Salary Cap: Pens Salary Cap Thread: Dr Strangedubas "Tankination" is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face."

[wheelz87]

(I’ll take the hate, whatever).
I’d go Ned and MAF. Blomqvist as backup option if MAF collapses. Which I doubt but regardless.
That’s maybe only 5 mil combined in goaltending.

 

[Empoleon8771]

If we are going to acquire Campbell, I'd rather just keep Jarry lol.

My concern with keeping Jarry is mostly that they'd play him as the starter just because he has the contract of a starter. I'd be fine with moving him for a less expensive backup/1B and a pick just to be sure that they wouldn't force Jarry to be their starter.

A partial appeal with Campbell is that if he sucks, I'm not nervous about them throwing him on waivers. I'd much rather go for a better goalie than Campbell as the 1B back for Jarry, but the concept would be trading Jarry for a less expensive 1B.

 

[BusinessGoose]

(I’ll take the hate, whatever).
I’d go Ned and MAF. Blomqvist as backup option if MAF collapses. Which I doubt but regardless.
That’s maybe only 5 mil combined in goaltending.

I hate MAF

But if he was available at a very team friendly discount I wouldn't say no. He's not even great anymore, but whatever.

 

[SEALBound]

Jarry to Edmonton does make sense but I don't know if they have what I would want in order to take on Campbell. I don't even know what that trade would look like.

 

[Pancakes]

I'm kinda skeptical about running with Ned as the starter long term but I am sick and tired of Jarry so I'd almost take anyone else at this point.

 

[SEALBound]

I'm kinda skeptical about running with Ned as the starter long term but I am sick and tired of Jarry so I'd almost take anyone else at this point.

I think the idea would be that you run Neds as the starter for 1-2 years while Blomqvist backs up and develops into the starter. Ideally:

24-25: Neds 50; Blom 30
25-26: Neds 41; Blom 41
26-27: Neds 20; Blom 62

Something like that. Then Neds deal will be up, Blom will be off his ELC, and you run with a new starter. Sans Murashov coming in as Vasi 2.0.

 

[Gurglesons]

I'm kinda skeptical about running with Ned as the starter long term but I am sick and tired of Jarry so I'd almost take anyone else at this point.

I'd take Ned over a goaltender with injury issues who has gotten worse every year over the last 3.

 

[SEALBound]

I'd take Ned over a goaltender with injury issues who has gotten worse every year over the last 3.

I would just say "one who appears to be rising to the occasion vs crumbling when it counts".

Of course that's not the best tag line if we are trying to trade him.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

I would just say "one who appears to be rising to the occasion vs crumbling when it counts".

Of course that's not the best tag line if we are trying to trade him.

Yeah however you feel about goaltending in general and Jarry vs. Ned in particular... it doesn't make any sense to be committing a decently lucrative contract at a rather questionable position to a guy who just can't make it happen for one reason or another when you actually need him. If he had ever done a thing in the playoffs maybe I'd feel a bit different. But, well...

 

[HandshakeLine]

I would just say "one who appears to be rising to the occasion vs crumbling when it counts".

Of course that's not the best tag line if we are trying to trade him.

I honestly don't think it'd be THAT hard to trade Jarry if the FO wanted to-- he's a good stickhandler, he's had an all-star nomination already, the goal-- someone is clearly going to think they can "fix" him.

But the problem is, as with many things with this team, I don't think the FO thinks Jarry is a problem or wants to trade him.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

I would def move Jarry for cap reasons. But I wouldn’t go super high or super long to keep Ned. 3M x 2 is probably my max offer.

 

[chethejet]

If Jarry can bring in much needed prospects to deepen the talent pool fine. But not projects as much as upgraded talent at RD and center for sure. Also since I am in the camp rust and Karlsson will be traded after next year for picks/prospects plus a potential number 1 pick if Pens lose the pick this year,

 

[HandshakeLine]

I don't think you even care what Jarry brings back as long as he's not retained.

 

[SEALBound]

Yeah however you feel about goaltending in general and Jarry vs. Ned in particular... it doesn't make any sense to be committing a decently lucrative contract at a rather questionable position to a guy who just can't make it happen for one reason or another when you actually need him. If he had ever done a thing in the playoffs maybe I'd feel a bit different. But, well...

It was a stinker of a contract no matter what. With a goalie, you either give money or term. It kills teams when they give both. I don't know have many times GMs have to get burned with anchor goalie contracts before they figure out they shouldn't - Dubas in particular.

I honestly don't think it'd be THAT hard to trade Jarry if the FO wanted to-- he's a good stickhandler, he's had an all-star nomination already, the goal-- someone is clearly going to think they can "fix" him.

But the problem is, as with many things with this team, I don't think the FO thinks Jarry is a problem or wants to trade him.

Oh I do think he's tradeable for sure. I think a selling point would actually be the Penguins questionable defensive system. I don't think it's a stretch to say that is Jarry was in a nicely structured defensive system like in NJ or Carolina, that he would do quite well. He's still young for a goalie and signed a "fair" deal if he reliably performed the way he is capable of. Value is not a vacuum and different players have different values to different teams. I think Jarry could be of better value to other teams that are looking such as LA or NJ.

I think if you're Dubas and you really want to retool the roster and need capital to do so (because you intend on competing next year), Jarry is a good candidate to part with. Especially if Neds will come back and you have faith in Blomqvist.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

I honestly don't think it'd be THAT hard to trade Jarry if the FO wanted to-- he's a good stickhandler, he's had an all-star nomination already, the goal-- someone is clearly going to think they can "fix" him.

But the problem is, as with many things with this team, I don't think the FO thinks Jarry is a problem or wants to trade him.

I have to imagine they’d be able to move him. The UFA class is so miserable that Ned might be the cream of the crop.

 

[Darren McCord]

I think the idea would be that you run Neds as the starter for 1-2 years while Blomqvist backs up and develops into the starter. Ideally:

24-25: Neds 50; Blom 30
25-26: Neds 41; Blom 41
26-27: Neds 20; Blom 62

Something like that. Then Neds deal will be up, Blom will be off his ELC, and you run with a new starter. Sans Murashov coming in as Vasi 2.0.

Then Murashov comes over and steals the number 1 spot

 

[HandshakeLine]

It was a stinker of a contract no matter what. With a goalie, you either give money or term. It kills teams when they give both. I don't know have many times GMs have to get burned with anchor goalie contracts before they figure out they shouldn't - Dubas in particular.

Oh I do think he's tradeable for sure. I think a selling point would actually be the Penguins questionable defensive system. I don't think it's a stretch to say that is Jarry was in a nicely structured defensive system like in NJ or Carolina, that he would do quite well. He's still young for a goalie and signed a "fair" deal if he reliably performed the way he is capable of. Value is not a vacuum and different players have different values to different teams. I think Jarry could be of better value to other teams that are looking such as LA or NJ.

I think if you're Dubas and you really want to retool the roster and need capital to do so (because you intend on competing next year), Jarry is a good candidate to part with. Especially if Neds will come back and you have faith in Blomqvist.

Yeah, really the only thing IMO keeping Jarry here is the organization itself. Despite our skepticism of him someone would certainly be willing to take a chance on him, but again, the organization has to want to make the trade in the first place. That's the really the crux of so many issues with this team: it's not that there aren't moves to make, it's that the team doesn't want to make them.

 

[Gurglesons]

Second time Jake has brought up how well coached the canes are.

Hmmmmm

 

[HandshakeLine]

Second time Jake has brought up how well coached the canes are.

Hmmmmm

Clearly only because he stole Coach S’s top secret playbook on the way out the door.

 

[Ryder71]

Sullivan will remain Pittsburgh's coach next season. No matter how much everyone belly aches. Don't you guys get tired of complaining as if it'll change anything. Maybe a month or two, but this is like four or five years of this.

We get it, he's not well liked in this forum. But at this point talking about it seems futile. Sometimes you just need to accept what is. If I can do it so can you.

 

[66-30-33]

Sullivan will remain Pittsburgh's coach next season. No matter how much everyone belly aches. Don't you guys get tired of complaining as if it'll change anything. Maybe a month or two, but this is like four or five years of this.

We get it, he's not well liked in this forum. But at this point talking about it seems futile.

What else are we going to talk about? player X needs to play better even though he's doing good but given 5 minutes ice time while player Z sucks a big fat donkey dick and gets 15-16 minutes ice time? There is not much else to talk about because all Sully does is f*** things up....example Eller/DOC in OT which cost us the game. Everything circles back to Sullivan. We can talk about the team not coming out of periods playing well, but again that's on Sully not doing his job.

 

[Ryder71]

What else are we going to talk about? player X needs to play better even though he's doing good but given 5 minutes ice time while player Z sucks a big fat donkey dick and gets 15-16 minutes ice time? There is not much else to talk about because all Sully does is f*** things up....example Eller/DOC in OT which cost us the game. Everything circles back to Sullivan. We can talk about the team not coming out of periods playing well, but again that's on Sully not doing his job.

I don't think it was a f*** up. Sids numbers in OT are pretty bad actually. When Sid was on the ice we are 0-5 in OT. And Geno can't win a face off to save his life. He's improved but he still isn't exactly clutch in that regard. There's no guarantee with either of those guys starting we'd win.

Complaining bout Sully for years upon years is just futile. When he's removed he's removed.

I still remember Letang giving the puck to McDavid 68 secs into a game not long ago. I can't imagine Sullivan telling Letang to do that. Sometimes the players are at fault.

 

[66-30-33]

I don't think it was a f*** up. Sids numbers in OT are pretty bad actually. When Sid was on the ice we are 0-5 in OT. And Geno can't win a face off to save his life. He's improved but he still isn't exactly clutch in that regard. There's no guarantee with either of those guys starting we'd win.

You still go with your best players, even if you lose with them. If we lost with Crosby/Malkin? i'm fine with it. Not putting Eller/DOC in, we had no chance at all with them.

 

[Ryder71]

You still go with your best players, even if you lose with them. If we lost with Crosby/Malkin? i'm fine with it. Not putting Eller/DOC in, we had no chance at all with them.

That's not true. if we would have lost then there would be another reason Sully squandered it for us.

The players, Letang and EK in particular have bad moments that have cost this team dearly, maybe look at them a bit.

 

[Ryder71]

The core wants him around, when you going to blame them for that?

If Sids here, Sully likely is as well. Do you want Sid and Sullivan or neither? That's very likely what you're looking at.