Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

mikey287 wrote:It's no scarier than what we have now. Again, I'm not going to sit here and predict the free agent additions or trades we make. But in terms of fitting the players we draft organizationally, we can do it. That was my point. Obviously, I'd add some punch to it...but I'm just saying, we shouldn't be panicked about having "too many quality d-men" which is apparently a scary thought for some...
Yes, I agree, that defense is pretty weak in terms of toughness...but that's what free agency and trades are for...

Steve wrote:Mikey - thanks for all of the info. I don't understand at all (from others) how it can be a problem to have too many defensive prospects...I'm really looking forward to watching these guys develop, to see how they pan out. I'll definately be paying more attention than I have in the past, with our prospects...
Anyway, my only concern would be if too many of these guys ended up in the same place at the same time - say Wilkes-Barre, where you'd have trouble carving up ice time in key situations for all of them. I haven't looked into this, but I'm assuming that's not an issue now, since they will be spread out in juniors, college etc. Do you see this as an issue at all?

mikey287 wrote:It's no scarier than what we have now. Again, I'm not going to sit here and predict the free agent additions or trades we make. But in terms of fitting the players we draft organizationally, we can do it. That was my point. Obviously, I'd add some punch to it...but I'm just saying, we shouldn't be panicked about having "too many quality d-men" which is apparently a scary thought for some...
Yes, I agree, that defense is pretty weak in terms of toughness...but that's what free agency and trades are for...


steelhammer wrote:mikey287 wrote:It's no scarier than what we have now. Again, I'm not going to sit here and predict the free agent additions or trades we make. But in terms of fitting the players we draft organizationally, we can do it. That was my point. Obviously, I'd add some punch to it...but I'm just saying, we shouldn't be panicked about having "too many quality d-men" which is apparently a scary thought for some...
Yes, I agree, that defense is pretty weak in terms of toughness...but that's what free agency and trades are for...
There is a difference between quality d-men and a bunch of offensive and or hybrid d-men. You can only have so many of the latter two in any given lineup and expect to be successful (re: prevent goals).

Nizzy wrote:Mikey,
Awesome post. I think its a joke to put Lovejoy over Strait/Bortuzzo going forward but thats just me being picky.
Is it possible our defense could get too young?
I like Letang - Despres, Orpik - Martin more.

mikey287 wrote:Nizzy wrote:Mikey,
Awesome post. I think its a joke to put Lovejoy over Strait/Bortuzzo going forward but thats just me being picky.
Is it possible our defense could get too young?
I like Letang - Despres, Orpik - Martin more.
Ok, switch'em, I don't care. A 6/7 is a 6/7 is a 6/7...
If you feel you have too young of a defense, just add a veteran piece at the deadline or via free agency. Common practice.
Young team:
Crosby, Malkin, Staal, Letang, Goligoski, Whitney, Kennedy, Fleury, Talbot
Cup team:
Crosby, Malkin, Staal, Letang, Goligoski, Whitney, Kennedy, Fleury, Talbot + Gonchar, Kunitz, Guerin, Gill, Fedotenko, Cooke, Adams, Garon
I'd say Shero understands this fairly well.


mikey287 wrote:Well, so far we've ventured not more than two years into the future...so I find it odd that we would need to sign 12 UFAs...
We already drafted forwards for a long stretch, those players are in the lineup still...in two years, we'll still have: Crosby, Malkin, Neal, Sutter for sure...we'll still have the option to keep Kunitz, the option to keep Kennedy, Cooke, Dupuis, Glass, perhaps Tangradi...Bennett will be here if he pans out, Uher looks pretty good, Marcantouni will be turning pro...Zlobin will turn pro in one year because we drafted him at 19...but the idea is that the core will still very much be intact.
Drafting a forward in 2012 does nothing for 2014 in most cases. I mean, I get it, I don't like to have a big hole in the organizational depth chart either...but what if we use our first 3 picks on forwards in the next draft and sign an overage college FA or something...is that better? Because we can still do that...
I think your point would be better served if we had an older lineup and needed to start getting the "next in line" ready...but that's not the case...it would also be better served if we didn't just put together the league's best defensive prospect pool in the league (and I don't say that without knowledge of the other 29 either)...so, next, we'll start working on forwards...we used a 2nd round pick on a project, we used a first a couple years ago, Agostino isn't looking bad, we drafted what should have been a first round pick in Marcantuoni last draft, we got a "head start" on a kid at 19, so he can join the AHL a year sooner than his draft class in Zlobin...I mean, we're working on it...this was bad draft for forwards below Yakupov and Galchenyuk...a lot of future 3rd liners were taken in the first round (Wilson, Gaunce, etc.)...by drafting a future 3rd liner at 22, does that make us better? You happier?
I'd say you should stop focusing so much on where we drafted and who we didn't draft in which spots and focus on what we do have...if we drafted Marcantuoni at 22, is this is a discussion right now? Forwards are easy to find and easy to replace...sure, I'd like it if we had creative scouts that sought out undrafted players from all over the world and brought them in - instead of finding Zach Sill's and Adam Payerl's - but whatever...but I mean, why don't we just see what the next draft brings...I'm not alarmed, you shouldn't be either...we're alright, we're doing this the right way...



mikey287 wrote:Ok, I'm getting very confused now because you're speaking in hyperbole and it's confusing and muddling the issue...
Let's just take a breath here for a second...ok, now just nice and easy, what is your concern for next season? What do you think is going to happen? Reasonably and realistically...what is going to happen that you are in such a panic about?

Idoit40fans wrote:I understand that you're subtracting 6 skaters from the roster and being left with 12 other skaters and the math of coming up with 67%, but how are you seriously coming up with 67%? Crosby is signed for eternity, Malkin will be kept beyond this contract, Neal and Sutter are signed for quite a while. That leaves 8 players of 18 skaters. Thats what? like 45%? Now you factor in the bottom lines that the Pens will be able to fill out within their organization, lets say just the very bottom line. Three more players. Now you're down to 5 spots. Less than 30% of your roster. Drop this 67% crap.

BurghersAndDogsSports wrote:Idoit40fans wrote:I understand that you're subtracting 6 skaters from the roster and being left with 12 other skaters and the math of coming up with 67%, but how are you seriously coming up with 67%? Crosby is signed for eternity, Malkin will be kept beyond this contract, Neal and Sutter are signed for quite a while. That leaves 8 players of 18 skaters. Thats what? like 45%? Now you factor in the bottom lines that the Pens will be able to fill out within their organization, lets say just the very bottom line. Three more players. Now you're down to 5 spots. Less than 30% of your roster. Drop this 67% crap.
No, if you really read what I wrote I was pointing out that they ignored a position that counts 67% of your roster (meaning skaters). I wasnt referring to how many we already had signed. You dont draft goalies more there here or there or even every few drafts.
Just by dumb math if you need to fill out 67% of your roster with forwards you think you would want a few of them in the system.
And honestly your math doesnt account for d-men we have signed to similar for the near future, so in reality for the near future we need to fill out
about 73% of our roster if you go by open spots.
And you cant count guys who are "going to fill in", thats kind of the point of the open spots.

Idoit40fans wrote:BurghersAndDogsSports wrote:Idoit40fans wrote:I understand that you're subtracting 6 skaters from the roster and being left with 12 other skaters and the math of coming up with 67%, but how are you seriously coming up with 67%? Crosby is signed for eternity, Malkin will be kept beyond this contract, Neal and Sutter are signed for quite a while. That leaves 8 players of 18 skaters. Thats what? like 45%? Now you factor in the bottom lines that the Pens will be able to fill out within their organization, lets say just the very bottom line. Three more players. Now you're down to 5 spots. Less than 30% of your roster. Drop this 67% crap.
No, if you really read what I wrote I was pointing out that they ignored a position that counts 67% of your roster (meaning skaters). I wasnt referring to how many we already had signed. You dont draft goalies more there here or there or even every few drafts.
Just by dumb math if you need to fill out 67% of your roster with forwards you think you would want a few of them in the system.
And honestly your math doesnt account for d-men we have signed to similar for the near future, so in reality for the near future we need to fill out
about 73% of our roster if you go by open spots.
And you cant count guys who are "going to fill in", thats kind of the point of the open spots.
I agree they need more of them in the system, but that is not the reason. You can ignore what they have all you want, but the reality is that they have 4 important forward spots on the NHL roster that they control for quite a while...barring Malkin's Soviet brainwashing kicking in.
and how many times are you going to contradict yourself? Are you adding in the defensive positions now? Thats not an issue, as thats the strength in their system, I thought you were arguing that you want the team to be able to backfill from other levels of the organization. I don't understand what you are arguing at all.



mikey287 wrote:Well, so far we've ventured not more than two years into the future...so I find it odd that we would need to sign 12 UFAs...
We already drafted forwards for a long stretch, those players are in the lineup still...in two years, we'll still have: Crosby, Malkin, Neal, Sutter for sure...we'll still have the option to keep Kunitz, the option to keep Kennedy, Cooke, Dupuis, Glass, perhaps Tangradi...Bennett will be here if he pans out, Uher looks pretty good, Marcantouni will be turning pro...Zlobin will turn pro in one year because we drafted him at 19...but the idea is that the core will still very much be intact.
Drafting a forward in 2012 does nothing for 2014 in most cases. I mean, I get it, I don't like to have a big hole in the organizational depth chart either...but what if we use our first 3 picks on forwards in the next draft and sign an overage college FA or something...is that better? Because we can still do that...
I think your point would be better served if we had an older lineup and needed to start getting the "next in line" ready...but that's not the case...it would also be better served if we didn't just put together the league's best defensive prospect pool in the league (and I don't say that without knowledge of the other 29 either)...so, next, we'll start working on forwards...we used a 2nd round pick on a project, we used a first a couple years ago, Agostino isn't looking bad, we drafted what should have been a first round pick in Marcantuoni last draft, we got a "head start" on a kid at 19, so he can join the AHL a year sooner than his draft class in Zlobin...I mean, we're working on it...this was bad draft for forwards below Yakupov and Galchenyuk...a lot of future 3rd liners were taken in the first round (Wilson, Gaunce, etc.)...by drafting a future 3rd liner at 22, does that make us better? You happier?
I'd say you should stop focusing so much on where we drafted and who we didn't draft in which spots and focus on what we do have...if we drafted Marcantuoni at 22, is this is a discussion right now? Forwards are easy to find and easy to replace...sure, I'd like it if we had creative scouts that sought out undrafted players from all over the world and brought them in - instead of finding Zach Sill's and Adam Payerl's - but whatever...but I mean, why don't we just see what the next draft brings...I'm not alarmed, you shouldn't be either...we're alright, we're doing this the right way...


BurghersAndDogsSports wrote:mikey287 wrote:Ok, I'm getting very confused now because you're speaking in hyperbole and it's confusing and muddling the issue...
Let's just take a breath here for a second...ok, now just nice and easy, what is your concern for next season? What do you think is going to happen? Reasonably and realistically...what is going to happen that you are in such a panic about?
For next season alone?
Kunitz is on the downside
Dupuis exposed in the playoffs
No 2nd line LW
Cooke wasnt effective in a 3rd line role (eveyrone just mentions his goals)
TK - wasnt effective in a 3rd line role
Suter will be ok for Staal on a 3rd line, except if Crosby or Malkin go down he cant fill in like Staal did
Adams
Viatle or Jeffrey or Tangradi
Orpik exposed
Michalek gone and he was our only slightly normal defensive d-men.
We are worse than last season at every spot other than the few we are equal at......with no forward help to come up and no defense in the system ready except maybe one. Since 2008 there should have been some forwards ready to play by now and no d-men to trade for another 2 years.


Nizzy wrote:mikey287 wrote:Well, so far we've ventured not more than two years into the future...so I find it odd that we would need to sign 12 UFAs...
We already drafted forwards for a long stretch, those players are in the lineup still...in two years, we'll still have: Crosby, Malkin, Neal, Sutter for sure...we'll still have the option to keep Kunitz, the option to keep Kennedy, Cooke, Dupuis, Glass, perhaps Tangradi...Bennett will be here if he pans out, Uher looks pretty good, Marcantouni will be turning pro...Zlobin will turn pro in one year because we drafted him at 19...but the idea is that the core will still very much be intact.
Drafting a forward in 2012 does nothing for 2014 in most cases. I mean, I get it, I don't like to have a big hole in the organizational depth chart either...but what if we use our first 3 picks on forwards in the next draft and sign an overage college FA or something...is that better? Because we can still do that...
I think your point would be better served if we had an older lineup and needed to start getting the "next in line" ready...but that's not the case...it would also be better served if we didn't just put together the league's best defensive prospect pool in the league (and I don't say that without knowledge of the other 29 either)...so, next, we'll start working on forwards...we used a 2nd round pick on a project, we used a first a couple years ago, Agostino isn't looking bad, we drafted what should have been a first round pick in Marcantuoni last draft, we got a "head start" on a kid at 19, so he can join the AHL a year sooner than his draft class in Zlobin...I mean, we're working on it...this was bad draft for forwards below Yakupov and Galchenyuk...a lot of future 3rd liners were taken in the first round (Wilson, Gaunce, etc.)...by drafting a future 3rd liner at 22, does that make us better? You happier?
I'd say you should stop focusing so much on where we drafted and who we didn't draft in which spots and focus on what we do have...if we drafted Marcantuoni at 22, is this is a discussion right now? Forwards are easy to find and easy to replace...sure, I'd like it if we had creative scouts that sought out undrafted players from all over the world and brought them in - instead of finding Zach Sill's and Adam Payerl's - but whatever...but I mean, why don't we just see what the next draft brings...I'm not alarmed, you shouldn't be either...we're alright, we're doing this the right way...
Mikey, Injuries bro. Few guys go down, key guys or not, after Tangradi/Jeffrey is anyone else NHL ready? o.o That's kind of scary.
As far as drafting 3rd liners, well Malkin lead the team/league in scoring with Fedotenko/Talbot (two 3rd liners, arguably) With paying 2 centers big money you're going to have to play a 3rd liner with them. Before Dupuis broke out this year to another level I would have considered him a 3rd liner. Just saying...
I like how you're putting so much faith into Marcantuoni. First off I love it, honestly. I agree that Uher looks promising as well. Personally I think Bennett will be a bust but I did hear he's over 200 lbs which is huge for his development.



Nizzy wrote:Salary Cap will ensure Crosby or Malkin are always playing with at least 1 3rd line talent.

Users browsing this forum: DudeMan2766, Gabe, IMFC and 22 guests