Salary Cap: The Salary Cap Thread | Something Happened!

[Gurglesons]

His back can go at any time. He will need his back in order to continue to take the punishment. And not giving him a NTC is a nice thought, but maybe he wants one? Trading him in two years might also be wishful thinking. If they kept Kunitz as long as they did without trading him, or Dupuis before his issues, or Fleury, they'll keep Horny too. This organization either keeps you or lets you go. They don't keep you today, and trade you away in a couple.

Life will go on without #72. I know it seems impossible, but it's true.

Well, that is a crazy asset to let just walk. Not to mention any of our players could suffer a career injury.

It is also makes no sense for a contending team that can afford Hornqvist to let him walk. Daley, Bonino, even Niskanen all make sense. Hornqvist is going to cost at most 1.5 mil more. Lock him up. Hopefully win one more cup and deal with the repercussions.

If you're going to question Hornqvist's health over the contract you better be asking those same questions about Malkin.

 

[wheelz87]

I don't always buy into the notion of 'veteran leadership.' We've heard it with Brendan Morrow, Billy G, Iginla, Kunitz, ect over the years.. some may be true, some may not be. I believe it 100 percent with Hornqvist though. The dude just oozes positive leadership and seems to be a perfect fit for the locker room - the energy he brings is contagious. And I feel optimistic about re-signing him as long as he doesn't ask for something stupid. Sully absolutely loves the guy. He is simply not replaceable right now. I've never seen a guy have such an impact on games while having a very average set of 'hockey skills.' The guy competes more than anybody out there. (or as much as 87 does) To lose him, over a million or so raise, would just be stupid. Who cares if the backend of the contract looks ugly? (which it may not) We're trying to win NOW. You don't lose him over a year or two of contract length. He has been among the biggest contributors in changing the identity of this team over the past 3 years. The guy is just a winner.

 

[Harvey Birdman]

I don't always buy into the notion of 'veteran leadership.' We've heard it with Brendan Morrow, Billy G, Iginla, Kunitz, ect over the years.. some may be true, some may not be. I believe it 100 percent with Hornqvist though. The dude just oozes positive leadership and seems to be a perfect fit for the locker room - the energy he brings is contagious. And I feel optimistic about re-signing him as long as he doesn't ask for something stupid. Sully absolutely loves the guy. He is simply not replaceable right now. I've never seen a guy have such an impact on games while having a very average set of 'hockey skills.' The guy competes more than anybody out there. (or as much as 87 does) To lose him, over a million or so raise, would just be stupid. Who cares if the backend of the contract looks ugly? (which it may not) We're trying to win NOW. You don't lose him over a year or two of contract length. He has been among the biggest contributors in changing the identity of this team over the past 3 years. The guy is just a winner.

With the current state of this team I do not buy into bringing in veteran leadership at all.

Veterans that have won 3 cups.

Crosby, 30.
Malkin, 31.
Letang, 30.

Veterans that have won 2 cups.

Hornqvist, 30.
Cole, 28.
Schultz, 27.

These are guys that are old enough, have won enough, and seen enough ups and downs on both sides of the puck and have all had great triumphs and failures. The last thing we should need at all infused into this lineup is "veteran leadership".

 

[The Old Master]

With the current state of this team I do not buy into bringing in veteran leadership at all.

Veterans that have won 3 cups.

Crosby, 30.
Malkin, 31.
Letang, 30.

Veterans that have won 2 cups.

Hornqvist, 30.
Cole, 28.
Schultz, 27.

These are guys that are old enough, have won enough, and seen enough ups and downs on both sides of the puck and have all had great triumphs and failures. The last thing we should need at all infused into this lineup is "veteran leadership".

just cause your a veteran, doesn't make you a leader........that said. ya, we don't need to get any older.

 

[wheelz87]

Well we're not bringing in another veteran, nor did I suggest that. I made my case for keeping one. Because we found one worth keeping.

 

[66-30-33]

Hopefully our core has at least 2 more cups left in them. Retiring with 5 cups would be one hell of a career. Not many people can say they got 5 cups in their careers.

 

[Andy99]

Sending Chris Summers was kind of a interesting move, why would they send down their 7th def?

The only reason i can think of is JR is trying to get as much cap space as possible for somebody.

What's really interesting is in Friedman's 31 Thoughts...he mentions BUF looking to possibly trade Sam Reinhart. A 3C candidate? He's posted 40+ point years. I think we know some people in BUF's front office....just saying. What would it cost?

 

[Gurglesons]

Probably a 1st and Sprong as a start.

 

[wheelz87]

I too thought it was interesting we sent Summers down after putting Hunwick on IR.. Wilkes Barre doesn't play until Friday. We've had a 23 man roster all year until now. Unless it's simply a cap move to save a few bucks?

 

[Speaking Moistly]

They could be trying to preserve Summer's waiver exemption. Idk, it's all a bit weird. If they're trying to avoid putting him on waivers again for as long as possible or trying to hoard as much cap space as possible it doesn't make sense that he's been up the whole time.

He was called up in the 10th and then they had games on the 11th, 12th, 14th and 17th. Their next game is on the 20th. They already had him sitting there eating up cap space and days for two free days.

Maybe WBS has unreported injuries.

 

[madinsomniac]

Kunitz isn't forcing himself into where he plays. This is four coaching staffs in a row that have played him as a top nine forward despite him being "garbage".

I'm not saying Kunitz is a great player now. Just that his demise isn't as bad as some with a clear agenda against him make it want to be. He helped us play HBK in 2016 by helping be a solid third option with Rust and Malkin and was a solid top nine forward in 2017 that produced in the Ottawa and Nash series when he was moved up.

If Hornqvist is Kunitz in 15-16 his last year on his contract we will be fine.

Kunitz gets premium ice time because he is a locker room good guy and he covers well defensively.. his offense has been a shit show for years now and NHL coaches are amoung tge worse in tge sports world at playing good guy vets years past their expiration dates... in fact nhl coaching has probably been the least developed over the past few decades... its just now breaking into a new era... you know what they say about okd dogs after all...

 

[Andy99]

Probably a 1st and Sprong as a start.

Pass on that then. But I wonder if they might have an interest in Sheary. If they continue to play poorly and lose, Kane could be available, and they'll need a LW. Also, isnt Reinhart playing or has played wing for them? Wonder if Sheary and a lesser draft pick would do it

 

[Gurglesons]

Kunitz gets premium ice time because he is a locker room good guy and he covers well defensively.. his offense has been a **** show for years now and NHL coaches are amoung tge worse in tge sports world at playing good guy vets years past their expiration dates... in fact nhl coaching has probably been the least developed over the past few decades... its just now breaking into a new era... you know what they say about okd dogs after all...

Cooper and Sullivan are both pretty progressive coaches. Kunitz is fine as a 3rd liner at this point.

 

[Peat]

What's really interesting is in Friedman's 31 Thoughts...he mentions BUF looking to possibly trade Sam Reinhart. A 3C candidate? He's posted 40+ point years. I think we know some people in BUF's front office....just saying. What would it cost?

What would his next contract be?

 

[AjaxTelamon]

His back can go at any time. He will need his back in order to continue to take the punishment. And not giving him a NTC is a nice thought, but maybe he wants one? Trading him in two years might also be wishful thinking. If they kept Kunitz as long as they did without trading him, or Dupuis before his issues, or Fleury, they'll keep Horny too. This organization either keeps you or lets you go. They don't keep you today, and trade you away in a couple.

Life will go on without #72. I know it seems impossible, but it's true.

Sure life will go on, but it hurts our chances to ever win another cup with this core. We sure aren't winning a cup with Sheary and Rust as our best net front guys. A lot of the reason Sid can hang out by the side of the cage is PH is in front taking the beating and drawing all the attention. No PH, and you've got Staal crosschecking Crosby again.

PH was productive with a broken rib in the playoffs his first year. He scored the Stanley Cup winning goal with a broken hand this year. What makes you think back problems are going to stop this guy next year, or the year after? Because that's our prime window, and since there's literally no way to replace the guy during that window, why would we possibly let him go over 1M in cap space or an extra year of term?

 

[Jag68Sid87]

Well, that is a crazy asset to let just walk. Not to mention any of our players could suffer a career injury.

It is also makes no sense for a contending team that can afford Hornqvist to let him walk. Daley, Bonino, even Niskanen all make sense. Hornqvist is going to cost at most 1.5 mil more. Lock him up. Hopefully win one more cup and deal with the repercussions.

If you're going to question Hornqvist's health over the contract you better be asking those same questions about Malkin.

First of all, I am not advocating letting Hornqvist walk. I am suggesting we should plug our third-line center hole by using him (an asset who will become too expensive beyond this season, who looks the part of a diminishing return once he signs his next contract) as a trade chip. That would be the best-case scenario. Then, the next-best scenario would be letting him walk as a UFA on July 1. The last scenario is to compete for his services on the open market. Penguins players have more value around the league. Especially two-time Cup champions. Hornqvist isn't going to take less money to stay. He is going to be among the most expensive, most sought-after players on the market. Those are the types of players we need to let go. He is not part of the core. In 2009 and subsequent years, we made the mistake of thinking we had to keep the entire team intact. And we never won anything. Once we started opening up roster spots for rookies and younger players, we started winning Cups again. That is not a coincidence.

Secondly, there is no comparison between Patric Hornqvist and Evgeni Malkin. None. One is a role player on an expiring contract. The other is a franchise player and future Hall-of-Famer signed through 2021-22. We have no plans to get rid of the latter, so why even bring it up?

Probably a 1st and Sprong as a start.

Stop it. Reinhart is not worth that much. Relax.

 

[Gurglesons]

Stop it. Reinhart is not worth that much. Relax.

Uh. Consistent 40pt center that has draft pedigree is definitely worth a solid prospect and a low 1st.

The Hornqvist argument will go nowhere. He isn't a role player. He is a consistent 50 pt player that brings a bucket of intangibles. We have no replacement for him in the system. The only players I'm keeping above him throughout the forward line-up are Kessel, Malkin, Crosby and Jake. You make room for Hornqvist.

 

[Jag68Sid87]

Sure life will go on, but it hurts our chances to ever win another cup with this core. We sure aren't winning a cup with Sheary and Rust as our best net front guys. A lot of the reason Sid can hang out by the side of the cage is PH is in front taking the beating and drawing all the attention. No PH, and you've got Staal crosschecking Crosby again.

PH was productive with a broken rib in the playoffs his first year. He scored the Stanley Cup winning goal with a broken hand this year. What makes you think back problems are going to stop this guy next year, or the year after? Because that's our prime window, and since there's literally no way to replace the guy during that window, why would we possibly let him go over 1M in cap space or an extra year of term?

I'm sorry. I'm not buying any of this hyperbole surrounding Hornqvist. Has he been a very important player for us? Absolutely? Does that mean he should retire a Penguin? Absolutely not.

Again, this is the last year Jake Guentzel will NOT be on the first PP unit. And maybe it's only a matter of weeks or months before he leapfrogs over Hornqvist again. His hands are simply too good to ignore much longer. He is off to a sluggish start so far, which is the only reason he is back on PP2.

Secondly, we already have 6 top-six forwards. Plus we have Sprong coming. Plus we need a new third-line center, and we don't know exactly how expensive he is going to be in terms of salary-cap hit.

We simply do not need Hornqvist beyond this season. All this talk about how we cannot win the Cup without him is just nonsense. We won without Letang. We can win without Hornqvist. It's not like we're talking about Mario Lemieux here.

I wish people would stop overrating him.

 

[Jag68Sid87]

Uh. Consistent 40pt center that has draft pedigree is definitely worth a solid prospect and a low 1st.

The Hornqvist argument will go nowhere. He isn't a role player. He is a consistent 50 pt player that brings a bucket of intangibles. We have no replacement for him in the system. The only players I'm keeping above him throughout the forward line-up are Kessel, Malkin, Crosby and Jake. You make room for Hornqvist.

No, winning teams make room for Sprong, let the expensive veterans go. When we did that, we've won. When we have done the opposite, we've lost.

If the player is a future HOFer, you make room. Otherwise, you don't.

 

[Gurglesons]

No, winning teams make room for Sprong, let the expensive veterans go. When we did that, we've won. When we have done the opposite, we've lost.

If the player is a future HOFer, you make room. Otherwise, you don't.

Like I said, we aren't going to agree. Also, the only players we likely lose from a Hornqvist raise in the next two years is likely Hags and Cole. Maybe Rust.

I can live with that.

I'll argue you that Reinhart would get a way better package than Sheary or Sprong + 1st from literally 80% of the league though!

 

[billybudd]

Kunitz isn't forcing himself into where he plays. This is four coaching staffs in a row that have played him as a top nine forward despite him being "garbage".

I'm not saying Kunitz is a great player now. Just that his demise isn't as bad as some with a clear agenda against him make it want to be. He helped us play HBK in 2016 by helping be a solid third option with Rust and Malkin and was a solid top nine forward in 2017 that produced in the Ottawa and Nash series when he was moved up.

If Hornqvist is Kunitz in 15-16 his last year on his contract we will be fine.

Hands are shot. Legs are so-so, but he still plays the game hard (very hard for his age) and his positioning and decision-making is going to make his coaches happy, no matter who they are. This will inevitably lead to more responsibility and more points than his critics think he merits.

I'm not sad to see him gone with what he's got left in his game, but, yeah, the guy's very real demise was still massively exaggerrated.

 

[AjaxTelamon]

No, winning teams make room for Sprong, let the expensive veterans go. When we did that, we've won. When we have done the opposite, we've lost.

If the player is a future HOFer, you make room. Otherwise, you don't.

You just keep speaking in generalities and acting like you're making a point. I'll ask you again, who is going to replace what PH does for this team? Or do you simply think what PH does, and that's cause chaos in front of the net, is of no significant value in the playoffs?

When I went through this with Riptide, he said that he could be replaced by committee, which I disagree is possible, but that was the disagreement. Is that your argument, or are you going to just keep saying "good teams play young players"?

Why don't we get both Sprong and PH in the lineup? Doesn't that give us the best chance to win? Rust has looked pretty good on the LW the last few games.

 

[Gurglesons]

Also, I like Jake's deflection abilities.

But he will literally get killed on the power play if he takes over Hornqvist's position.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

There's a reason Horny looks like some gym rat. To take that kind of beating and have that kind of energy you have to be built like a tank. Guentzel could be ok at it or even great at it, but he'd need to bulk up to at least 190~ lbs.

 

[PensandCaps]

Pass on that then. But I wonder if they might have an interest in Sheary. If they continue to play poorly and lose, Kane could be available, and they'll need a LW. Also, isnt Reinhart playing or has played wing for them? Wonder if Sheary and a lesser draft pick would do it

Pass? Lol I'd easily give up Sprong and a late 1st for Reinhart.