Speculation: Trade Speculation / Untouchable Players Pt. V

[Jules Winnfield]

He's been so bad this season. He had 3-5 games of good hockey. He can never hold that consistency. Where we give him all the credit - the defensive zone - actually has been pretty subpar, too.

I want to see Sutter play well. I am just so tired of sugar coating it. He's playing like ass and he isn't even worth re-signing outside of his last name and age. His glimpses of light are like very small windows. They are always in the same situation, too. The game has to be wide open for him to use his speed and shoot a wrister top shelf. If the game tightens up into small 1 on 1 battles, he is just a lost puppy looking for something.

For what he's done this season, he's not worth much of anything to the Pens. Some team could utilize what he does best (shadowing/speed/pk/etc).

This. Sutter is one of the most overrated Pens I've seen in a long time. He's played 11 more games this year and has 2 points more than someone a lot of Pens fans ***** about never seeing in a Pens uniform again and that he's just a 4th liner, etc...Mad Max.

That said, I don't think Sutter is a bad player. I think he's a terrible fit for Bylsma's system. Players with intensity or those who can skate their ass off thrive under Bylsma. Sutter does neither.

If Bylsma is going to stay here, I'd deal Sutter. Someone like Ott is a better fit for Bylsma.

 

[jmelm]

On a side note and maybe and unpopular opinion/thought process...

I would even entertain moving Paul Martin this summer at the draft if he waives his NMC.

I would be content without either Orpik or Martin if need be and I think Paul could fetch the team something fairly decent with his solid play. I like Martin, he's solid, but he is also fallible, he just doesn't make those big blunders that he did 2yrs ago, thank goodness for that. But I think there is more balance with the pairings below.

Despres, Letang
Maatta, Niskanen
Scuderi, Bortuzzo

I appreciate your thoughts, only insofar as trying to maximize our asset management in any way we can. If, for example, we would be unable to re-sign Niskanen without a NTC (I doubt this would be a problem, though, Nisky doesn't have that much clout), then we may choose to retain him rather than lose him for nothing, and then trade Martin instead. But then I would propose: why not just trade Scuderi instead? He won't bring in as much as Martin, but he's a more valuable player to this team.


Also, I would personally advocate signing/retaining both Nisky and Martin on long term deals, with the view of trading them when our young guys are ready. This gives us the dual benefit of being able to not rush our young guys (i.e. Pouliot, Harrington); as well as being able to retain great assets in Nisky & Martin and get something good for them when we are ready to move them and let the young guys play. In order, I value Martin, Niskanen and then Scuderi, and I would sooner trade Scuds to keep the other two if needed than lose them for nothing.


Finally, while I understand that your proposed D pairings you mentioned make sense, I do firmly believe that a Maatta--Martin paring could be as good or better than the Maatta--Nisky pairing. So to me, I think we could find a win-win scenario next year whether it's Maatta+Martin and Despres+Bortuzzo, or Despres+Martin and Maatta+Bortuzzo. Either way, this situation is very workable, and then I'd have the mindset of trading Scuderi the after that, then one of Nisky/Martin the following year, and then the remaing of Nisky Martin in year 3 (3 years from now). That would be my ideal scenario.

 

[Michael8771*]

Getting Letang back is the best trade deadline pick up of all.

That's very debatable!

 

[Michael8771*]

This. Sutter is one of the most overrated Pens I've seen in a long time. He's played 11 more games this year and has 2 points more than someone a lot of Pens fans ***** about never seeing in a Pens uniform again and that he's just a 4th liner, etc...Mad Max.

That said, I don't think Sutter is a bad player. I think he's a terrible fit for Bylsma's system. Players with intensity or those who can skate their ass off thrive under Bylsma. Sutter does neither.

If Bylsma is going to stay here, I'd deal Sutter. Someone like Ott is a better fit for Bylsma.

Agreed! Sutter doesn't provide what this team in particular needs but he could possibly fill a need elsewhere. I would not be opposed to moving him provided we found a MORE suitable replacement. As others have mentioned someone in more the mold of a Steve Ott. I wonder if we could swing a trade with the AV's for Mcginn and Talbot with Sutter and say a 4th rounder goin back.

 

[jmelm]

This. Sutter is one of the most overrated Pens I've seen in a long time. He's played 11 more games this year and has 2 points more than someone a lot of Pens fans ***** about never seeing in a Pens uniform again and that he's just a 4th liner, etc...Mad Max.

That said, I don't think Sutter is a bad player. I think he's a terrible fit for Bylsma's system. Players with intensity or those who can skate their ass off thrive under Bylsma. Sutter does neither.

If Bylsma is going to stay here, I'd deal Sutter. Someone like Ott is a better fit for Bylsma.

A few key points to raise:

- I don't think there would be anyone on here who wouldn't jump at the chance to move Sutter if we could get an ELITE winger (obviously as part of a package with one of our Dmen/D prospects of 1st rounder), but I don't believe there is any addition by subtraction or that Sutter is inherently a bad fit here. Sutter has, by far, been shafted the most -- and by a fair margin, IMO -- of any of our forwards in terms of both the quality and consistency of his linemates.

- Sutter is a solid player who has enough speed and skill that if we surround him with two quality linemates (such as Bennett + Megna, Dupuis + Megna, Gibbons + Megna, etc.), that we could have an extremely strong 3rd line that could both be good defensively and score goals. He's got enough skill, and we need to find him regular linemates, which should be no problem when healthy. And those young guys I mentioned (Megna, Bennett, Gibbons) are all essentially rookies and are only going to get substantially better and make that line substantially stronger.

- Sutter is still very young. I think we forget this because we've been spoiled by Crosby, Malkin & Staal. These guys are exceptions and not the norm. Sutter is the youngest of our centremen by a fair margin, and he is only going to get a lot better with development. Most "regular" players (not bests like Crosby, Malkin or others) don't even come into their peak until their mid-to-late 20s, and Sutter isn't even there yet. I think we will see this player make enormous strides within the next 2-3 years. I really believe that. This is a player who hasn't even done the type of off-ice conditioning that most of our star players do. You give this guy one summer with Roberts, T.R. Goodman, or Andy O'Brian, and watch him make a serious jump in his game.

In short, I don't think the Sutter issue is solve by trading Sutter. This is a player we need to continue to develop and surround with better talent. And if we do, trust me: we will reap the rewards of it. I just know it, and I've see it too many times before, and he's got the pedigree. There's nothing about him that makes him intrinsically a poor fit with this team.

 

[jmelm]

Agreed! Sutter doesn't provide what this team in particular needs but he could possibly fill a need elsewhere. I would not be opposed to moving him provided we found a MORE suitable replacement. As others have mentioned someone in more the mold of a Steve Ott. I wonder if we could swing a trade with the AV's for Mcginn and Talbot with Sutter and say a 4th rounder goin back.

Not only does this resemble an video game trade type scenario, it kills our salary cap. Ott would cost at least 50% or more of what Sutter will make on his next deal, and while Talbot is nice, we don't need him. McGinn is nice, but the LAST thing on the planet COL needs is another centre. AND, McGinn would also cost a heck of a lot more than Megna, Gibbons or Bennett for our 3rd line, and brings us no closer to finding a winger for Crosby. This is a TERRIBLE use of cap space and assets.

Trust me: you put Steve Ott with Tanner Glass a musical-chairs rotation of RWers and our 3rd line still will look like a horse's anus. We need wingers who can crash, bang, provide speed and score. Either Sutter or Ott in the middle would look just fine, and about the same (in terms of overall production).

And there's some short-sightedness going on here. Sutter having a "poor" offensive season in a contract year means we get to re-sign him long term to a deal that is very reasonable and what I believe will prove to be a bargain in a few years when Sutter has raised his game a level or three higher than it is now. Think how valuable THAT player will be at that time. This is a great position for us to be in. And by that time, a guy like Sundqvist should be ready, so if we trade Brandon for a winger, we'll have someone internally (and inexpensively) to replace him.

This, ^, is the correct course of action, IMO. If we can use Sutter in a package to get an elite winger, I'm all for that. But anything less than #wingerforcrosby, and I have no interest in moving this player.

 

[billybudd]

Whoever threw out Colin Wilson's name that's...not only a good call, but possible. Nashville has at least 4 of him.

Though it's also possible Poile elects to move Legwand, who would be a considerably more expensive acquisition. Difference in asked return would be far greater than the difference in what they actually do in a game.

Anyways, I'll throw my hat in with the others in thinking Sutter is part of the problem in the bottom six, not part of the solution. If there's another 6 foot 3 guy who loses as many battles for body position and is less effective than 5'4 Chris Conner on the wall, I don't know who it is.

He doesn't need to be Staal. But he does need to be

a) difficult to play against

or

b) capable of a little production

but he's neither. Only saving grace for him is his value over replacement players is through the roof right now.

There's nothing else in the system that remotely has the look of a 3C.

 

[Michael8771*]

Not only does this resemble an video game trade type scenario, it kills our salary cap. Ott would cost at least 50% or more of what Sutter will make on his next deal, and while Talbot is nice, we don't need him. McGinn is nice, but the LAST thing on the planet COL needs is another centre. AND, McGinn would also cost a heck of a lot more than Megna, Gibbons or Bennett for our 3rd line, and brings us no closer to finding a winger for Crosby. This is a TERRIBLE use of cap space and assets.

Trust me: you put Steve Ott with Tanner Glass a musical-chairs rotation of RWers and our 3rd line still will look like a horse's anus. We need wingers who can crash, bang, provide speed and score. Either Sutter or Ott in the middle would look just fine, and about the same (in terms of overall production).

And there's some short-sightedness going on here. Sutter having a "poor" offensive season in a contract year means we get to re-sign him long term to a deal that is very reasonable and what I believe will prove to be a bargain in a few years when Sutter has raised his game a level or three higher than it is now. Think how valuable THAT player will be at that time. This is a great position for us to be in. And by that time, a guy like Sundqvist should be ready, so if we trade Brandon for a winger, we'll have someone internally (and inexpensively) to replace him.

This, ^, is the correct course of action, IMO. If we can use Sutter in a package to get an elite winger, I'm all for that. But anything less than #wingerforcrosby, and I have no interest in moving this player.

I see your perspective but I disagree. Sutter is a very ''meek'' sort of player relative to what I believe we need on the third line. Ideally, sure. I'd love to get Sid that top six guy. Unfortunately our options are limited at this time. if we would trade Sutter we'd NEED to counteract his loss by acquiring a third line guy (possibly two). Sutter IMO lives off his surname, he's not a bad player, he's steady and solid but unspectacular and very much unnoticeable more times than not. I know he hasn't had the best support or quality on his wings (I'll give you that), but nonetheless he's been very ordinary or to be brutally honest somewhat disappointing.

As far as the Av's situation at center, Stastny is not likely to be retained, and if we acquire Talbot then obviously they're down another center anyhow. So adding Sutter isn't or shouldn't be an issue. Particularly with ROR being made into a full time wing. And Mcginn is a huge upgrade over Megna or Gibbons and currently over Bennet (until we see what he does after coming back from injury). We are trying to win a cup NOW. Adding Mcginn and Talbot is a move for the present as well as the future. We need PROVEN COMMODITIES to help solidify our depth upfront, We shouldn't be trying to roll the proverbial dice with guys who have only played a handful of NHL games. That approach is risky and very naive.

 

[cygnus47]

A few key points to raise:

- I don't think there would be anyone on here who wouldn't jump at the chance to move Sutter if we could get an ELITE winger (obviously as part of a package with one of our Dmen/D prospects of 1st rounder), but I don't believe there is any addition by subtraction or that Sutter is inherently a bad fit here. Sutter has, by far, been shafted the most -- and by a fair margin, IMO -- of any of our forwards in terms of both the quality and consistency of his linemates.

- Sutter is a solid player who has enough speed and skill that if we surround him with two quality linemates (such as Bennett + Megna, Dupuis + Megna, Gibbons + Megna, etc.), that we could have an extremely strong 3rd line that could both be good defensively and score goals. He's got enough skill, and we need to find him regular linemates, which should be no problem when healthy. And those young guys I mentioned (Megna, Bennett, Gibbons) are all essentially rookies and are only going to get substantially better and make that line substantially stronger.

- Sutter is still very young. I think we forget this because we've been spoiled by Crosby, Malkin & Staal. These guys are exceptions and not the norm. Sutter is the youngest of our centremen by a fair margin, and he is only going to get a lot better with development. Most "regular" players (not bests like Crosby, Malkin or others) don't even come into their peak until their mid-to-late 20s, and Sutter isn't even there yet. I think we will see this player make enormous strides within the next 2-3 years. I really believe that. This is a player who hasn't even done the type of off-ice conditioning that most of our star players do. You give this guy one summer with Roberts, T.R. Goodman, or Andy O'Brian, and watch him make a serious jump in his game.

In short, I don't think the Sutter issue is solve by trading Sutter. This is a player we need to continue to develop and surround with better talent. And if we do, trust me: we will reap the rewards of it. I just know it, and I've see it too many times before, and he's got the pedigree. There's nothing about him that makes him intrinsically a poor fit with this team.

Hey I actually agree with you! No way!

 

[Gurglesons]

I see your perspective but I disagree. Sutter is a very ''meek'' sort of player relative to what I believe we need on the third line. Ideally, sure. I'd love to get Sid that top six guy. Unfortunately our options are limited at this time. if we would trade Sutter we'd NEED to counteract his loss by acquiring a third line guy (possibly two). Sutter IMO lives off his surname, he's not a bad player, he's steady and solid but unspectacular and very much unnoticeable more times than not. I know he hasn't had the best support or quality on his wings (I'll give you that), but nonetheless he's been very ordinary or to be brutally honest somewhat disappointing.

As far as their centers go, Statsny is not likely to be retained and if we acquire Talbot then obviously they're down a center there anyhow so adding Sutter isn't or shouldn't be an issue there. Particularly with ROR being made into a full time wing. And Mcginn is a huge upgrade over Megna or Gibbons and right now over Bennet. We are tring to win a cup, adding Mcginn and Talbot is a move for the present as well as the future. We need PROVEN COMMODIES, We shouldn't be trying to roll the proverbial dice with guys who have only played a handful of NHL games. That approach is risky and very naive.

He's a third liner who chips in 30 points a year and plays solid defensively and on the PK. He isn't going to play like Staal and he pretty much plays the same exact game as Talbot minus fighting.

 

[Michael8771*]

He's a third liner who chips in 30 points a year and plays solid defensively and on the PK. He isn't going to play like Staal and he pretty much plays the same exact game as Talbot minus fighting.

Sutter is a better player than Talbot, but I think Talbot suits our needs better. Max is also a more gritty and physical player. I wouldn't trade Sutter for Talbot straight up, certainly not, but if Mcginn is part of a package, hell yeah. We'd have to add, depending on what else we'd have to give up would determine if it was worth it or not. And as bad as some of us think Sutter has been, he's still likely to get a pay raise, Talbot won't be getting one.

One other thing, I was very excited about getting Sutter in the Staal deal. I can't tell you how disappointed I have been to this point. I didn't expect a 55 point guy, but I thought 40-45 points was reasonable. He'll maybe hit 30. To me that's just not gonna cut it. As you said he's a 30 point guy, we can get that from MT at a lower cap hit.

 

[drpepper]

Sutter is a better player than Talbot, but I think Talbot suits our needs better. Max is also a more gritty and physical player. I wouldn't trade Sutter for Talbot straight up, certainly not, but if Mcginn is part of a package, hell yeah. We'd have to add, depending on what else we'd have to give up would determine if it was worth it or not. And as bad as some of us think Sutter has been, he's still likely to get a pay raise, Talbot won't be getting one.

One other thing, I was very excited about getting Sutter in the Staal deal. I can't tell you how disappointed I have been to this point. I didn't expect a 55 point guy, but I thought 40-45 points was reasonable. He'll maybe hit 30. To me that's just not gonna cut it. As you said he's a 30 point guy, well we can get that from MT at a lower cap hit.

If you go grittier with Talbot, who do you put on the wings to match that grit? The Pens have Glass and maybe Engelland who should be on the 4th line if at all. Otherwise, your grittier third line is going to have Pyatt or Kobasew or Megna or Gibbons or Bennett. The Pens don't have the center or the wings for a gritty third line, and I highly doubt the Pens acquire three new players at the TDL for the third line.

Also, this year especially, I don't know how you expected Sutter to produce 40-45 pts with the likes of Adams, Glass, Kobasew, Pyatt and revolving door of AHL players on his wings. What 3Cs in the league produce that much with no quality players or any consistency? Please name me a few and how much it would require to acquire them.

Talbot is also 30 years old. Even if he is the difference between making the SCF, which I doubt he is, Crosby is 26; Malkin is 27. You sacrifice a player who is still developing for a player who is not going to be able to help the team in the future.

Finally, I highly doubt the Avs who are making the playoffs are going to give up two players on their third line - McGinn (on PP unit #1) and Talbot (one of their veteran leaders / locker room guys) for Sutter +. They want top 4 D and veteran leadership none of which Sutter provides.

EDIT: Just to add, Talbot struggles defensively and is not going to give you 30 pts with Glass, Adams, Kobasew, Pyatt, etc on his wings. He is projected to have 8G 18A 26Pts with far better quality of teammates. Sutter will give you 30 pts (projected 13A 14G 27Pts) with rotating trash so to speak on his wings.

 

[Michael8771*]

If you go grittier with Talbot, who do you put on the wings to match that grit? The Pens have Glass and maybe Engelland who should be on the 4th line if at all. Otherwise, your grittier third line is going to have Pyatt or Kobasew or Megna or Gibbons or Bennett. The Pens don't have the center or the wings for a gritty third line, and I highly doubt the Pens acquire three new players at the TDL for the third line.

Also, this year especially, I don't know how you expected Sutter to produce 40-45 pts with the likes of Adams, Glass, Kobasew, Pyatt and revolving door of AHL players on his wings. What 3Cs in the league produce that much with no quality players or any consistency? Please name me a few and how much it would require to acquire them.

Talbot is also 30 years old. Even if he is the difference between making the SCF, which I doubt he is, Crosby is 26; Malkin is 27. You sacrifice a player who is still developing for a player who is not going to be able to help the team in the future.

Finally, I highly doubt the Avs who are making the playoffs are going to give up two players on their third line - McGinn (on PP unit #1) and Talbot (one of their veteran leaders / locker room guys) for Sutter +. They want top 4 D and veteran leadership none of which Sutter provides.

EDIT: Just to add, Talbot struggles defensively and is not going to give you 30 pts with Glass, Adams, Kobasew, Pyatt, etc on his wings. He is projected to have 8G 18A 26Pts with far better quality of teammates. Sutter will give you 30 pts (projected 13A 14G 27Pts) with rotating trash so to speak on his wings.

Well, of course it's not likely to happen, most proposed trades don't. I just see the Av's as a team that has a glutton of forwards. I can also understand the argument for Sutter (to some degree) but you have to give to get. And if we wanted a guy like Mcginn, I would think Sutter might be a guy they'd look at. Talbot would be the throw in so to speak. As far as Talbot struggling defensively I can't agree there. He's a pretty solid guy and good on the PK. Also not sure where you came up with the notion that all three guys had to be ''gritty''. I think you need an element like that, particularly on the third line, but you can have diversity as well. Right now we have no one of that ilk on line three. Ideally you'd like to have two third liners who can forecheck and bang a bit, but you got to have at least one IMO.

 

[Ogrezilla]

He's been so bad this season. He had 3-5 games of good hockey. He can never hold that consistency. Where we give him all the credit - the defensive zone - actually has been pretty subpar, too.

I want to see Sutter play well. I am just so tired of sugar coating it. He's playing like ass and he isn't even worth re-signing outside of his last name and age. His glimpses of light are like very small windows. They are always in the same situation, too. The game has to be wide open for him to use his speed and shoot a wrister top shelf. If the game tightens up into small 1 on 1 battles, he is just a lost puppy looking for something.

For what he's done this season, he's not worth much of anything to the Pens. Some team could utilize what he does best (shadowing/speed/pk/etc).

he is essentially playing alone every night. His wingers have been absolute garbage all year; and not even a stable pair of garbage but a rotating cast that has gotten progressively worse and worse. He needs some wingers that can help cover his weaknesses so he can play to his strengths. He is a role player without a well defined role. Staal was a guy who was a 3rd line all to himself who just needed guys around him. Sutter is a real bottom 6 role player who simply cannot make a line work on his own. Unless we want to pay big money for our 3rd line center again, I don't think we should expect a hole lot better than Sutter there.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Getting Letang back is the best trade deadline pick up of all.

unless of course he plays like he has every other time he's come back from injury this year.

 

[drpepper]

Well, of course it's not likely to happen, most proposed trades don't. I just see the Av's as a team that has a glutton of forwards. I can also understand the argument for Sutter (to some degree) but you have to give to get. And if we wanted a guy like Mcginn, I would think Sutter might be a guy they'd look at. Talbot would be the throw in so to speak. As far as Talbot struggling defensively I can't agree there. He's a pretty solid guy and good on the PK. Also not sure where you came up with the notion that all three guys had to be ''gritty''. I think you need an element like that, particularly on the third line, but you can have diversity as well. Right now we have no one of that ilk on line three. Ideally you'd like to have two third liners who can forecheck and bang a bit, but you got to have at least one IMO.

I've noticed most proposed trades are unrealistic. But if you're going to insert realism about not getting a top 6 winger for Crosby, I think realistically considering the Avs needs and playoff positioning is important. Avs don't need another center. Talbot and McGinn have been playing as wings. Even if they move Stastny, ROR or MacKinnon can play center. Talbot could play center and be cheaper than Sutter. Plus Avs have needs on D and with veteran leadership; Sutter doesn't help with any of these needs.

I think Sutter is better than both Talbot and McGinn. Sutter is a better defensive player than both. I think Sutter has more offensive upside, too. I think Talbot has more defensive weaknesses than Sutter.

One of the third lines current issues is identity. No not all the players on the third line need to bring the same thing (talent, grit, etc) but they should be able to play the same or complimentary style(s). I'd rather see McGinn on Sutter's wing creating a shutdown line than have Talbot centering the Pens third line with McGinn.

 

[Michael8771*]

I've noticed most proposed trades are unrealistic. But if you're going to insert realism about not getting a top 6 winger for Crosby, I think realistically considering the Avs needs and playoff positioning is important. Avs don't need another center. Talbot and McGinn have been playing as wings. Even if they move Stastny, ROR or MacKinnon can play center. Talbot could play center and be cheaper than Sutter. Plus Avs have needs on D and with veteran leadership; Sutter doesn't help with any of these needs.

I think Sutter is better than both Talbot and McGinn. Sutter is a better defensive player than both. I think Sutter has more offensive upside, too. I think Talbot has more defensive weaknesses than Sutter.

One of the third lines current issues is identity. No not all the players on the third line need to bring the same thing (talent, grit, etc) but they should be able to play the same or complimentary style(s). I'd rather see McGinn on Sutter's wing creating a shutdown line than have Talbot centering the Pens third line with McGinn.

Yeah, I'd like to see Mcginn play with Sutter over Talbot, however who are we gonna give up to get Mcginn if we keep Sutter? That's the Dilemma that would face us. My main interest is to get Mcginn and use Talbot as a stopgap for a season or two. But again you have to give to get. And with Letang out we have limited options. If they wanted Despres in that scenario instead of Sutter sure, but the way this team has (to a large degree) mitigated his value, I doubt the Av's would even consider it. In the Mcginn and Talbot for Sutter+ scenario you gain two top nine forwards and lose one.

And let's for arguments sake say we can get a a QUALITY top six guy for Sutter (which I highly doubt). What are we gonna do for our third line center? At least in my scenario we still have a viable option there. As much as I want a top six guy I don't want to deplete the third line anymore than it's already been depleted.

 

[Ogrezilla]

but why would Colorado even want Sutter? They have centers coming out of their ears.

 

[Michael8771*]

but why would Colorado even want Sutter? They have centers coming out of their ears.

ROR has converted to wing. Statsny based on salary and position is likely to leave. Sutter could be there third line guy for the future. You take Talbot and Statsny out of the equation that does open up a spot.

 

[Ogrezilla]

ROR has converted to wing. Statsny based on salary and position is likely to leave. Sutter could be there third line guy for the future.

So they might make the deal next year or in the off-season. But they aren't going to make this trade as long as they still have Duchene, Stastny, ROR, MacKinnon, and Mitchell.

 

[Michael8771*]

So they might make the deal next year or in the off-season. But they aren't going to make this trade as long as they still have Duchene, Stastny, ROR, MacKinnon, and Mitchell. Even with any two of those guys playing wing, they have a better 3rd line center than Sutter.

I can't argue that point I guess. I just can't see any of our prospects (we'd be willing to part with) getting us anything but a rental. I would think Sutter would be the only roster player we could get good return for that we might be willing to part with. And if we do, we'd have to get a third line center back. I'm just wanting to get a guy who's more physical and gritty.

 

[Ogrezilla]

I can't argue that point I guess. I just can't see any of our prospects (we'd be willing to part with) getting us anything but a rental.

I have no idea what we plan on doing.

 

[Sideline]

Re: Sutter

Cooke and Kennedy are lightyears better than the hot garbage Sutter has played with this year. If Sutter had been this bad with something better than AHLers next to him I'd be worried.

 

[Winger for Hire]

I really think Scotty Upshall would do a lot to help this club. He's the kind of grit/skill (with more skill than grit) that the Pens need on any line's wing.

 

[Michael8771*]

I really think Scotty Upshall would do a lot to help this club. He's the kind of grit/skill (with more skill than grit) that the Pens need on any line's wing.

I've mentioned Upshall several times. I think he'd be a nice pick up, but at what cost?