Salary Cap: The Guds days are gone, now it's time to look forward

[ZeroPucksGiven]

So roll the dice? That's your response? For the record, MM was a dominant goalie in the AHL so it's not like he appeared out of thin air.

Would you call Jarry dominant in the AHL? Nope, but he's got the exact same tools as MM. Difference is he's getting a chance now.

Again, MM is BARELY above league average. His calling card was that he never lost a big game. That luster and confidence disappeared vs Washington and continued vs the NYI (both playoff series).

I'll ask the question again: how much more millions are you willing to pay for a couple more save percentage points? According to this thread, apparently a few million more. Those extra millions are the difference between another Rust or another Petterson.

Goalies are like RB's. The team around them can make them look better, but never the other way around.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I think people also need to remember that Jarry was drafted back in 2013 to be the "heir" to Fleury, and I think Jarry has progressed well as a 2nd rounder. He's obviously not Murray, but I don't think saying "let's make Jarry the goalie of the future" is the same as saying "let's make DeSmith the goalie of the future". There is a justification for doing that with Jarry, he was a moderately highly regarded goalie prospect who was good in both juniors and the AHL. He is considered to have a starter's upside, how good of a starter remains to be seen (I think Markstrom caliber starter is a fair guess for him).

The argument for moving Murray and making Jarry the "goalie of the future" is that if Murray wants way too much money, you have a viable alternative that is NHL ready and has a starter's upside. I don't think you can justify doing that without Murray wanting too much money, but there's totally an argument there if Murray does want too much money. If you can get Jarry to a contract similar to what Saros is making (3 years at $1.5 million), plus you can get a strong 1B goalie to platoon with Jarry for like $3-$5 million a year, there is totally an argument for paying that tandem $4.5-$6.5 million AAV and getting a big return for Murray over paying too much for Murray.

 

[ZeroPucksGiven]

How is it different? You said a primary reason for moving him is cap related. It only matters if you need that cap for something else.

Because we're onto an entirely different discussion that we've had a billion times before. If you send JJ to the moon, you still need to replace that 6th dman. That would hopefully be Rikko.
But I'm operating in that JJ is staying and will be here opening night next year.

 

[molon labe]

Would you call Jarry dominant in the AHL? Nope, but he's got the exact same tools as MM. Difference is he's getting a chance now.

Again, MM is BARELY above league average. His calling card was that he never lost a big game. That luster and confidence disappeared vs Washington and continued vs the NYI (both playoff series).

I'll ask the question again: how much more millions are you willing to pay for a couple more save percentage points? According to this thread, apparently a few million more. Those extra millions are the difference between another Rust or another Petterson.

Goalies are like RB's. The team around them can make them look better, but never the other way around.

Sully's teams in 16 and 17 were blocking record numbers of shots and limiting chances. Murray appeared GREAT mostly because we were so used to a goalie trying too hard and doing too much - often resulting in bad goals or mishandled pucks/turnovers. We just needed a guy to play the percentages and stop the play. Murray came in and swallowed the puck over and over - allowing for us to win a draw and go for it.

I tend to bring up Hitchcock a lot with goalies - but he almost always coaches a team that 'miraculously' has good goaltending. Boucher is the same way. Coincidence? If you're going to play trap or conservative, you're not typically going to give up a ton of goals. Going to open an entirely different can of worms here but in the Summer it's one of the reasons I was mentioning Boucher as a potential successor. We're a team built upon scoring chances - not the quality of goaltending or defense. Fortunately Sully is preaching a level of forechecking that allows us to contain chances - but we still occasionally bleed them. I tend to think oppositely when it comes to team style - preach defense first when you have offensive weapons and preach high-tempo offense when you have a stud defense....because it's easier to lean on your strength in a time of need.

 

[Peat]

Do you think he's getting over 10?

1- I don't know whether he's ready to ride off into the sunset on a bad team for a big payday

2- Anywhere he goes is going to be a 7 year deal for sure (unless he really wants to maximize his gains by going 3-5, then another 2-4 after that with a bigger salary cap).... and I tend to think that number is going to be 9-9.5 due to age.

He's gotten more **** from Caps fans over the years than Murray ever has from the yinzer crowd....so I have questioned his place in Washington for some time now.

I don't know whether he's getting over 10. I'm pretty sure his ask will start there and we'll see how much he gets argued down. I think how much he gets argued down depends on how much he wants to be somewhere. Maybe Washington. Maybe somewhere in Alberta/Saskatchewan, closer to where he grew up. Or maybe somewhere else in Canada near his wife's family (don't know where she's from, the internet has let me down). Or maybe he just wants sunshine and low taxes.

What I do feel pretty sure of is there's no particular reason for him to sign here other than winning and money. And for most players, money comes first.

Agreed. That said, there is always the question of how much a goalie's sv% is impacted by team play. Theoretically, the Pens could insulate 2 solid goalies by spending that cap on better players and be better off. I'm far from convinced that is realistic in the Pen's scenario though.

I'm not sure there's enough money in the league to change the Pens' DNA from regularly throwing the goaltender under the bus to regularly insulating them.

Idk, Peat, Riptide and SB (sorry if I forgot others who have said this) keeps telling me that Murray will get closer to the Vasilevskiy contract than I think he will

I have him at around $7 million on a long-term deal, and I'd be comfortable with that number. Anything over $7.5 million makes me uncomfortable, and anything above $8 million makes him a trade candidate. I personally don't see an argument for him getting over $7.5 million, so I think this scenario isn't all that likely. But if he's demanding near the Vasilevskiy contract just because he has 2 cups, I'm looking to move him.

I think he can ask closer to it than you do. I don't know if he'll ask much closer. I'm guessing not, Vasi's contract felt like an overpayment to me. My numbers for comfort are only 500k north of yours in each incident.

All goalies are capable of going on an insane run for a period of time.

Heck CDS did it last year for a spell

Who was Binnington at this time last year?

Who was Matt Murray 4 seasons ago?

Point is...there are capable goalies out there who haven't been given much of a chance.

Nick Bonino had a number of 20 game spells of playing like a 1C - including one cup pivotal spell - but no one's suggesting Nashville should move Johansen out and play Bonino at 1C. I don't particularly see why it should be different with goalies.

 

[molon labe]

I honestly don't think Holtby is worth that either. Dude hasn't been legit for years at this point.



I'm not saying that based on Jarry looking good for 3 games. I'm saying that based on Jarry always being a good goalie prospect.

Well Holtby has historically been like a .927 in the playoffs and actually plays 55-60 games a year for you. I agree though that his regular season numbers haven't been stellar.

 

[Shady Machine]

Because we're onto an entirely different discussion that we've had a billion times before. If you send JJ to the moon, you still need to replace that 6th dman. That would hopefully be Rikko.
But I'm operating in that JJ is staying and will be here opening night next year.

And I'm saying you do whatever you can within reason to keep MM because having a goalie that can get it done when it matters is worth a lot. Maybe someone else can do it, but with the Pens contending window closing soon, I want to maximize the remaining opportunities. You show me a goalie that realistic, cheaper, and as likely to lead to playoff success as MM and I will listen.

 

[Shady Machine]

Would you call Jarry dominant in the AHL? Nope, but he's got the exact same tools as MM. Difference is he's getting a chance now.

Again, MM is BARELY above league average. His calling card was that he never lost a big game. That luster and confidence disappeared vs Washington and continued vs the NYI (both playoff series).

I'll ask the question again: how much more millions are you willing to pay for a couple more save percentage points? According to this thread, apparently a few million more. Those extra millions are the difference between another Rust or another Petterson.

Goalies are like RB's. The team around them can make them look better, but never the other way around.

You basically suggested MM came out of nowhere. I am refuting that point. No idea what Jarry has to do with it and Jarry is far from proven in the NHL. Show me his performance over a longer sample size or in the playoffs and then we can talk.

 

[ZeroPucksGiven]

Well Holtby has historically been like a .927 in the playoffs and actually plays 55-60 games a year for you. I agree though that his regular season numbers haven't been stellar.

What's ironic is the year that Holtby & the Caps finally break through is when he started the playoffs on the bench
That's how unpredictable goaltending can be year in and year out

The only goalie I'm breaking bank for right now would be Gibson. I'd pay him up to $9M because he's a difference maker
MM is not a difference maker...or enough of one to consider paying a number above $7M

Still no one wants to take a shot at how many millions one would pay for a possible extra save percentage points to a goalie who isn't exactly an iron horse....

 

[ZeroPucksGiven]

You basically suggested MM came out of nowhere. I am refuting that point. No idea what Jarry has to do with it and Jarry is far from proven in the NHL. Show me his performance over a longer sample size or in the playoffs and then we can talk.

I also used Binnington as an example. Wasn't he in the ECHL only 2 years ago as a journeyman?
Tell me Binnington's AHL resume and his Stanley Cup playoff experience 1 year ago and we can talk...

 

[Peat]

Would you call Jarry dominant in the AHL? Nope, but he's got the exact same tools as MM. Difference is he's getting a chance now.

Again, MM is BARELY above league average. His calling card was that he never lost a big game. That luster and confidence disappeared vs Washington and continued vs the NYI (both playoff series).

I'll ask the question again: how much more millions are you willing to pay for a couple more save percentage points? According to this thread, apparently a few million more. Those extra millions are the difference between another Rust or another Petterson.

Goalies are like RB's. The team around them can make them look better, but never the other way around.

A few million is the difference between Rust (or Bjugstad) and ZAR/Lafferty. By the numbers, the difference between them is pretty minimal too. And we're a team that currently has so many forwards there's plenty advocating to move one for nothing just to make roster space. I don't see the issue in using a few million to move a seemingly small difference in the numbers.

Also... historically, Murray's been well above league average except when coping with becoming a league number one/losing his dad in the same season.

I think people also need to remember that Jarry was drafted back in 2013 to be the "heir" to Fleury, and I think Jarry has progressed well as a 2nd rounder. He's obviously not Murray, but I don't think saying "let's make Jarry the goalie of the future" is the same as saying "let's make DeSmith the goalie of the future". There is a justification for doing that with Jarry, he was a moderately highly regarded goalie prospect who was good in both juniors and the AHL. He is considered to have a starter's upside, how good of a starter remains to be seen (I think Markstrom caliber starter is a fair guess for him).

This is true, and a fair argument, but a number of goalies turn into pumpkins when making the jump from good backup to being the good starter their ceiling says they should be, and its pretty hard to predict which. Its basically playing roulette. Yes Jarry has the potential, but that doesn't change the maths for people who don't want to play roulette.

Sully's teams in 16 and 17 were blocking record numbers of shots and limiting chances. Murray appeared GREAT mostly because we were so used to a goalie trying too hard and doing too much - often resulting in bad goals or mishandled pucks/turnovers. We just needed a guy to play the percentages and stop the play. Murray came in and swallowed the puck over and over - allowing for us to win a draw and go for it.

Murray regular season in 15-16 and 16-17 was great. Only Price equalled his save percentage in that period, or his GSAA/60 (according to NST). He outperformed his expected goals against significantly.

 

[Shady Machine]

I also used Binnington as an example. Wasn't he in the ECHL only 2 years ago as a journeyman?
Tell me Binnington's AHL resume and his Stanley Cup playoff experience 1 year ago and we can talk...

And what do you think the odds are of finding the next Binnington and winning the Cup? A lot less than MM doing what he's already done twice a 3rd time. Ask Flyer's fans how the goaltending search has gone the last 2 decades.

 

[ZeroPucksGiven]

A few million is the difference between Rust (or Bjugstad) and ZAR/Lafferty. By the numbers, the difference between them is pretty minimal too. And we're a team that currently has so many forwards there's plenty advocating to move one for nothing just to make roster space. I don't see the issue in using a few million to move a seemingly small difference in the numbers.

Also... historically, Murray's been well above league average except when coping with becoming a league number one/losing his dad in the same season.

This discussion is about our offseason. We have to qualify a number of people (including MM), so no I'd say we won't have a glut of F's like we currently do. Perhaps we don't qualify everyone and we use the savings to get better than a Rust/Petts/etc.

And I've admitted that MM is above league average in many categories. Games played isn't one of them though.
I'm asking how many more millions do you think that's worth to an injury prone guy?

 

[Shady Machine]

This discussion is about our offseason. We have to qualify a number of people (including MM), so no I'd say we won't have a glut of F's like we currently do. Perhaps we don't qualify everyone and we use the savings to get better than a Rust/Petts/etc.

And I've admitted that MM is above league average in many categories. Games played isn't one of them though.
I'm asking how many more millions do you think that's worth to an injury prone guy?

If MM is healthy for the playoffs, which he has been, I don't really care if he plays 60 games a year.

 

[Empoleon8771]

This is true, and a fair argument, but a number of goalies turn into pumpkins when making the jump from good backup to being the good starter their ceiling says they should be, and its pretty hard to predict which. Its basically playing roulette. Yes Jarry has the potential, but that doesn't change the maths for people who don't want to play roulette.

I agree with this, and this is why I don't think you should do that unless you're forced in a position to doing that. To me, having to pay Murray more than $8 million a year counts as something that forces you into doing that. If the Penguins didn't have Jarry, they'd basically have to give Murray whatever he wanted, because they didn't have that high upside goalie of the future. But with Jarry, they do have that extra avenue out if they're pressed hard enough.

 

[ZeroPucksGiven]

If MM is healthy for the playoffs, which he has been, I don't really care if he plays 60 games a year.

That's a false claim
MM was injured for the first 2 rounds of 2017

 

[Rakell67]

People here suggesting dumping MM for Halak are the most "MEMBER that ONE playoff in 2010" type of people I've ever seen in my entire life. HAHA

Reminds me of the trade Fleury for Lalime discussion.

 

[Peat]

This discussion is about our offseason. We have to qualify a number of people (including MM), so no I'd say we won't have a glut of F's like we currently do. Perhaps we don't qualify everyone and we use the savings to get better than a Rust/Petts/etc.

And I've admitted that MM is above league average in many categories. Games played isn't one of them though.
I'm asking how many more millions do you think that's worth to an injury prone guy?

We've currently got 14 forwards you can make a case for as perfectly fine 3rd liners. Move 2, and you still have 12, without considering the possibility of getting another Kahun back in trade or AJ/Miletec/whoever coming up to Blueger/Lafferty standard in the rest of the season. I'm pretty happy to guess we'll still have a glut.

And even if you say trade McCann for peanuts so you can throw those extra few million at Rust ++, what are we expecting from Rust ++? The difference between 35 and 40 ES points a season?

Last year, Lundqvist and Martin Jones both faced 1699 shots. Lundqvist had a .907 sv%, Jones a .896%. That .011% difference was worth 18 goals. So if that swing in save percentage is worth 18 goals, it seems to me to be a better use of money than 5 points (maybe make it 10 including special teams). And Lundqvist faced those shots in 52 games, which means even with the injury proneness, Murray can play enough games to make that sort of difference. The difference between Murray and Varlamov last year was 7 goals on a .010 difference, and that's with Varlamov facing a 100 less shots. Putting a number on it? Dunno, I'd have to think properly, but a few million seems fair. A few million is rarely buying much of a difference in the regular season.

I agree with this, and this is why I don't think you should do that unless you're forced in a position to doing that. To me, having to pay Murray more than $8 million a year counts as something that forces you into doing that. If the Penguins didn't have Jarry, they'd basically have to give Murray whatever he wanted, because they didn't have that high upside goalie of the future. But with Jarry, they do have that extra avenue out if they're pressed hard enough.

If Jarry has a strong season, maybe. I don't like the option but it is at least some kind of option. Tbh, I think Jarry having a strong season probably decreases Murray's eventual cap hit as it reduces how much he can hold us to ransom.

 

[ZeroPucksGiven]

We've currently got 14 forwards you can make a case for as perfectly fine 3rd liners. Move 2, and you still have 12, without considering the possibility of getting another Kahun back in trade or AJ/Miletec/whoever coming up to Blueger/Lafferty standard in the rest of the season. I'm pretty happy to guess we'll still have a glut.

And even if you say trade McCann for peanuts so you can throw those extra few million at Rust ++, what are we expecting from Rust ++? The difference between 35 and 40 ES points a season?

Last year, Lundqvist and Martin Jones both faced 1699 shots. Lundqvist had a .907 sv%, Jones a .896%. That .011% difference was worth 18 goals. So if that swing in save percentage is worth 18 goals, it seems to me to be a better use of money than 5 points (maybe make it 10 including special teams). And Lundqvist faced those shots in 52 games, which means even with the injury proneness, Murray can play enough games to make that sort of difference. The difference between Murray and Varlamov last year was 7 goals on a .010 difference, and that's with Varlamov facing a 100 less shots. Putting a number on it? Dunno, I'd have to think properly, but a few million seems fair. A few million is rarely buying much of a difference in the regular season.

Thanks- that's a good discussion about goals=SV% and I can respect your take on it

To your first paragraph, I'm more thinking on defense because we'll need to replace Schultz. RHD are at a premium.
Maybe Marino takes his spot up the lineup? But then again you have the musical chair of who replaces Marino?

 

[Ludwig120]

This whole trade Murray and save cap or don’t pay him shit is getting really old do you want to play goalie roulette like philly has been doing it’s crazy

 

[Empoleon8771]

This whole trade Murray and save cap or don’t pay him **** is getting really old do you want to play goalie roulette like philly has been doing it’s crazy

Why would the Penguins be playing goalie roulette? You're making up a straw man situation instead talking about their actual situation.

 

[Peat]

Thanks- that's a good discussion about goals=SV% and I can respect your take on it

To your first paragraph, I'm more thinking on defense because we'll need to replace Schultz. RHD are at a premium.
Maybe Marino takes his spot up the lineup? But then again you have the musical chair of who replaces Marino?

Fair enough, but my answer is still kinda the same - I'd keep moving depth forwards for cheap ones until I can afford to trade for a Severson to Risto scale RD. I think that can work out with relatively little hassle even with Murray getting a fair sized contract. The Gudbranson money pays for Pettersson, move Bjugstad and he can pay for Murray, the cap raise hopefully pays for one RFA, I think that means you can pretty much give Schultz's money to another RD, and then either move the other RFAs/move other forwards or JJ to pay for them. Probably end up qualifying and trading one of Simon/McCann/Kahun (which isn't a bad start towards being able to pay for that RD in trade).

 

[SEALBound]

That's a false claim
MM was injured for the first 2 rounds of 2017

And the first two games of 2016. Shout out to Mr. Game 1, himself, Jeff Zatkoff!

 

[ownal]

Would Murray take a 4 year x 7.5 million? That would leave him with one last big contract.

 

[Shady Machine]

That's a false claim
MM was injured for the first 2 rounds of 2017

You are right and I was aware of that. Should have re-phrased. Anyway, I think we are at an impasse here. I get your point. I just disagree and you have yet to show me a realistic option I would even consider. So we shall move on.