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

[Tender Rip]

But honesty compels me to point out that we won a cup with them and that its a pairing capable of going for a prolonged stretch at a 75% GF%. Which is pretty close to what they're doing right now. If things change, then obviously it makes sense to split them up, but to split them up right now if they continue what they're doing?

edit: Also, so you agree that plans do get redrawn from time to time - if so, when do you redraw Brassard's?

(And the depth Nirvana was very temporary).

1: They’re not red hot in my book. They had a very good game against Toronto without scoring and has otherwise been opportunistic on breakaways. Geno has one goal against the Caps as a PP expired, a softy PP against Toronto and an ENG. He has a total of 12 shots on goal.
They have not been a particularly good possession line (even if that is also because they get less of Letang who is the only D-man driving possession early on).

Being capable of “stretches” of 75% GF means nothing to me when they are close to 50/50 ES together over the last two years, and Geno is big time in the plus without Phil.

2: Of course plans can and should be changed with the circumstances. Always. I’ve been very clear about Brassard. I think the original idea of having him with Kessel is the right one. The one that both gives us league best offensive depth and best accommodates our best players strengths and weaknesses. If we cannot have that we need to try all available meaningful combinations to make another useful 3rd line (which is not a Simon/Sprong combo), , and if that is not sufficiently so we should trade him as he’d be worth more elsewhere.
Not do silly stuff like making him a winger to limit the efficiency of several other players in the proces.

Again, I’ve also several times said that it’s early and I am far from worried plus I think Sully SHOULD be experimenting early. Like anyone, I just have a preference for him to experiment along the lines of what I prefer to have happen .

Nirvana was temporary, yes, yet they clearly sought to replicate it.

 

[Gurglesons]

1: They’re not red hot in my book. They had a very good game against Toronto without scoring and has otherwise been opportunistic on breakaways. Geno has one goal against the Caps as a PP expired, a softy PP against Toronto and an ENG. He has a total of 12 shots on goal.
They have not been a particularly good possession line (even if that is also because they get less of Letang who is the only D-man driving possession early on).

Being capable of “stretches” of 75% GF means nothing to me when they are close to 50/50 ES together over the last two years, and Geno is big time in the plus without Phil.

2: Of course plans can and should be changed with the circumstances. Always. I’ve been very clear about Brassard. I think the original idea of having him with Kessel is the right one. The one that both gives us league best offensive depth and best accommodates our best players strengths and weaknesses. If we cannot have that we need to try all available meaningful combinations to make another useful 3rd line (which is not a Simon/Sprong combo), , and if that is not sufficiently so we should trade him as he’d be worth more elsewhere.
Not do silly stuff like making him a winger to limit the efficiency of several other players in the proces.

Again, I’ve also several times said that it’s early and I am far from worried plus I think Sully SHOULD be experimenting early. Like anyone, I just have a preference for him to experiment along the lines of what I prefer to have happen .

Nirvana was temporary, yes, yet they clearly sought to replicate it.

So, we should trade Brassard because the coach is experimenting with lines but not how you would do it and Kessel and Malkin don’t work because the goals were gimmes.

Many people used to say Malkin and Hornqvist didn’t work. MK paired up to dominate in 16-17 on the way to a cup. They are honestly the least of my worries.

 

[Riptide]

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.

Less lazy then going into free agency again yet without a 3c, and having traded the only guy internally who could have filled that role.

 

[Riptide]

Let's see him do it for more than one frickin season first. I'll admit, I may have some rose colored Bonino glasses and be biased against Sheahan. I just don't care for him as a player. But, he did produce after a slow start last year. Let's see him do it this year.

This year will be harder to evaluate him, unless he's actually given 3rd line minutes. He'll get them, but it probably won't be on a consistent basis. Not the end of the world, just something to take into consideration when we eventually look at his production against last year's stats.

I removed Bonino's HBK stats simply because he never ever came close to repeating that production. If HBK had done anything the following season (where I kept all the stats), his numbers should have been a lot better. But we know that wasn't the case despite the coach trying like hell to make it work.

 

[Gurglesons]

Less lazy then going into free agency again yet without a 3c, and having traded the only guy internally who could have filled that role.

Sheahan is very vanilla, but I’d argue so is Cullen. Game 6 against the Flyers was an example of him at his peak. The Capitals series was an example of his Sutter like qualities.

It will be interesting to see what he does moving forward in the post season. I could see a Cullen - Sheahan - Hornqvist line being our best line in the playoffs in terms of shutting down the other team and outchancing them.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

So, we should trade Brassard because the coach is experimenting with lines but not how you would do it and Kessel and Malkin don’t work because the goals were gimmes.

Many people used to say Malkin and Hornqvist didn’t work. MK paired up to dominate in 16-17 on the way to a cup. They are honestly the least of my worries.

Maybe I’m set in my ways with how abused “advanced” stats are, but I’ll take a line that is as productive as HMK vs a Corsi darling line that isn’t very productive.

It’s pretty much on Malkin to shoot more, and giving him a less talented teammate like Rust to force him to shoot more is kind of stupid when you really think about it.

 

[Riptide]

The one that both gives us league best offensive depth and best accommodates our best players strengths and weaknesses. If we cannot have that we need to try all available meaningful combinations to make another useful 3rd line (which is not a Simon/Sprong combo), and if that is not sufficiently so we should trade him as he’d be worth more elsewhere.
Not do silly stuff like making him a winger to limit the efficiency of several other players in the proces.

So you'd trade him for what exactly? Do you think the winger we'd get would be significantly better than him to the point that it would be worth giving up the ability to go back to Brassard at 3c? Why wouldn't you "do silly stuff like making him a winger" which keeps him in the fold as an option should he be needed?

 

[Empoleon8771]

Less lazy then going into free agency again yet without a 3c, and having traded the only guy internally who could have filled that role.

How is going into free agency while trying to bring in a new 3C "lazy"? That just seems like you're pulling a "I know you are, but what am I?" comment.

Settling with Sheahan as your long term 3C just because you have him in the organization is flat out lazy. I have no idea why you think trying to get someone better than Sheahan to be your 3C counts as lazy.

 

[Riptide]

How is going into free agency while trying to bring in a new 3C "lazy"? That just seems like you're pulling a "I know you are, but what am I?" comment.

Settling with Sheahan as your long term 3C just because you have him in the organization is flat out lazy. I have no idea why you think trying to get someone better than Sheahan to be your 3C counts as lazy.

Doesn't change things. You want an upgrade on Sheahan, by all means... but you don't move him until you've secured something else. Because if you hang onto him for the season, going back to him is always an option. But it's an option you likely don't have after you trade him.

But hey I get it... you don't like Sheahan, and thus damn near everything is the end of the world with him. It's okay.

 

[pistolpete11]

How is going into free agency while trying to bring in a new 3C "lazy"? That just seems like you're pulling a "I know you are, but what am I?" comment.

Settling with Sheahan as your long term 3C just because you have him in the organization is flat out lazy. I have no idea why you think trying to get someone better than Sheahan to be your 3C counts as lazy.

Lazy is not the right word, but it would be risky. Depending on cost of course, I think they should keep Sheahan around until they know they have a better 3C. If they really need his cap space, they can always trade him.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Doesn't change things. You want an upgrade on Sheahan, by all means... but you don't move him until you've secured something else. Because if you hang onto him for the season, going back to him is always an option. But it's an option you likely don't have after you trade him.

But hey I get it... you don't like Sheahan, and thus damn near everything is the end of the world with him. It's okay.

Uh...what? I was one of Sheahan's biggest fans on here, I defended him basically non-stop for the last 15 months. Don't you remember all of the debates @Warm Cookies and I had last year before and after acquiring him? He's an above average 3C, I just think they either need a significantly above average 3C or an above average 3C that fits well with Kessel. Sheahan isn't that. To say I don't like Sheahan is wildly inaccurate, I just want a better option than him as the "long term 3C". He's a great stopgap option, he's not a great long term option.

If Sheahan and Kessel would work well together, or if the Penguins had another playmaking winger prospect coming up through the system that would be a great fit with Sheahan, I'd be totally in favor of Sheahan being the long term 3C. But both of those aren't true. Had Beau Bennett panned out as a playmaking top-6 winger, I'd be totally comfortable with a 3rd line that had Sheahan and Bennett as the C-RW duo. They just don't have anyone like that in the organization.

Lazy is not the right word, but it would be risky. Depending on cost of course, I think they should keep Sheahan around until they know they have a better 3C. If they really need his cap space, they can always trade him.

Risky is a better word to describe it, I don't think it's unfair to want to stick with Sheahan because the risk is ending up with Greg McKegg 2.0 as your 3C to start the year. Sheahan isn't bad, I just think the Penguins should be shooting for better.

 

[Shady Machine]

@Riptide I'm the guy that hates Sheahan!

 

[Tasty Biscuits]

Maybe I’m set in my ways with how abused “advanced” stats are, but I’ll take a line that is as productive as HMK vs a Corsi darling line that isn’t very productive.

Hey, I'll jump on any opportunity I get to rag on corsi!

Line A: generates 7 shots on goal (12 attempts), all of which are low-danger. Gives up 2 shots on goal (7 attempts), one of which is a high-danger chance that results in a goal.

Line B: generates 3 shots on goal (6 attempts), all of which are high-danger chances, resulting in one goal. Give up 8 shots on goal (13 attempts), all of which are low danger, resulting in no goals.

corsi says Line A vastly outperformed Line B. I disagree.

Corsi to me is useless because it doesn't factor in quality of attempt (or your regular defensive pairing if you're on a forward line, and vice versa). That's the one "advanced" stat where the ol' "watch the games" response really does prove superior.

 

[Shady Machine]

Hey, I'll jump on any opportunity I get to rag on corsi!

Line A: generates 7 shots on goal (12 attempts), all of which are low-danger. Gives up 2 shots on goal (7 attempts), one of which is a high-danger chance that results in a goal.

Line B: generates 3 shots on goal (6 attempts), all of which are high-danger chances, resulting in one goal. Give up 8 shots on goal (13 attempts), all of which are low danger, resulting in no goals.

corsi says Line A vastly outperformed Line B. I disagree.

Corsi to me is useless because it doesn't factor in quality of attempt (or your regular defensive pairing if you're on a forward line, and vice versa). That's the one "advanced" stat where the ol' "watch the games" response really does prove superior.

It can be useful over long sample sizes. While your Line A and B clearly show the flaws in the stat, when taken in a short sample size and in isolation, I'd be surprised if Line B could maintain that type of stat line over a 20+ game sample size.

 

[vodeni]

It can be useful over long sample sizes. While your Line A and B clearly show the flaws in the stat, when taken in a short sample size and in isolation, I'd be surprised if Line B could maintain that type of stat line over a 20+ game sample size.

of course its a valuable stat, of course you can win the cup as we did two years ago riding high PDO first lien especially and a hot goalie, but you will never build a team to do that. you do that out of desperation.

 

[pistolpete11]

Risky is a better word to describe it, I don't think it's unfair to want to stick with Sheahan because the risk is ending up with Greg McKegg 2.0 as your 3C to start the year. Sheahan isn't bad, I just think the Penguins should be shooting for better.

I get that. I go back and forth on it, but I seem to like Sheahan more than most. If they go with the balanced offense approach, then yeah, I think they need someone better than Sheahan. If they go with the traditional defensive bottom 6 (not Craig Adams 'defense' mind you), then I think Sheahan would be alright as 3C.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

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.

No but confidence is a hell of a thing. You crush it in some moronic roundabout way of "sending a message that you have to earn it" when you really don't need to send that message, can have ever lasting effects. That has nothing to do with Sprong and his mental game at all, it has everything to do with a kid that is getting 6-7mins, and benched in the 3rd period while watching others make countless mistakes and not getting that same treatment.

Sure, time will tell during this season. But this isn't something that we haven't seen before.

 

[Tom Hanks]

I get that. I go back and forth on it, but I seem to like Sheahan more than most. If they go with the balanced offense approach, then yeah, I think they need someone better than Sheahan. If they go with the traditional defensive bottom 6 (not Craig Adams 'defense' mind you), then I think Sheahan would be alright as 3C.

We’d need to change our D men for that to work well

 

[Honour Over Glory]

We’d need to change our D men for that to work well

You need a shutdown pair, we don't currently have any form of that (Tanger & Dumo can, but that's overkill). The team is built on transition even if it fools us with poor attempts at playing that style as a unit, it's how its been built. You can't go back to the traditional check and grind'em down bottom 6 of forwards anymore. You need guys that are quick strike and can pin the other team in their own zone and then have waves of line changes to get Sid, Geno, Kessel, Brass all out there to over whelm.

We saw a bit of that vs the Leafs, rearing its head again and it was nice. I really am curious what the response is vs the Oilers. They have some decently quick guys and then McDavid who is an absolute burner, so it's not like it's a lot to contain, it's a lot of containing McDavid and being aware of who else he has on his line because he's going to draw most of, if not all of your attention.

A good test for the "lines" Sullivan has been deploying as well.

 

[Tasty Biscuits]

It can be useful over long sample sizes. While your Line A and B clearly show the flaws in the stat, when taken in a short sample size and in isolation, I'd be surprised if Line B could maintain that type of stat line over a 20+ game sample size.

Sometimes sure. And sometimes it rewards line with players who just toss the puck on net first chance they get, resulting in loss of possession. Either way.... "eh," haha.

 

[pistolpete11]

We’d need to change our D men for that to work well

Some would argue we need to change our D men anyway

How do you mean, though? More defensive?

 

[Tom Hanks]

Some would argue we need to change our D men anyway

How do you mean, though? More defensive?

Yeah lol. They are good enough to play our current style though.

Yeah we aren’t built to be spending much time in our D zone. It’s all about transition and keeping the opponents out wider.

Probably best to keep it that way for the foreseeable future anyway.

 

[pistolpete11]

Yeah lol. They are good enough to play our current style though.

Yeah we aren’t built to be spending much time in our D zone. It’s all about transition and keeping the opponents out wider.

Probably best to keep it that way for the foreseeable future anyway.

I wouldn't want them spending time in their d-zone even if they were a 'defensive' line. That's what I meant by not being Craig Adams.

I would want them to be more like the Bonino and Cullen lines from the '16-'17 playoffs. They were relied on heavily to take the D-zone draws, but they were still trying to get the puck to the other end of the ice. Chip in when you can, but the main goal is to not get scored on.

 

[Ugene Magic]

He's still probably our 3rd best LW.

Their 3rd best LW is in WBS. His name is Johnson, A..dam Johnson.

 

[mpp9]

Phil Kessel defies analytics. He can score from areas that are classified as nonthreatening. And some of his most productive and important games, he's shit in most of his shifts.

I do think Malkin's gotta learn to utilize Phil's playmaking (shoot more) and shot threat from all over the ice.

They're definitely looking to get the puck to one another alot this season so that's good.