Confirmed with Link: WBS have signed Jake Guentzel to an ATO

[Le Magnifique 66]

I wanted so bad Bjorkstrand in the 2013 3rd round, that he really has to pan out really good to relieve me

Would have been a hell of a pick. He sure looks promising and he also played in Portland for MJ with Pouliot there as well.

Let's see what Guentzel can do

 

[jmelm]

I wanted so bad Bjorkstrand in the 2013 3rd round, that he really has to pan out really good to relieve me

Would have been a hell of a pick. He sure looks promising and he also played in Portland for MJ with Pouliot there as well.

Let's see what Guentzel can do

I REALLY believed the Pens were going to draft him in the 1st round. Then, when they traded up in the 2nd, I thought FOR SURE they were going to take him in the 2nd. I was shocked again when they didn't take him in the 3rd. I was, and still am, shocked that he didn't go in the first two rounds, and then so late in the 3rd. This is not a guy who was an unknown commodity or hadn't broken out yet.

 

[Zen Arcade]

Mool-er-at seems to be the most common pronunciation, WBS' announcers and other teams' announcers all say it that way. Granted, that doesn't mean it's right.

I enjoy that he breaks out the lacrosse goal every year though, most guys do that once. It's like a tradition for him or something.

 

[Riptide]

I do like the sound of this comment:

Blais said he was told by Pittsburgh Assistant General Manager Bill Guerin, who once played under him on the United States team, that the Penguins believe Guentzel is ready to transition into the pro game.
<snip>
“I can’t say too much other than I’m happy for him,†Blais said. “But, oh, would I have loved to see him play next year — not for his development, for our fans to see him really dominate.

 

[Booba]

Suprised we didnt just sign his elc right away. But maybe this is done so we dont lose a year of the elc contract?

I find it a little puzzling too...

Why would he forgo his senior NCAA season without having a NHL contract?

If he doesn't sign with Pittsburgh, his options are pretty much limited to signing a AHL contract with WBS or going to Europe as Pittsburgh holds his NHL rights until June 2017.

The most plausible scenario is that Guentzel and the Pens' management needs more time to work on the details of Guentzel's NHL contract and this ATO allows him to play in the AHL while they are working on it.

Yes. It's pretty standard for drafted college players to sign ATOs rather than ELCs for that reason and because of the 50 contracts limit...no clue where the Penguins stand on that, but we took upon a bunch of contracts at the deadline so we're probably pretty close.

The 50-contract limit doesn't have much of an impact on these signings because most of these type of deals only start the season after.

On some rare occasions, you'll see a team using these "late season" signings to burn a year of ELC contract on highly regarded NCAA players or prospects/free agents playing in Europe.

This maneuver allows the newly signed players to get closer to RFA status and sometimes to play a few NHL games (along with a NHL paycheck). It's often used as an incentive when NHL teams are competing for the services of coveted NCAA free agents. See Casey Wellman (signed by Minnesota in 2010) or Matt Carey (signed by Chicago in 2014) for examples.

By the way, those deals are immediately counted in the 50-contract limit.

 

[shureshot66]

 

[jmelm]

Bust.


Did anyone see the game? Scouting report?

 

[WayneSid9987]

Bust.


Did anyone see the game? Scouting report?

Listened on radio.
He came close to scoring several times.
Made nice defensive plays as well.
Played some PP later in the game.
Theres more in the WBS thread.

 

[Jaykay]

Kind of surprised by the lack of excitement in this thread. Buccigross recently called Guentzel the best all around player in the NCHC.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Kind of surprised by the lack of excitement in this thread. Buccigross recently called Guentzel the best all around player in the NCHC.

Many here have an inherent bias against small-to-medium sized college forwards selected during the Shero regime (since it would result in having to change long-held, heavily-invested ideas about his poor drafting), which is only slowly changing thanks to how good Rust and Wilson have played recently. Guentzel's looked good every time I've seen him and has always produced well.

 

[Shady Machine]

Many here have an inherent bias against small-to-medium sized college forwards selected during the Shero regime (since it would result in having to change long-held, heavily-invested ideas about his poor drafting), which is only slowly changing thanks to how good Rust and Wilson have played recently. Guentzel's looked good every time I've seen him and has always produced well.

It's because of his tiny arms.

 

[Zero Pucks]

Kind of surprised by the lack of excitement in this thread. Buccigross recently called Guentzel the best all around player in the NCHC.

Me too. But then again this board gets excited about players like Jaden Lindo for some reason, so it might be a good thing.

 

[Darth Vitale]

I think he's less of a project then Blueger. At the draft, I think that would have been a fair statement (that Guentzel was more of a project then TB), but I do not think that's a fair statement today.

He's come a long way since he was drafted, and I'm not sure enough of us here have adjusted our expectations from when we drafted a scrawny 5-9, 150 lb kid. He's still likely 1-2 years away from the NHL (and probably 2-3 from being an impact player - if he gets there), but he's moved on from being a project and should classify as a very good prospect for us. As jmelm said, probably our 2nd best F prospect and probably our 4th or 5th best prospect (behind Murray, DP, DS and maybe Jarry).

When he was drafted, I had zero expectations for him. As he's developed, those have changed. At this point, if he doesn't develop into a top 6/9F I'll be disappointed.

Good stuff. We will wait in anticipation for "Gunz" to make his NHL debut one day.

 

[Riptide]

Many here have an inherent bias against small-to-medium sized college forwards selected during the Shero regime (since it would result in having to change long-held, heavily-invested ideas about his poor drafting), which is only slowly changing thanks to how good Rust and Wilson have played recently. Guentzel's looked good every time I've seen him and has always produced well.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1770383&highlight=

Incorrect. The only thing that would change those very accurate statements that his drafting sucked would be some of his prospects actually panning out. From 2006 to 2010 Shero had 26 picks and only had 2 prospects (as of 11/2014) hit 100 games. Would need to be updated to reflect Rust and Kuhnhackl graduating to be NHL players (even if bottom 6 guys) - although neither are anywhere near 100 NHL games at this point.

What really might save Shero's record after years of ****** drafting is his 2012 and 2013 drafts, where he did more in those two years (at least looking at how promising some of those prospects currently look), then he did basically over his entire time combined as our GM. I mean those two drafts alone netted him: Jarry, Guentzel, Blueger, Sundqvist and Murray (outside of the 1st round). That's as good or better than every single one of his other drafts combined.

Are those two drafts enough to change how people see his drafting? No, because overall it was somewhere between meh and awful. However to really make any analysis of Shero's overall record, we'd have to wait at least another year - if not two or three to see how those 2012/13 picks pan out.

I still stand by the statement I made in 11/2014 - that overall his drafting was bad and that it was one of the main reasons our team is where it is today. Those 5 prospects (or more depending on how others do) panning out will not change that. I'll be happy if it works out as we all hope, and I'll thank and acknowledge him for it. But a couple decent drafts doesn't make up for years of mediocrity - which is exactly what he gave us when it came time for him to step up to the podium at the NHL Draft.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1770383&highlight=

Incorrect. The only thing that would change those very accurate statements that his drafting sucked would be some of his prospects actually panning out. From 2006 to 2010 Shero had 26 picks and only had 2 prospects (as of 11/2014) hit 100 games. Would need to be updated to reflect Rust and Kuhnhackl graduating to be NHL players (even if bottom 6 guys) - although neither are anywhere near 100 NHL games at this point.

What really might save Shero's record after years of ****** drafting is his 2012 and 2013 drafts, where he did more in those two years (at least looking at how promising some of those prospects currently look), then he did basically over his entire time combined as our GM. I mean those two drafts alone netted him: Jarry, Guentzel, Blueger, Sundqvist and Murray (outside of the 1st round). That's as good or better than every single one of his other drafts combined.

Are those two drafts enough to change how people see his drafting? No, because overall it was somewhere between meh and awful. However to really make any analysis of Shero's overall record, we'd have to wait at least another year - if not two or three to see how those 2012/13 picks pan out.

I still stand by the statement I made in 11/2014 - that overall his drafting was bad and that it was one of the main reasons our team is where it is today. Those 5 prospects (or more depending on how others do) panning out will not change that. I'll be happy if it works out as we all hope, and I'll thank and acknowledge him for it. But a couple decent drafts doesn't make up for years of mediocrity - which is exactly what he gave us when it came time for him to step up to the podium at the NHL Draft.

Posting a thread you made a couple years ago isn't any kind of counter-evidence.

In spite of trading a 1st and 2 2nds between '06 and '10 and generally finishing top 10 in the league resulting in their 1st rounders being between 20 and 30, the Pens drafted Staal, Strait, Johnson, Bortuzzo, Muzzin, Despres, Bennett, Rust, and Kuhnhackl.

The folly there was making concrete conclusions about draft results too soon with an arbitrary "games played" number, which resulted in excluding players who developed in college (Rust, Johnson), more slowly (Kuhn), or had injury issues (Bennett).

 

[#1GuinFan]

Don't forget Wilson too.

 

[Riptide]

Posting a thread you made a couple years ago isn't any kind of counter-evidence.

Well statistically it shows that of his peers over that time frame, he was in the bottom 3rd for drafting and developing players. The fact that a year and a half later it hasn't changed all that much is kind of telling. Am I happy that some of the prospects he drafted are finally looking like they'll pay off? Of course. But that still doesn't change the fact that overall he was still crap at the draft table.

In spite of trading a 1st and 2 2nds between '06 and '10 and generally finishing top 10 in the league resulting in their 1st rounders being between 20 and 30, the Pens drafted Staal, Strait, Johnson, Bortuzzo, Muzzin, Despres, Bennett, Rust, and Kuhnhackl.

The folly there was making concrete conclusions about draft results too soon with an arbitrary "games played" number, which resulted in excluding players who developed in college (Rust, Johnson), more slowly (Kuhn), or had injury issues (Bennett).

Sorry, but I'm not going to pat someone on the back for not screwing up the #2 pick at the draft - which was why I specifically looked at how he (and others) did outside of the first round. The 1st round picks are fairly easy to make, and it's less a matter of not screwing them up vs making great picks. The true testament to how successful someone is (or isn't) is in the middle or latter rounds of the draft, which is why when I looked at this 18 mths ago, I looked at rounds 2-7. And this is where he didn't do all that **** hot - especially in his first 4 drafts. By comparison his last 4 drafts are almost night and day compared to his first 4. But as I said already, we'll need another few years to really evaluate those.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Well statistically it shows that of his peers over that time frame, he was in the bottom 3rd for drafting and developing players. The fact that a year and a half later it hasn't changed all that much is kind of telling. Am I happy that some of the prospects he drafted are finally looking like they'll pay off? Of course. But that still doesn't change the fact that overall he was still crap at the draft table.

The point is that your data wasn't far enough removed from that time frame, particularly since - as people always point out - Shero drafted college heavy, where kids take longer to develop. We're only starting to see the fruits of some of those drafts now.

Our yield between '06 and '10 was decent for a team that was usually drafting late and had traded a 1st and 2 2nds for long playoff runs over a 5 year period. Not great, but middle-of-the-pack all things considered.

Sorry, but I'm not going to pat someone on the back for not screwing up the #2 pick at the draft - which was why I specifically looked at how he (and others) did outside of the first round. The 1st round picks are fairly easy to make, and it's less a matter of not screwing them up vs making great picks. The true testament to how successful someone is (or isn't) is in the middle or latter rounds of the draft, which is why when I looked at this 18 mths ago, I looked at rounds 2-7. And this is where he didn't do all that **** hot - especially in his first 4 drafts. By comparison his last 4 drafts are almost night and day compared to his first 4. But as I said already, we'll need another few years to really evaluate those.

Omitting the 1st round entirely is a flaw in your method and skews things against the Pens, who only had one 1st round flub over that 5 year span (Espo). It's not hard to get a quality player with a #2 overall, but we also got a top 6 talent at #20 overall and a top 4 defenseman at #30 overall, an impressive late-1st hit rate that's not reflected in your numbers.

 

[Riptide]

Omitting the 1st round entirely is a flaw in your method and skews things against the Pens, who only had one 1st round flub over that 5 year span (Espo). It's not hard to get a quality player with a #2 overall, but we also got a top 6 talent at #20 overall and a top 4 defenseman at #30 overall, an impressive late-1st hit rate that's not reflected in your numbers.

Disagree completely.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Disagree completely.

Your method strikes off 3 top 6 forward/top 4 defense players from the Pens draft yield right off the bat, due to no other reason than that it's easy to draft well in the 1st. If it's so easy, then other teams should be able to do it too, so why not include them?

 

[billybudd]

Many here have an inherent bias against small-to-medium sized college forwards selected during the Shero regime (since it would result in having to change long-held, heavily-invested ideas about his poor drafting), which is only slowly changing thanks to how good Rust and Wilson have played recently. Guentzel's looked good every time I've seen him and has always produced well.

He's not just small, he's also a top-six-or-nothing center-or-nothing with a casual playstyle and so-so speed. Does that describe something we needed then or now?

Keep in mind that the reason you're still watching Kunitz in the top six instead of someone else is that we picked this guy instead of Duke.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

He's not just small, he's also a top-six-or-nothing center-or-nothing with a casual playstyle and so-so speed. Does that describe something we needed then or now?

Keep in mind that the reason you're still watching Kunitz in the top six instead of someone else is that we picked this guy instead of Duke.

Where exactly are you getting this?

Most scouting reports I've seen go out of their way to mention that Guentzel's a cerebral player (an assessment that matches my eye test when I saw him in camp), and I haven't seen any that label him as some sort of casual, offense-only liability. If you've seen them, please link them. Further, not only did Guentzel play some left wing in college, but that's also exactly where he started in WBS.

I think we could use a smart, versatile young forward, particularly given how injury-prone Malkin is and the fact that Cullen and Bonino won't likely be Pens beyond next year. Jokinen sure filled that role well here.

But more than anything, you need to get over Duclair, a guy who virtually every other team in the league passed over for lesser prospects through the 2nd and 3rd round. I don't remember anybody here pounding the table for Duclair at the draft - were you? The reason nobody was up-in-arms about it is because he wasn't an obvious talent who'd been passed over due to some exaggerated flaw - the kid couldn't manage a PPG in his draft year in the Q. Only afterwards did he have his breakout year, so it's the hindsight experts wringing their hands because we didn't pick him. Breakouts happen. If they were predictable, Duclair wouldn't have made it out of the 1st round.

We did well to get a quality prospect who's tracking well in the 3rd round. So you can either be happy with the new Honda in your parking lot, or you can forever be moaning about the Ferrari your neighbor got when he won the lotto, haha.

 

[billybudd]

Where exactly are you getting this?

Most scouting reports I've seen go out of their way to mention that Guentzel's a cerebral player (an assessment that matches my eye test when I saw him in camp), and I haven't seen any that label him as some sort of casual, offense-only liability. If you've seen them, please link them. Further, not only did Guentzel play some left wing in college, but that's also exactly where he started in WBS.

I think we could use a smart, versatile young forward, particularly given how injury-prone Malkin is and the fact that Cullen and Bonino won't likely be Pens beyond next year. Jokinen sure filled that role well here.

But more than anything, you need to get over Duclair, a guy who virtually every other team in the league passed over for lesser prospects through the 2nd and 3rd round. I don't remember anybody here pounding the table for Duclair at the draft - were you? The reason nobody was up-in-arms about it is because he wasn't an obvious talent who'd been passed over due to some exaggerated flaw - the kid couldn't manage a PPG in his draft year in the Q. Only afterwards did he have his breakout year, so it's the hindsight experts wringing their hands because we didn't pick him. Breakouts happen. If they were predictable, Duclair wouldn't have made it out of the 1st round.

We did well to get a quality prospect who's tracking well in the 3rd round. So you can either be happy with the new Honda in your parking lot, or you can forever be moaning about the Ferrari your neighbor got when he won the lotto, haha.

I didn't say he was an offense-only liability, I said he was casual.

I wasn't pounding the table about Duclair at the draft, but I sure as Hell was the first time he played a Rangers exhibition. Kind of doubt he had some radical degree of improvement in the 4 month vacation between the scouts last seeing him and me first seeing him.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I didn't say he was an offense-only liability, I said he was casual.

I wasn't pounding the table about Duclair at the draft, but I sure as Hell was the first time he played a Rangers exhibition. Kind of doubt he had some radical degree of improvement in the 4 month vacation between the scouts last seeing him and me first seeing him.

You said he was casual and top-6-or-bust, which usually doesn't apply to smart players who can play defense. I don't even get the casual thing, to be honest. Are these firsthand impressions or have you read them somewhere?

As for Duclair, it's hindsight drafting, man. This isn't like a Forsberg - who people knew and adamantly argued for - or even a Saad. It's a player nobody talked about whose talent you assume should have been on full display in a draft year when he put up pedestrian production in a league known for being wide-open...because he looked good in an exhibition game and had a breakout season the following year.

The fact is that there was no reason to think more of Duclair than any other comparably rated prospect at the time. The Rangers got lucky and nabbed a great one. That shouldn't have any bearing on Guentzel, who's a good prospect in his own right.

 

[sf expat71]

I'll just throw out the obvious as well, which is that if we had Duclair, he'd be playing on the 3rd line here while Sid plays with Kunitz. Well duh.