Streaks House wrote: BurghersAndDogsSports wrote:
bhaw wrote:I think the discussions we are having in other threads about which dmen will make the team this year proves the strategy is working. Going forward, we basically have a steady supply of guys who can start taking NHL spots. That means we don't have to keep investing tons of cap space into the defense because we have enough guys to plug in as a guy leaves or can be used for something else like a trade. We don't have to worry about trading our one of two guys who can help fill in on the blue line. We could literally trade 2 or 3 defensemen next year and not really miss too much of a beat. That frees up a lot of cap space for the forwards. The team can go after already established guys because someone who is 2-3 or 4-5 years out from hitting the NHL is worthless to Sid or Malkin right now.
Whether this is the best strategy or not remains to be seen, but it certainly isn't a poor strategy as some here are claiming.
What good would Forsberg have done for this team in 2012? 2013? 2014? Probably not much, if any. Puloit may not help in that time frame either, but the constant flow of prospects defensive prospects becoming NHL ready DOES help during that time frame.
It is also really funny that people are shocked that this is how it has gone. Where did Shero come from? And what has Nashville done for the last 10 years? Yeah, draft a constant supply of defensemen that have allowed them to be competitive with minimal spending and an abysmal offense. The Pens already have a solid base on offense and the funds to fill in the holes via free agency. That system produced 2 guys who people here were ready to throw $80m+ at or literally the next 4 first round draft picks plus $10M+ for 1 year. Given Shero came from that background and school of thought, I've been incredibly curious what people thought they were going to get from him.
The process has allowed us to obtain 3 really good long term top 6 guys already plus multiple short term guys. Why is there concern that won't keep happening? There will always be teams out of the playoffs or struggling with salary or in ownership issues or rebuilding looking to unload a good forward. It got us Neal, Dupuis, Kunitz, Guerin, and Hossa. 3 of those 5 became long term solutions. Guerin retired but clearly would have stayed. Hossa was the only one who left. The forward situation is not going to blow up on us anytime soon unless half of the top 50 forwards in the NHL bolt for the KH
Ready for the flaming and lecturing about how drafting one forward would have changed the franchise forever.
I am not going to flame you, I understand your point, just point out that if he would have balanced it out we would have 4 forwards and 4 d-men ready for the NHL soon and no need for trades.
I understand the need for cheaper d-men due to the cap - but everyone on FA has been getting overpaid, not just d-men. Forwards too. Maybe not as much but still a lot.
Plus, in the examples above are not exactly clear cut. We did have to give up some other assets, draft picks, players, other prospects.
Just because they didnt all work out neither did every player in our return. Kunitz and Dupuis are ok is but its not like they had/have huge pedigree, they forced a terrible Niskanen on us, we clearly didnt want him, we got some guys back that were not that great too.
.....the biggest point the last 3 years we were not able to pull a rabbit out of our hat for veteran FA's unless you count Ponikarovsky?
You simply can not count on getting a Hossa or Guerin every year no matter how much the depth of one position you have. They have to be available on a team that has no shot, they have to be a UFA and you have to outbid other teams. Lots go into it, we got Hossa but how many 37 year old super leaders like Guerin are there in this situation? How many times can you actually get a Hossa? And our prospects that people want now are not Espisito.
If we have to count on deadline deals we will be in trouble.
1. This ASSUMES they all develop accordingly and none are busts. And unless a team has MULTIPLE top draft picks in any given year, it is going to be difficult to consistently be able to draft players with high ceilings, as these guys don't usually make it out of the top 50 picks.
2. What did these other assets end up becoming? Nothing significant. Colby Armstrong, Erik Christensen, Angelo Esposito, 1st rounder, mid-round picks. Nothing of value.
3. There hasn't been a great market of recent for these types of players, and teams have been overpaying. Look at what Nashville paid for Gaustad at the deadline. Look at this past season, there were only a few teams that were legitimately out of playoff contention. Tough for a team that is within a few points of a playoff spot to justify shedding one of their important pieces. Leopold was a solid acquisition aside from missing time with a concussion.
1. True but the other way assume quite a bit too. Like all of those guys are going to develop enough to be able to trade for assets, that assets will be available, that teams want those assets to part with what we need, that salary related to cap/players/potential UFA's work in our favor where we can land guys at the deadline or summer etc.
2. I agree but everything people bring up is 3 or 4 years ago. What did Hossa end up for us? Tangradi? I mean Kunitz and Dupuis are nice pieces but hardly not replaceable. I am not saying there is zero validity to stockpiling defensive prospects my only point is that everyone thinks by stock piling these guys we can just simply go trade them for our needs. Signed, delivered. It doesnt work that way. At all. You need a player that fits the mold, a team willing to part for whatever reason, and a team that is willing to give up a forward for prospects and then of course overpaying at the deadline and also salary cap issues.
Its just not a slam dunk. I would rather draft and develop my own players and then adjust off of that.
3. That is my point. There are only a few teams out of playoff contention every year now, the market has been slim by product of the competitiveness of the salary capped NHL not by some weird coincidence. Teams overpaying for Gaustard at the deadline mean more to me that we cant just ship a prospect over, it will have to be 2 or 3 and/or a draft pick plus an NHL ready forward to pick up a goal scoring forward. Only having 5 teams out of contention mean you are bidding against more teams than a few years ago.
Look, I am not against everything that Shero did, if all the prospects turn out great so be it, I really hope so. And if we can just trade for forwards to plug into our needs great, even better. I just dont think its so easy as everyone is making it.
Because we got Neal in a trade that every year we can trade a d-men for a winger and problem solved because the player available if perfect, his salary is perfect (as you stated in point 1) we ASSUME that the other prospect we didnt trade is perfectly ready to play at a high enough NHL level.
By not having a good substance of forwards in our system at all, in a year or two we really could have serious depth problems that even trades cant solve ESPECIALLY at higher trade prices. Pretty much all of our wings and 4th line but Neal are gonna be gone in 2 years
. The theory behind lower salaries for d-men in their first years holds true for forwards too and if we want someone to help us win a cup he probably has enough years of service that is entry contract will be up too, just like Neal.