Would you be okay with an extended losing streak if Bylsma gets canned?

[Jaded-Fan]

That's the whole issue with this train of thought, are we rebuilding?

Point #1.
Not all of these D-prospects are ready for full-time top 4 minutes. Maatta has been the closest thing to this notion, and they have made that statement by keeping him up. Despres, at the time was their best bet, and he hasn't grasped that role yet in more games than Maatta has played to date.

Point #2.
To shove all these D-prospects into the lineup at once constitutes a rebuild. Those don't usually come with cup aspirations.

Point #3.
Win now, seems the tone the team has taken.

Point #4.
These D-prospects have to actually be better than the roster players they're to be replacing on their ELC's.

Point #5.
These guys will not be just thrusted into top 4 minute roles and just cut loose players due to their ELC's, they'll earn their spot through the bottom pairing like anyone else. Otherwise, again....that costitutes a rebuild.

What's more important to you guys, winning it now, or getting all of these D-prospects in on ELC's?

One way has you trying to win it every year, and the other in a couple more seasons or more. Which leads to another question.

Do you want to waste another couple seasons on a defense rebuild that you're speaking of, wasting more prime years of the top stars?

The picking heavy on Defense seems to be keeping the ones you have the highest hope for and the rest are trading chips for what you need.

Balance is key, but that balance can be disrupted easily with injuries, moreso at forward. Now why's that? Because their cap dollars are allocated there more. It's the only place on the roster that can absorb the top heavy contracts due to sheer numbers.

This has been addressed.

Unless you toss them into the fire and deal with their growing pains, prospects are not worth a warm cup of spit. Just think back to Goligoski and even Letang when they first came to the Pens, and for their first two years, when they were downright brutal with turnovers, etc.

Once you actual develop them, and they prove that they can cut it at the NHL level, sure they have some real value. Until then? Not so much.

That is the inherent flaw in the Shero model.

 

[KIRK]

That's the whole issue with this train of thought, are we rebuilding?

Point #1.
Not all of these D-prospects are ready for full-time top 4 minutes. Maatta has been the closest thing to this notion, and they have made that statement by keeping him up. Despres, at the time was their best bet, and he hasn't grasped that role yet in more games than Maatta has played to date.

Point #2.
To shove all these D-prospects into the lineup at once constitutes a rebuild. Those don't usually come with cup aspirations.

Point #3.
Win now, seems the tone the team has taken.

Point #4.
These D-prospects have to actually be better than the roster players they're to be replacing on their ELC's.

Point #5.
These guys will not be just thrusted into top 4 minute roles and just cut loose players due to their ELC's, they'll earn their spot through the bottom pairing like anyone else. Otherwise, again....that costitutes a rebuild.

What's more important to you guys, winning it now, or getting all of these D-prospects in on ELC's?

One way has you trying to win it every year, and the other in a couple more seasons or more. Which leads to another question.

Do you want to waste another couple seasons on a defense rebuild that you're speaking of, wasting more prime years of the top stars?

The picking heavy on Defense seems to be keeping the ones you have the highest hope for and the rest are trading chips for what you need.

Balance is key, but that balance can be disrupted easily with injuries, moreso at forward. Now why's that? Because their cap dollars are allocated there more. It's the only place on the roster that can absorb the top heavy contracts due to sheer numbers.

Point 1: Despres could have been. Maatta could be by the end of the season.

Point 2: Why if I say 'on a perfectly healthy roster, only 1 of the 4 young Pens capable of being in the starting 6 dresses' and I then say 'we should have 2 and could have 3' do you then say I want all young kids in there. It's like RRP, when I talk about risking more than futures in a trade, bemoans going full homer. There's a middle ground. Shero drafted all these guys so there COULD be a middle ground. It's not an either/or proposition.

Point 3: The last time the Pens 'won now', it was with several ELC's on the roster. Win now and young players on ELC's are NOT an either/or proposition.

Point 4: Brooks Orpik and Matt Niskanen. One could argue that say Despres and Bortuzzo aren't as good. BUT, that really isn't and shouldn't be the question: The question should be are you better off with Orpik, Niskanen, Kobasew, and D'Agostini OR Despres, Bortuzzo, what you could get for Orpik, and what you could get for Niskanen. Or, you could just take Orpik out of the equation.

Point 5: Once again, a straw man. See point 1.

Balance? Once again, in a cap era, SOMETHING has to give. Do you make Sid and Geno make due with less? Do you cut corners on the bottom six? Do you cut corners on defense? Do you cut corners in goal? IMO, WHERE you cut corners depends upon where you focus your drafting. Look at Chicago. They've been drafting forwards, and look at the number of ELC guys they've got up front. It allows them to take care of Toews and Kane and spend more on defense.

Shero has been drafting defense. But, instead of doing what Chicago (and a team like San Jose last year) did, he refuses to leverage this strategy and instead has scrimped on his forwards, which is the weakest area of his drafting to begin with.

Speaking of the forwards, do you really see the Pens top 12 as 'balanced' when everyone is healthy? Perhaps you do. Just as perhaps as some see how the Pens handle their young D as being synonymous with being in 'win now' mode.

 

[TheBeardofJustice]

This has been addressed.

Unless you toss them into the fire and deal with their growing pains, prospects are not worth a warm cup of spit. Just think back to Goligoski and even Letang when they first came to the Pens, and for their first two years, when they were downright brutal with turnovers, etc.

Once you actual develop them, and they prove that they can cut it at the NHL level, sure they have some real value. Until then? Not so much.

That is the inherent flaw in the Shero model.

He never grew out of it.

 

[WayneSid9987]

The roster still isn't built correctly though.

Scuderi and 1 of Orpik or Martin with Letang SHOULD be plenty to start off with in terms of cutting $ in the right spots with the cap crunch.

Even if KCD gets shutdown in a playoffs series, you can beef up your roster so you don't have to lean on that line so much when the games count.

As for the Op's question:
I'd probably fire an assistant and put J.Martin behind the bench with a more expanded role.

 

[KIRK]

This has been addressed.

Unless you toss them into the fire and deal with their growing pains, prospects are not worth a warm cup of spit. Just think back to Goligoski and even Letang when they first came to the Pens, and for their first two years, when they were downright brutal with turnovers, etc.

Once you actual develop them, and they prove that they can cut it at the NHL level, sure they have some real value. Until then? Not so much.

That is the inherent flaw in the Shero model.

No, there's no inherent flaw in the Shero model. It's actually really smart. The flaw lies in its execution. We should've spent the last two years grooming Despres to take Orpik's spot now, so we could've moved Orpik this last summer to address, UM's opinion notwithstanding, the lack of balance up front.

Thankfully, we're doing the same with Maatta, but it should be Maatta and Borts. Who knows, maybe you'll feel comfortable enough with one of them by the deadline to consider moving someone other than Niskanen this season. Because of how things have been handled, it's a lot harder to consider (i.e., the risk of such a move is greater than it should've been).

I would like to hear Shero talk less about Detroit in terms of modeling the franchise and more about Chicago. Ya know, the team that has won two Cups in the last three calendar years and is set up as strong as ever.

But I have no problem with Shero's drafting strategy. Maatta has the look of an elite D-man. Already a regular in the line up at 19. Possibly a partner for Letang as soon as next season. It's up to Ray to take advantage of what that means for our cap situation. And for DB to properly incorporate the new players in the coming years, i.e., vets get lesser roles as better players come up the pipeline or via trade.

As I said, it's the execution, not the plan. But, Maatta may be the first positive sign from Bylsma. I wonder if we're hanging our hats on the one time he's gotten it right a little too much.

 

[KIRK]

He never grew out of it.

No, it's why I love the **** on Despres fest. The sheer hypocrisy of it. I mean, think about it: If Dan Bylsma is coach in 2007 when Letang is recalled, does he stay, or does he mistake his way back to WBS? The evidence suggests the latter.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

No, there's no inherent flaw in the Shero model. It's actually really smart. The flaw lies in its execution. We should've spent the last two years grooming Despres to take Orpik's spot now, so we could've moved Orpik this last summer to address, UM's opinion notwithstanding, the lack of balance up front.

Thankfully, we're doing the same with Maatta, but it should be Maatta and Borts. Who knows, maybe you'll feel comfortable enough with one of them by the deadline to consider moving someone other than Niskanen this season. Because of how things have been handled, it's a lot harder to consider (i.e., the risk of such a move is greater than it should've been).

Granted.

To a degree.

It is a tough balancing act for a team with the two most talented players in hockey in their prime. You generally do not want to develop players in key defensive positions if you are in a win now for the most part mind set. Not merely as trade bait replacements anyways. Defensemen generally take longer to learn their craft than forwards from everything that I have read, so far better to develop your own forwards internally.

 

[KIRK]

Granted.

To a degree.

It is a tough balancing act for a team with the two most talented players in hockey in their prime. You generally do not want to develop players in key defensive positions if you are in a win now for the most part mind set. Not merely as trade bait replacements anyways. Defensemen generally take longer to learn their craft than forwards from everything that I have read, so far better to develop your own forwards internally.

There's no excuse not to move Niskanen. If Despres had been handled properly, there might be an excellent case to move Orpik.

That said, here's your other problem: The Pens have allocated 7.5M to Sid's wingers. Can you think of a worse way to have spent it than Shero has?

Bottom six is just a jumbled mess. Personally, I wouldn't mind something more like the Carlyle model where he doesn't roll four lines and has two scoring lines and a defensive line. I wouldn't be spending a dime over 2M for my fourth line on a team like this. Go energy guys. Something like Sill-Vitale-Scrabbles would've made too much sense.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

This has been addressed.

Unless you toss them into the fire and deal with their growing pains, prospects are not worth a warm cup of spit. Just think back to Goligoski and even Letang when they first came to the Pens, and for their first two years, when they were downright brutal with turnovers, etc.

Once you actual develop them, and they prove that they can cut it at the NHL level, sure they have some real value. Until then? Not so much.

That is the inherent flaw in the Shero model.

What are you talking about? Hoarding those defensemen prospects yielded a superstar forward in Brenden Morrow!

Personally, I can't wait until Pouliot lands us Dan Cleary at the trade deadline.

 

[KIRK]

What are you talking about? Hoarding those defensemen prospects yielded a superstar forward in Brenden Morrow!

Personally, I can't wait until Pouliot lands us Dan Cleary at the trade deadline.

I'd admonish you for your hyperbole if it were further from the truth than much closer to it.

 

[Ugene Magic]

This has been addressed.

Unless you toss them into the fire and deal with their growing pains, prospects are not worth a warm cup of spit. Just think back to Goligoski and even Letang when they first came to the Pens, and for their first two years, when they were downright brutal with turnovers, etc.

Once you actual develop them, and they prove that they can cut it at the NHL level, sure they have some real value. Until then? Not so much.

That is the inherent flaw in the Shero model.

But they are, and these guys are getting the same treatment.

Point 1: Despres could have been. Maatta could be by the end of the season.

Point 2: Why if I say 'on a perfectly healthy roster, only 1 of the 4 young Pens capable of being in the starting 6 dresses' and I then say 'we should have 2 and could have 3' do you then say I want all young kids in there. It's like RRP, when I talk about risking more than futures in a trade, bemoans going full homer. There's a middle ground. Shero drafted all these guys so there COULD be a middle ground. It's not an either/or proposition.

Point 3: The last time the Pens 'won now', it was with several ELC's on the roster. Win now and young players on ELC's are NOT an either/or proposition.

Point 4: Brooks Orpik and Matt Niskanen. One could argue that say Despres and Bortuzzo aren't as good. BUT, that really isn't and shouldn't be the question: The question should be are you better off with Orpik, Niskanen, Kobasew, and D'Agostini OR Despres, Bortuzzo, what you could get for Orpik, and what you could get for Niskanen. Or, you could just take Orpik out of the equation.

Point 5: Once again, a straw man. See point 1.

Balance? Once again, in a cap era, SOMETHING has to give. Do you make Sid and Geno make due with less? Do you cut corners on the bottom six? Do you cut corners on defense? Do you cut corners in goal? IMO, WHERE you cut corners depends upon where you focus your drafting. Look at Chicago. They've been drafting forwards, and look at the number of ELC guys they've got up front. It allows them to take care of Toews and Kane and spend more on defense.

Shero has been drafting defense. But, instead of doing what Chicago (and a team like San Jose last year) did, he refuses to leverage this strategy and instead has scrimped on his forwards, which is the weakest area of his drafting to begin with.

Speaking of the forwards, do you really see the Pens top 12 as 'balanced' when everyone is healthy? Perhaps you do. Just as perhaps as some see how the Pens handle their young D as being synonymous with being in 'win now' mode.

1. Yes, if you're talking, Niskanen for Despres. Maatta could by the end of the season because he has shown much better traits than any of the rest.

2. When you're talking seriously competing for a cup 2/3 rookies/young guys with little to no experience would certainly speak to a either/or.

3. How much did those players actually play? Their future best got benched for the first finals and the other never really saw action at all, 2 games the second playoffs where they won the cup, Goligoski played a whole two games those playoffs. You can't be using Crosby's and Malkin's ELC's to push your agenda, it's not quite the same thing as what they're going through now, and win now has them on high contacts, unless you want to trade them so we can have ELC's in their place? These are totally different sides of the spectrum here. You can either have them, or ELC's, which is it?

4. This one's mind boggling you even suggest it knowing these guys have very little to no experience, to win now, yes, you keep, Orpik.

5. Strawman? Facts are hard to take.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Before we get too depressed, a revisit to a young Crosby for the fun of it.

 

[KIRK]

But they are, and these guys are getting the same treatment.

Borts is getting the same treatment as Gologoski or Letang? If he were, then Nisky would've been jettisoned.

 

[KIRK]

Before we get too depressed, a revisit to a young Crosby for the fun of it.

Actually, it depressed me to think that a dryer is every bit as useful a linemate as the ones Sid actually has.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Actually, it depressed me to think that a dryer is every bit as useful a linemate as the ones Sid actually has.

Crosby's parents' dryer is a better net front presence than Kunitz.

 

[ObsessedCreative*]

OKay?! Hell, I'd be ecstatic. I hoped & even called for this before the season started.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Point 2: Why if I say 'on a perfectly healthy roster, only 1 of the 4 young Pens capable of being in the starting 6 dresses' and I then say 'we should have 2 and could have 3' do you then say I want all young kids in there. It's like RRP, when I talk about risking more than futures in a trade, bemoans going full homer. There's a middle ground. Shero drafted all these guys so there COULD be a middle ground. It's not an either/or proposition.

No, there's not KIRK. Any time somebody mentions a trade where Shero has traded more than futures, you try to find a new ad hoc way to re-categorize it so it doesn't qualify.

Goligoski? "Oh, that was a no-brainer."
Staal? "He was forced to trade him."
Michalek? God knows why dealing a top 4 defenseman so he could have cap space to pursue a star winger doesn't qualify.

Point 3: The last time the Pens 'won now', it was with several ELC's on the roster. Win now and young players on ELC's are NOT an either/or proposition.

Can you kindly name those players on ELCs?

Shero has been drafting defense. But, instead of doing what Chicago (and a team like San Jose last year) did, he refuses to leverage this strategy and instead has scrimped on his forwards, which is the weakest area of his drafting to begin with.

Oh, a lack of scoring forwards was our problem last year?

News to me.

 

[Le Magnifique 66]

Absolutely not, at the end of the day I just don't want to see this team lose! Don't really care who coaches this team

 

[Darth Vitale]

I don't know much about Forsberg scouting wise, but I think Forsberg has more offensive upside than Kobasew or Jokinen. So yeah, I'd love to have Forsberg here.

Yes he's got a lot more upside than Kobasew, but that's not my point. Wingerz was inferring that had Shero just done a better job of drafting at the #8 pick and/or kept Tyler Kennedy and/or [insert simplistic complaint here], that we would not be having the same problems as a team right now. I'm saying we would. I'm saying there's not a single F drafted in the Top 10 since Taylor Hall roughly, who would've brought enough to this team the last couple years to "solve our problems". Most rookie F, even really talented ones, wouldn't get a sniff of our top lines, and they don't on most other teams either. See also: Nathan MacKinnon, Drouin, etc.

People BADLY overestimate the value in the short term, of picking a "flashy rookie F prospect" in the draft. Badly.
Most of those kids do NOT make their teams better initially, unless the team really sucks. And even then not (see also: every "great player" drafted by Florida in the last 3 years and TB this year). Those kinds of players take time to develop and slot into the Top 6. They would solve almost nothing IMO, based on what our actual problems are.

Especially a kid like Forsberg who was a more risky pick and is not known for being defensively responsible. We lucked out with Bennett in the sense that he does everything well and took very little time to adjust. That's the exception with rookie F, not the rule. You can't just say "well we'd have two Bennett-like players if only we'd picked Forsberg or traded for Tarasenko" or whatever. Doesn't work that way.

He's putting up far better numbers in the NHL than Pouiliot. I thought the whole justification in drafting DP was to take over for Letang?.

How can you compare them?? One's a PPQB in the WHL, one's learning to be a F in the NHL. And the second part is a perfect example of an HFB Brain Fart. Where did you get THAT from? There was not a single person in our organization who suggested Pouliot was chosen to replace Kris Letang. So because some people in here made superficial correlations between Pouliot's game and deficiencies in Letang's game sometimes, you not only assume he was the wrong player to draft, but the wrong reason for drafting him. For better or worse the Pens picked Pouliot (and Maatta and all their other picks) because they are a BPA team. They don't draft for positional need [except] when the need is getting more goalies in the system.

Stop using simplistic assumptions about why guys were picked or weren't picked, unless you have [real] information about that from our scouts or other people not named in the Trib Media guide. Because they don't know **** either.

I just don't see how any fan can honesty be happy with shero at this point.

That's because you're selectively ignoring every good thing he's done when making your analysis. While Bylsma is arguably not a good coach sometimes / not good at certain coaching tasks, Ray Shero is one of the best GMs in hockey and pretty much any other GM would tell you that I wager. He's made some mistakes but they're the same kind of mistakes ALL GMs make when trying to keep 3 or 4 high profile players and build around them in a cap situation.

I got much more enjoyment from watching this team under MT, and that is saying something.

It's tough to enjoy when on the bad days, it's the same mistakes over and over. That's what bugs me. All good teams lose games and go on losing streaks. Not all good teams make the same mistakes repeatedly.

C'mon, DV, you can't compare to what other GM's did because part of that is assessing what their other options are or what they chose not to do....

You had a nice post and I'll grant you two points: you can argue there's no excuse for having kept Bylsma and his staff this summer, and you can argue he should not have signed BOTH Dupuis and [Kunitz] into "late 30s" contracts. One or the other maybe. And ironically you can argue he should not have kept Fleury, but good thing he did eh? He knew better than all of us on that one.

On balance Shero has done a good job with personnel and a mediocre to poor job with the coaching situation, as of the last two years.

 

[Houston Penguin]

Sid and Geno are in the prime of their careers. That's why we're in win now mode. It's not hard to understand.

If DP reaches his potential, then yes he'll fill a need. However, that'll not be till Sid and Geno are in their 30s. The reason Olli made the team is because his defense is NHL ready. DP's defense needs a lot of work till it' at NHL levels. If you think DP will step in to be the Pens' PPQB next year, you're gonna be disappointed.

FF's done about as much as BB at this point, just at a younger age.

Over the past two seasons there have been many wingers that signed for 6M or less. Look them up for yourself, I'm not gonna list them all: http://capgeek.com/latest-contracts/?listing_type=latest&contract_limit=150

As for a trade; Seto was moved for a 2nd, which Shero could have easily beaten. IIRC there was also talk of a Orpik/Stewart deal when Stew was getting scratched by Hitch and before their young D were playing.

And isn't Shero supposed to be "the best trading GM in the league"? You'd think he could turn some of our plethora of Dmen into a top 9 winger.

So, a 1st for Setoguchi (excuse me while I barf at a guy who was recently scratched by Winnipeg) and moving Orpik for Stewart, which St. Louis never wanted to do as they re-signed Stewart .... got it.

At least you tried.

And one winger under 6M .... sure .... I was asking about two under 7M.

And if Bennett and FF are at the same spot, why are we having this conversation ... we have our FF in Bennett!

 

[Ragamuffin Gunner]

So, a 1st for Setoguchi (excuse me while I barf at a guy who was recently scratched by Winnipeg) and moving Orpik for Stewart, which St. Louis never wanted to do as they re-signed Stewart .... got it.

At least you tried.

And one winger under 6M .... sure .... I was asking about two under 7M.

And if Bennett and FF are at the same spot, why are we having this conversation ... we have our FF in Bennett!

No, it'd be Nisky for Seto, not a 1st.

And you do realize that there are 4 top 6 wingers not 1, right?

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Niskanen for Setoguchi wouldn't happen. Minnesota was dumping salary.

How many times do people have to explain why certain trades were never going to happen before you stop bringing them up?

 

[AquaticBirdman]

My answer is "no". Why? Because the only "extended losing streak" that would be severe enough to get Bylsma canned is one that would jeopardize our playoff hopes (like what happened to Therrien). Personally I don't want to have to flirt with that possibility just to see a coach get canned. Unfortunately Shero is so bloody patient with these things that he would need to literally have his hand forced into pulling the plug on DB...

 

[Ragamuffin Gunner]

Niskanen for Setoguchi wouldn't happen. Minnesota was dumping salary.

How many times do people have to explain why certain trades were never going to happen before you stop bringing them up?

Seto makes 3M, Nisky 2.3M. Minny also went out and signed a recently bought out Ballard for 1.5M.

I guess people will keep bringing up these trades as long as people keep asking "who could Shero trade for?" and pretending like there was no possible move that the "best trading GM in the league" could make to upgrade our top 9.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Seto makes 3M, Nisky 2.3M. Minny also went out and signed a recently bought out Ballard for 1.5M.

I guess people will keep bringing up these trades as long as people keep asking "who could Shero trade for?" and pretending like there was no possible move that the "best trading GM in the league" could make to upgrade our top 9.

That's not nearly enough off the cap. Minnesota traded Clutterbuck because they couldn't afford to re-sign him due to the cap. They also bought out Tom Gilbert's $4 million dollar salary. When of became clear they couldn't buy out Heatley, they were in serious cap trouble. They had to do a lot of work to free up the room they had for Cooke and Ballard. Niskanen and $700,000 in cap relief would not have worked for them.