edged sword there isn't it?

Would Neal be any good if he was on a good team and didn't get those chances to prove he can score and was stuck playing 4th line and 6-7 mins on average and benched for 3rd periods or was it better for him to get that shot right away and show what he can do.

Because the funniest **** is the argument that he was on a bad team and thats why he got top 6 Mins. And that he earned it in Dallas to get the shot with us.

Lost in that is the whole thing of "was given top 6 minutes..." Had he not had that chance he wouldn't be ****.


Imagine that.

That’s not the two options for a player though. Get top 6 minutes and you’ll be good, get bottom 6 minutes and you’ll be bad.

Neal began his career on a team that finished 23rd in the league. Of course there is going to be more opportunity for him.

Rust and Sheary had lower minutes in their first seasons. We had a little bit of a weaker roster but they also got opportunities with injuries etc and built up from there.

Sprong is getting 8:30 mins right now and 1:30 of that on the PP and has only managed 3 shots in 6 games. He’s not playing with scrubs either. A 3rd line C and a smart vet who can set up plays very well (has 711 career points) plus good players on the PP. He’s not forcing anyone’s hand either with his play. At the moment he’s the 11th or 12th best forward on the team.

 

[Clatartar]

That’s not the two options for a player though. Get top 6 minutes and you’ll be good, get bottom 6 minutes and you’ll be bad.

Neal began his career on a team that finished 23rd in the league. Of course there is going to be more opportunity for him.

Rust and Sheary had lower minutes in their first seasons. We had a little bit of a weaker roster but they also got opportunities with injuries etc and built up from there.

Sprong is getting 8:30 mins right now and 1:30 of that on the PP and has only managed 3 shots in 6 games. He’s not playing with scrubs either. A 3rd line C and a smart vet who can set up plays very well (has 711 career points) plus good players on the PP. He’s not forcing anyone’s hand either with his play. At the moment he’s the 11th or 12th best forward on the team.

This does not account for “fit”.
Sprong is made for Geno. If we’re going to continue to use brassard as a winger he’d be better off with G and Sprong.

Jake-Sid-Horny
Brassard-G-Sprsong
Hagelin-Sheahan-Phil (Phil looked his best 5v5 with Sheahan)
Simon-Cullen/Grant-Rust

 

[Ryder71]

wrong thread

 

[Riptide]

I don't think you move Brassard for Saad, I think you move Maatta for Saad and make the cap work some other way. Something like Sheahan and Maatta for Saad works with the cap and you have the center depth to make that trade. If you view Sheahan as your long term 3C, you may say no to that, but I don't think anyone should view him as your long term 3C.

Then who is? Because Brassard won't be here next season. Sheahan might not be either, but we had better not be going into FA knowing we'll lose Brassard and not having a backup option. We just don't have enough time in our window to be doing that.
.

Am I the only person that does not see why Sprong is constantly compared to Neal? Completely different playing styles imo.

Yes... and no. He gets compared to Neal because of his shot. Sprong is faster and could end up being a better play maker. But Sprong is more Neal ish then like say Kessel or Guentzel.
.

 

[Tom Hanks]

This does not account for “fit”.
Sprong is made for Geno. If we’re going to continue to use brassard as a winger he’d be better off with G and Sprong.

Jake-Sid-Horny
Brassard-G-Sprsong
Hagelin-Sheahan-Phil (Phil looked his best 5v5 with Sheahan)
Simon-Cullen/Grant-Rust

I don’t think Sprong is made for Geno. Obviously it depends on the LW on the line but come playoff time if our roster stayed the same I imagine Geno getting double teamed (just like what happened with Neal) against the stronger teams.

They are trying stuff with Brassard but I imagine he’ll play mostly at centre.

I’d say Phil being good with Sheahan had more to do with Guentzel than anything. He was also good with Malkin. Phil was our best player for the first half of the season (that’s when he played the majority with Malkin).

 

[Riptide]

I dislike he brings next to nothing as far as ice hockey goes.

He'll be a placeholder and nothing more, as soon as someone comes in he sits, sits for a reason. I get for him being cheap, but to actually say you'd count on him or him to make a difference, well....

I don't buy into it, or that people actually go to task for him. If he actually brought something tangible I'd be alright with it. Being a warm body who can skate isn't enough.

He can play minutes without being a liability - that's more than enough for me considering that he's our 7/8D.

 

[Riptide]

How long was Kessel playing with a healthy Brassard? I'd say not nearly long enough to draw any definitive conclusions.

He played 180 ES minutes here in the RS in the 17/18 season, and Kessel was his linemate for 147 of them - or 81.6% of the time. If 150 minutes isn't enough to show something half ass decent... then I don't think it matters what they would get as you wouldn't be happy with it.

Edit. His next two Pen forward linemates were Sheary at 69 minutes and Sheahan at 45 minutes. Almost all of his time when he arrived here was with Kessel on his wing.

 

[Riptide]

I’d say Phil being good with Sheahan had more to do with Guentzel than anything. He was also good with Malkin. Phil was our best player for the first half of the season (that’s when he played the majority with Malkin).

And yet based on the stats, he was at his most productive when Sheahan was his center and Rust I believe was on LW. With Malkin (iirc) he was only +1 (or 2?) in goal differential.

 

[Tender Rip]

He played 180 ES minutes here in the RS in the 17/18 season, and Kessel was his linemate for 147 of them - or 81.6% of the time. If 150 minutes isn't enough to show something half ass decent... then I don't think it matters what they would get as you wouldn't be happy with it.

Edit. His next two Pen forward linemates were Sheary at 69 minutes and Sheahan at 45 minutes. Almost all of his time when he arrived here was with Kessel on his wing.

I think what Cookies and I want is simply a second take to verify what they’re like if neither have any health excuses.
Kessel was a drain on every C at the tail-end of last season. He was shut.
If Brassard cannot make it work/dominate at C with Kessel... third line duty against bottom 6 opposition, with both of them healthy, it would make decisions quite a bit easier, IMO.

If that was the thinking behind the acquisition in the first place, which usage would imply, then that should not be an outrageous ask.

 

[Peat]

And yet based on the stats, he was at his most productive when Sheahan was his center and Rust I believe was on LW. With Malkin (iirc) he was only +1 (or 2?) in goal differential.

I don’t think Sprong is made for Geno. Obviously it depends on the LW on the line but come playoff time if our roster stayed the same I imagine Geno getting double teamed (just like what happened with Neal) against the stronger teams.

They are trying stuff with Brassard but I imagine he’ll play mostly at centre.

I’d say Phil being good with Sheahan had more to do with Guentzel than anything. He was also good with Malkin. Phil was our best player for the first half of the season (that’s when he played the majority with Malkin).

Phil's best production with both Sheahan and Malkin was with Guentzel respectively and was better with MK than with SK - just when Guentzel was with MK, the line got stoved in defensively comparatively to without, and when with SK, the line functioned better defensively compared to without.

SK without Guentzel outproduced MK without Guentzel in terms of p/60 though. I'm not huge on a Phil line of only having a GF/60 of 2.88 and it would need to be better defensively (not at all accomplished by less Sheary and Simon on that line ) but it was functional. Whatever Phil and Sheahan have together, its not solely based around Guentzel.

We need a better 3LW than what Simon is currently giving us. That's the biggest thing hurting Brassard other than Brassard's play itself. Well, that and playing at wing. But Rust and Horny on his RW aren't the problem.

That said, I'd love to see Rust-Brassard-Sprong. I know Sully doesn't like it, but I think it's the best option with what we've got right now.

I just wish Sprong played LW.

I think the extent to which Rust and Horny just aren't playing well shouldn't be ignored. Having them both in cold streaks is really annoying.

That said, yeah, maybe Simon is a problem. He strikes me as a guy who comes to life when his line has time and space but won't really help establish it. That would be okay if Rust/Horny were playing well as they are possession machines, but they're not and I think that isn't helping the line. Although who knows? Maybe if Simon-Brassard-Rust had been given a little more patience they've have built on their pre-season and first game against Washington.

Still, if Simon is the problem... realistically, what is Sprong going to do better? He has a higher ceiling, but he's done nothing to asset that he's a better player yet, particularly when it comes to establishing possession. Either Brassard can carry an inconsistent kid or he can't.

And tbh, if they need carrying, we don't have enough skilled winger options. Need some evolution there pretty quick.

It just seems like a real half-assed way to use an asset we had to pay through the teeth for. At least give the guy the building blocks for success.

People rightfully *****ed about Iggy to LW back in Disco Dan's day. This is bordering on that, except if they don't figure it out it'll be a whole year of mismanagement instead of just a playoff run.

Oh yeah. I'm not here to tell you that this is everything going as planned. If we trade Brassard, at least one mistake has been made, and we're talking the biggest mistake of Rutherford's time here yet.

But mistakes happen and they happen regularly. I was asking questions to see whether this is something bigger than just another mistake.

Kessel was playing with a healthy Brassard for 14 games? I think there might be some crossed lines here.

As Riptide said, Brassard had 14 RS games here (and was healthy for all of them) and was with Kessel for nearly all of them. I was being lazy and not working out the exact number of games (which is why I gave the minutes), but I'm guessing we're talking at least 12 of them - he only had 25 minutes as C of a non-Kessel line (7 minutes with either Sid or Geno).

I think what Cookies and I want is simply a second take to verify what they’re like if neither have any health excuses.
Kessel was a drain on every C at the tail-end of last season. He was shut.
If Brassard cannot make it work/dominate at C with Kessel... third line duty against bottom 6 opposition, with both of them healthy, it would make decisions quite a bit easier, IMO.

If that was the thinking behind the acquisition in the first place, which usage would imply, then that should not be an outrageous ask.

Kessel was our tied leading ES scorer at the tail end of the season and on ice for the second highest g/60 of any of our forwards - not that much of a drain.

I'd prefer a second look too - and broadly speaking expect one - but I don't think its all that outrageous if the staff feel pretty sure about what they have there with the sample (i.e. Kessel and Brassard doesn't represent enough of an improvement to pre-existing options to make it the best use of talent).

 

[Tender Rip]

As Riptide said, Brassard had 14 RS games here (and was healthy for all of them) and was with Kessel for nearly all of them. I was being lazy and not working out the exact number of games (which is why I gave the minutes), but I'm guessing we're talking at least 12 of them - he only had 25 minutes as C of a non-Kessel line (7 minutes with either Sid or Geno).

Well.... OK, in those 14 games Brassard had 8 points, 7 of them ES. That equates to 41 ES points for a full season, from the third line. I think we can say SAMPLE SIZE, sure, but also that this wouldn't be too bad for someone having just arrived. Indeed we'd likely settle for that avg. for this season in 2 seconds flat. Problem was what came after the injury, playoffs included.

Kessel was our tied leading ES scorer at the tail end of the season and on ice for the second highest g/60 of any of our forwards - not that much of a drain.

While Kessel was not tied for the ES lead (Geno), and got overtaken by Sid after he heated up, I must admit I was shocked by his numbers. He produced a great deal more points from March forward, also ES, than I remembered, even if he was still a minus player which better reflects my recollection of his level of overall play that carried into the playoffs.

I'd prefer a second look too - and broadly speaking expect one - but I don't think its all that outrageous if the staff feel pretty sure about what they have there with the sample (i.e. Kessel and Brassard doesn't represent enough of an improvement to pre-existing options to make it the best use of talent).

Well, after checking what Kessel and Brassard actually did together when Brassard was healthy, trying it again really should be an easy decision. If they have a better posession player than Sheary next to them.... that ought to help on the defensive side of things too.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Stars weren't as bad as you think.

They certainly weren't as good as us, especially at Neal's position.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Then who is? Because Brassard won't be here next season. Sheahan might not be either, but we had better not be going into FA knowing we'll lose Brassard and not having a backup option. We just don't have enough time in our window to be doing that.

Saying Sheahan is your long term 3C because he's in the organization right now seems like an incredibly lazy way to build a good roster.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Kind of a double edged sword there isn't it?

Would Neal be any good if he was on a good team and didn't get those chances to prove he can score and was stuck playing 4th line and 6-7 mins on average and benched for 3rd periods or was it better for him to get that shot right away and show what he can do.

Because the funniest **** is the argument that he was on a bad team and thats why he got top 6 Mins. And that he earned it in Dallas to get the shot with us.

Lost in that is the whole thing of "was given top 6 minutes..." Had he not had that chance he wouldn't be ****.


Imagine that.

The point I'm making is that it's not a race. Sprong doesn't need to keep up with Neal's first season. If we take longer to give him a chance, that's fine. He's not going to forget how to shoot in the next few months if he has to wait for a better opportunity.

 

[Ogrezilla]

He played 180 ES minutes here in the RS in the 17/18 season, and Kessel was his linemate for 147 of them - or 81.6% of the time. If 150 minutes isn't enough to show something half ass decent... then I don't think it matters what they would get as you wouldn't be happy with it.

Edit. His next two Pen forward linemates were Sheary at 69 minutes and Sheahan at 45 minutes. Almost all of his time when he arrived here was with Kessel on his wing.

Brassard was good last year before getting hurt. So he's certainly shown something already. He was playing at his normal career pace despite the 3rd line minutes.

 

[Peat]

Well.... OK, in those 14 games Brassard had 8 points, 7 of them ES. That equates to 41 ES points for a full season, from the third line. I think we can SAMPLE SIZE, but also that this wouldn't be too bad for someone having just arrived. Indeed we'd likely settle for that avg. for this season in 2 seconds flat. Problem was what came after the injury, playoffs included.

I am inclined to agree and have always been puzzled by the narrative of "They expected more". But it exists, and I think it partially comes from the org given what came after that season, and I think they were expecting Brassard to really super-energise third line scoring compared to what Sheahan had managed. While Brassard's sample was good for 9 more ES points over the season compared to Sheahan's, it wasn't good for more goals scored on ice by the team. But I'm guessing and tbh, I am guessing at something I'm a bit puzzled by.

While Kessel was not tied for the ES lead (Geno), and got overtaken by Sid after he heated up, I must admit I was shocked by his numbers. He produced a great deal more points from March forward, also ES, than I remembered, even if he was still a minus player which better reflects my recollection of his level of overall play that carried into the playoffs.

*cough* To be clear, I wasn't saying he had the ES lead going into that part of the season, but he was tied for it during that period. From when Brassard arrived here to the end of the season, iirc, Sid/Geno/Phil all have 14 ES points in 19 games.

You are correct though about him being a minus player and I have to agree that my recollection of his play level was that there was something missing... but given where he was in terms of production, I'm inclined to think there wasn't enough missing there to significantly alter things.

Well, after checking what Kessel and Brassard actually did together when Brassard was healthy, trying it again really should be an easy decision. If they have a better posession player than Sheary next to them.... that ought to help on the defensive side of things too.

I think its a very obvious thing to try if/when Kessel loses steam with Malkin, yes. But what if that doesn't happen any time soon? Do you break up our current best pairing and annoy Phil just to test things with Brassard? How many games would you need to test them with?

And then how many games would you need to test him with Sheahan for to be sure that Brassard/Kessel is definitely better rather than "We can get results with Kessel on the 3rd line if he's in the mood but the centre doesn't much matter?"

 

[Tender Rip]

I think its a very obvious thing to try if/when Kessel loses steam with Malkin, yes. But what if that doesn't happen any time soon? Do you break up our current best pairing and annoy Phil just to test things with Brassard?

Its not "just" to test things with Brassard. It is to make the pieces come together as they were designed to and make sure we have that deep offense we could have... which is key to making us legit.

Screw what Kessel fancies. He is a never going to win any personal hardware but he could add to his collection of cups, that should be his focus. He gets to munch on PP's with Sid and Geno and has OT action with Geno too. He won the adulation of all of Pittsburgh when he carried HBK and had a huge stake in the first of those cups. Not as if he would be getting chopped liver considering his years in Toronto with Tyler Bozak.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Its not "just" to test things with Brassard. It is to make the pieces come together as they were designed to and make sure we have that deep offense we could have... which is key to making us legit.

Screw what Kessel fancies. He is a never going to win any personal hardware but he could add to his collection of cups, that should be his focus. He gets to munch on PP's with Sid and Geno and has OT action with Geno too. He won the adulation of all of Pittsburgh when he carried HBK and had a huge stake in the first of those cups. Not as if he would be getting chopped liver considering his years in Toronto with Tyler Bozak.

Kessel also helped us win a Cup flanking Malkin the following year.

I think a big draw of Brassard is that in theory he can be "the guy" to drive the third line. I'm sure we'll see Phil there at some point, but it would be nice if Brassard didn't need Kessel to give us a really good third line. And I think he can. We might need to find a better 3LW though.

 

[Peat]

Its not "just" to test things with Brassard. It is to make the pieces come together as they were designed to and make sure we have that deep offense we could have... which is key to making us legit.

Screw what Kessel fancies. He is a never going to win any personal hardware but he could add to his collection of cups, that should be his focus. He gets to munch on PP's with Sid and Geno and has OT action with Geno too. He won the adulation of all of Pittsburgh when he carried HBK and had a huge stake in the first of those cups. Not as if he would be getting chopped liver considering his years in Toronto with Tyler Bozak.

Kessel believes he'll add more to his cup collection with Geno and if unfocused/disenchanted with what he gets instead, won't do a huge amount to help us win the next one.

But that's in the future and I'm talking about now. Phil and Geno are currently our best pairing by a mile - maybe the current best in the NHL. If we're talking about design, wasn't something like this the original design for Kessel here anyway? Either you never discard original designs and the ones for Kessel and Brassard are mutually exclusive, or at some point you do and make new designs that reflect the current situation. If we have not reached that point with Brassard already, at what point do we?

Is trying to make a deep offence more important than racking up points now and getting a strong start?

And why can't Brassard give us a deep offence without getting Kessel? That's been tested less than Brassard and Kessel.

I am in favour of trying the two together. But if events continue like this and it keeps the pair of them apart, I will not regard it as a particular injustice or mistake.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

I don’t think Sprong is made for Geno. Obviously it depends on the LW on the line but come playoff time if our roster stayed the same I imagine Geno getting double teamed (just like what happened with Neal) against the stronger teams.

They are trying stuff with Brassard but I imagine he’ll play mostly at centre.

I’d say Phil being good with Sheahan had more to do with Guentzel than anything. He was also good with Malkin. Phil was our best player for the first half of the season (that’s when he played the majority with Malkin).

Sprong is inherently more capable of generating offense than Neal, so he’s a pretty bad comparison. I know he’s routinely compared to Neal around here because one is a pure goal scorer and the other has the rep for similar potential.

If Sprong was actually sticking on a line with Malkin come playoff time, that means he would be playing his game, which is generating his own chances and shooting from every angle.

That kind of player would obviously be of great concern to other teams, as opposed to a leach that was reliant on Malkin to get him the puck.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

He played 180 ES minutes here in the RS in the 17/18 season, and Kessel was his linemate for 147 of them - or 81.6% of the time. If 150 minutes isn't enough to show something half ass decent... then I don't think it matters what they would get as you wouldn't be happy with it.

Edit. His next two Pen forward linemates were Sheary at 69 minutes and Sheahan at 45 minutes. Almost all of his time when he arrived here was with Kessel on his wing.

What do you mean by crossed lines? I think Kessel just really likes playing with Geno.

As Riptide said, Brassard had 14 RS games here (and was healthy for all of them) and was with Kessel for nearly all of them. I was being lazy and not working out the exact number of games (which is why I gave the minutes), but I'm guessing we're talking at least 12 of them - he only had 25 minutes as C of a non-Kessel line (7 minutes with either Sid or Geno).

I was mistaken about Brass's playing time with Kessel, but I remembered that I had a specific problem with evaluating their time together. Looking back, that issue was the DOA combo of Sheary-Brassard-Kessel, and how the script totally flipped when we saw the well-balanced combo of Rust-Brassard-Kessel.

I mean, if you want to have an outrageous knee jerk reaction to the situation, sure. 95% of the games Brassard has played here, he has played center.

My post was predicated on the idea that nothing changes and they don't figure out how to use him by the end of the season. That would be the opposite of "knee jerk".

I think we agree on what Brassard's best potential usage is, and with how HMH worked last year, I think it was certainly also what JR had in mind when acquiring him. Usage when he arrived suggested the same.

Now there are certainly potential explanations for Brassard not having been successful so far, chief among those his injury last season, and the fact that Kessel seemed injured also.
But at the same time you cannot say or suggest that Brassard has no responsibility. He is not a 3C, he cannot be measured like that, just like Geno is not measured as a 2C. Brassard is a 2C being acquired and asked to make a third line effective - against weaker opposition than he is used to seeing. If he absolutely requires top6 level wingers to do that, then we have an issue.
I'm curious how it will work with Horny and Simon though. In theory I like the complimentary qualities on that line - ought to be a strong 3rd line.
If it is not, then that brings one closer to the point where you have to say that it was a decent idea, but you might want to move on from it anyway.

That is, unless it is tried again with healthy Brassard and Kessel which would be my preference for many reasons. At least to see if it would work before deciding to do something else.
Again - if that is just not going to happen because it is Geno's line getting it done; because Kessel doesn't like it etc., then those are more reasons you'd want to move on from the idea.
As said before, there should be no panic on this, there's time to try things out, but at the same time you do need to find something that works or establish that it does not, and if it doesn't then it really doesn't matter what they might have thought or wanted last season. Then its about getting as much value from the asset in the here and now as we can. Whether that is a swap for a suitable asset for us or futures that can realistically be used to get such an asset, I don't care.

NB: for those talking about "its only six games, why even talk about this before we've played 25/30 games"..... I have kids who are 4½ and 1½ years old..... time flies. You're talking about 1½ month of hockey.... I need that amount of time just to plan for a night out with the guys.... .

It's not necessarily top 6 wingers better than Rust/Hornqvist. Like you say, it's complementary qualities, which requires a skill component that neither of those 2 really have. Simon's a smart player but I don't think he has the sort of talent to be a scoring line's primary skill winger.

Until Brass is given some rope with Sprong/Kessel and a better LW complement than '17-'18 Sheary, I don't think the org will have given him the tools to succeed. Sully's absurd roster contortions to avoid putting Sprong in the top 9 are obviously a big contributor to this problem.