Scuderi being honest

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

he was in LA in 2013.

I'm well aware. Doesn't change my feelings in this matter.

He hasn't been good for two years now.

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

Ew... a what coach?

Not to turn this into a Bylsma debate but he's a good coach. You don't luck into the record he has, despite contrary opinion. There's also a reason why I called Sutter a very good coach and left off the "very" for Bylsma.

 

[Coastal Kev]

Scuderi is O-L-D old, something none of these players were in their first seasons here.

Gonchar and Martin were near elite level talents when they had their struggles. Rob Scuderi has never and will never be thought of in that way.

Scuderi compares in NO WAY to Gonchar and Scuderi other than the fact that they're white defensemen in the NHL who have played with the Penguins.

CORRECT! Scuderi was bad last year and he won't be finding the fountain of youth this year or the next. How do you give a guy in late 30's a four year contract??? I always found Scuderi to be overrated. I thought Gill made him look good his last year here and in LA, a certain goalie bailed him out more times than not.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

But Niskanen wouldn't have been traded if we hadn't signed Scuderi. So even then, it's not justifiable. Shero brought in Scuds to be Letang's partner. He thought he was getting a Scuds-Doughty pairing. He was wrong.

Right. We were almost certainly bringing Scuds in to be Letang's partner and moving Niskanen because of his redundant skillset/cap hit for the bottom pairing/Despres road blockage, which made perfect sense in theory.

Maatta's emergence and snowballing injuries threw it all for a loop.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Right. We were almost certainly bringing Scuds in to be Letang's partner and moving Niskanen because of his redundant skillset/cap hit for the bottom pairing/Despres road blockage, which made perfect sense in theory.

Maatta's emergence and snowballing injuries threw it all for a loop.

Bringing Scuds in to be Letang's partner was a bad idea before we ever did it.

 

[Shady Machine]

Right. We were almost certainly bringing Scuds in to be Letang's partner and moving Niskanen because of his redundant skillset/cap hit for the bottom pairing/Despres road blockage, which made perfect sense in theory.

Maatta's emergence and snowballing injuries threw it all for a loop.

Right but you made it seem like Shero had to sign Scuds because Nisky was inevitably going to be traded. I'm saying that Shero made that inevitable by signing Scuds. I guess I'm being too picky since both agree on the major part of this anyway.

 

[Shady Machine]

Bringing Scuds in to be Letang's partner was a bad idea before we ever did it.

Certainly. I still never got why we moved Michalek for peanuts, then signed Eaton during the following season. Then Scuds in the offseason. While different players, all 3 played a similar role and Michalek is the best of them IMO. Certainly the best skater and 1st pass of the 3 which would fit Bylsma's system better.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Certainly. I still never got why we moved Michalek for peanuts, then signed Eaton during the following season. Then Scuds in the offseason. While different players, all 3 played a similar role and Michalek is the best of them IMO. Certainly the best skater and 1st pass of the 3 which would fit Bylsma's system better.

and gave away Strait and Lovejoy in the process. I'd much rather have Lovejoy than Scuderi. What a **** show.

We got Sundqvist and Ruopp out of Michalek right?

 

[Shady Machine]

and gave away Strait and Lovejoy in the process. I'd much rather have Lovejoy than Scuderi. What a **** show.

We got Sundqvist and Ruopp out of Michalek right?

Yeah I believe so. It may end up turning out decent, but it was definitely selling low on the guy.

 

[ObsessedCreative*]

Scuds was not honest. He should have said, I stunk and was the worse D on the team last year and the Pens have at least 8 other D that should be playing ahead of him. Until he makes these statements then and only then you can say he is honest.

Scuds is untradeable period. Who wants a 35 year old D who can't play at a 3 yr. cap hit of 3.2MM per year. He must be bought out, there is no other solution for him unless you believe in miracles.

False, Orpik was worse.

 

[ObsessedCreative*]

I think if Scudz stays healthy he will have a pretty solid to good season, but even that at his age & cap hit won't be that great or beneficial for us. That 3.2 mil would be better off spent on helping Sid or Geno in the top 6.

If only we could have moved him & snagged Hemsky at the 4 mil / year, but it seemed like it was spezza or bust for him

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Bringing Scuds in to be Letang's partner was a bad idea before we ever did it.

It makes sense if you think he can be a foil for Letang (which we needed) like he was for Doughty, it doesn't if you think his limitations totally preclude him from succeeding in a system like ours.

Right but you made it seem like Shero had to sign Scuds because Nisky was inevitably going to be traded. I'm saying that Shero made that inevitable by signing Scuds. I guess I'm being too picky since both agree on the major part of this anyway.

It wasn't inevitable but it was logical from a skillset/need perspective. We wanted a stabilizing partner for Letang which wasn't going to happen internally without buggering up the #2 pairing, Nisky's skillset was redundant and ready to be replaced by Despres, and we could've flipped Niskanen for forward depth.

and gave away Strait and Lovejoy in the process. I'd much rather have Lovejoy than Scuderi. What a **** show.

We got Sundqvist and Ruopp out of Michalek right?

Nobody was sorry to see Lovejoy go at the time though. He was pedestrian in his time here and blocking younger defensemen.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

Not to turn this into a Bylsma debate but he's a good coach. You don't luck into the record he has, despite contrary opinion. There's also a reason why I called Sutter a very good coach and left off the "very" for Bylsma.

Heh, yeah... you're right that it's probably wise not to go down that road.

 

[Ogrezilla]

It makes sense if you think he can be a foil for Letang (which we needed) like he was for Doughty, it doesn't if you think his limitations totally preclude him from succeeding in a system like ours.

He had no business being considered for a top pairing position on an offensive minded team. It was a bad fit from the start.

It wasn't inevitable but it was logical from a skillset/need perspective. We wanted a stabilizing partner for Letang which wasn't going to happen internally without buggering up the #2 pairing, Nisky's skillset was redundant and ready to be replaced by Despres, and we could've flipped Niskanen for forward depth.

Letang needs someone who at least can play offense though. Someone who can handle the puck. Scuderi is the definition of an anchor. He keeps things steady and makes sure you don't go anywhere at all. Its seriously like playing 5 on 4 when we have the puck and he's on the ice. He makes Engo and Bortuzzo look like all-stars with the puck.

Nobody was sorry to see Lovejoy go at the time though. He was pedestrian in his time here and blocking younger defensemen.

You're right, but immediately replacing him with Eaton made no sense at all. We downgraded from pedestrian to ******. Then we payed more money to Scuds to continue the tradition of blocking the kids.

 

[Gurglesons]

He had no business being considered for a top pairing position on an offensive minded team. It was a bad fit from the start.

Letang needs someone who at least can play offense though. Someone who can handle the puck. Scuderi is the definition of an anchor. He keeps things steady and makes sure you don't go anywhere at all. Its seriously like playing 5 on 4 when we have the puck and he's on the ice. He makes Engo and Bortuzzo look like all-stars with the puck.


You're right, but immediately replacing him with Eaton made no sense at all. We downgraded from pedestrian to ******. Then we payed more money to Scuds to continue the tradition of blocking the kids.

I really hope either Despres or Martin is flanking Letang and Scuderi is on either our second or third pairing. Or traded. I still think we need to showcase Scuds a little bit in a new system to prove he is still a legit NHLer. He has a freaking NTC though, right?

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

I really hope either Despres or Martin is flanking Letang and Scuderi is on either our second or third pairing. Or traded. I still think we need to showcase Scuds a little bit in a new system to prove he is still a legit NHLer. He has a freaking NTC though, right?

Limited but yes.

For some reason.

 

[Gurglesons]

Limited but yes.

For some reason.

So like ten teams? I feel like there has to be some team that would want him. I mean, if someone is going to pay Orpik 5 million, you figure Scuderi who I think a lot of the time was more sound positionally than Orpik would be seen as a positive asset for 3 million.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

So like ten teams? I feel like there has to be some team that would want him. I mean, if someone is going to pay Orpik 5 million, you figure Scuderi who I think a lot of the time was more sound positionally than Orpik would be seen as a positive asset for 3 million.

All of the info I was able to find seems to indicate that he has a list of just five teams he would accept a trade to.

Taking everything into consideration, I have a hard time believing that any GM would take him on without at least first seeing that he can hold down third pairing minutes without botching things up too badly. And even that is a stretch. He's just... more or less the exact opposite of the kind of defenseman almost every single team in the league is looking for, these days.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

He had no business being considered for a top pairing position on an offensive minded team. It was a bad fit from the start.

Letang needs someone who at least can play offense though. Someone who can handle the puck. Scuderi is the definition of an anchor. He keeps things steady and makes sure you don't go anywhere at all. Its seriously like playing 5 on 4 when we have the puck and he's on the ice. He makes Engo and Bortuzzo look like all-stars with the puck.

That's the conundrum. You want somebody who can stabilize Letang, but you'd like him to be a good puckmover too. Turns out that guy costs 5 mil per and he's gonna be a UFA making a lot more next season. I know some people thought Despres would work in that role a year ago, but it's pretty unrealistic to expect a guy to anchor a top pairing in his 1st full season.

We went with Scuderi hoping his negatives would outweigh his positives in that role. The early returns weren't great, then he went off the tracks with his injury. And now we have Maatta and Ehrhoff, and the kids have another year of development under their belt, so there's no place for him even if he bounces back (health permitting).

You're right, but immediately replacing him with Eaton made no sense at all. We downgraded from pedestrian to ******. Then we payed more money to Scuds to continue the tradition of blocking the kids.

Lovejoy was thought of as lesser than Despres, Bort, Strait, and Engo because he didn't bring any unique skillset to the table. After we moved Lovejoy that opened up space for the others. Strait was the guy who got the axe when we signed Eaton, and that was dumb.

The Scuds situation was different because of Maatta's early emergence and the injury situation.

 

[mpp9]

Playing Maatta or Despres with Letang forces him to play a responsible brand of hockey. With Ehrhoff in the fold, we don't need him soley for puck moving purposes. And with Martin moving on more than likely, we definitely need him to be going up against top lines.

Bringing in Scuds to insulate Letang as a 4th a forward out there was a decent idea. But I think that version of Letang will be gone moving forward.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Playing Maatta or Despres with Letang forces him to play a responsible brand of hockey. With Ehrhoff in the fold, we don't need him soley for puck moving purposes. And with Martin moving on more than likely, we definitely need him to be going up against top lines.

Bringing in Scuds to insulate Letang as a 4th a forward out there was a decent idea. But I think that version of Letang will be gone moving forward.

That's one theory, anyway. Maybe putting Letang with a young defenseman just becomes a double **** show.

I don't know of too many offensive defensemen who've gotten better defensively after being paired with less responsible partners. Letang played his best hockey last year when paired with the most responsible defenseman on the team.

 

[mpp9]

I was fine moving him last summer for a mega return at forward b/c it was pretty clear he was going to be used only for his puck moving abilities. And we were going to be paying him #1D money.

I think he has it in him to be a much more responsible player under a new coach and system and with a leadership role on the blue line.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I was fine moving him last summer for a mega return at forward b/c it was pretty clear he was going to be used only for his puck moving abilities. And we were going to be paying him #1D money.

I think he has it in him to be a much more responsible player under a new coach and system and with a leadership role on the blue line.

I do too. But he has to show it, and I don't think if it does happen that it'll have anything to do with being paired with a less responsible defenseman who "forces" him to play more responsibly. That strikes me as a flimsy justification for putting an inexperienced young guy on the top pair under the guise of making Letang better.

 

[mpp9]

I do too. But he has to show it, and I don't think if it does happen that it'll have anything to do with being paired with a less responsible defenseman who "forces" him to play more responsibly. That strikes me as a flimsy justification for putting an inexperienced young guy on the top pair under the guise of making Letang better.

It's reality in 2015-16 if Martin doesn't have a change of heart.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

It's reality in 2015-16 if Martin doesn't have a change of heart.

Hopefully an extra year of experience and development for our blueline will make the loss more palatable then than it would be now.