A GM's Blueprint

Forum for Pittsburgh Penguins-related messages.

Re: A GM's Blueprint

Postby sjnhiils on Thu Aug 20, 2020 5:01 pm

FLPensFan wrote:
dark_forces wrote:
Pitts wrote:Hornqvist should be trade candidate #1 right now. He's no longer effective for this team. You want to get younger? Start there.


I think his intangibles would be hard to replace. He's so good in front of the net and really brings it every shift. I'd be inclined to keep him around and see where the team is near the trade deadline and how the younger forwards progress (like S. Poulin). However, if another team calls on him and presents a real nice offer, I'd listen. My question to the board is -- what would you consider a fair offer for Hornqvist? Would a 2nd round pick in 2020 do it? A B+ level prospect? An established 3rd liner/penalty killer, or a 4-5 defenseman who can skate?

Hornqvist is most definitely a tricky one.
-->He's no longer a top 6 forward. He doesn't have the speed to be effective there.
-->He's overpaid to be a bottom 6 player. Sometimes you can get away with it. On a team like Pittsburgh that is a bit cap strapped, it really won't work well.
-->He has a NMC which makes moving him more difficult. You likely can't dump him on a team on the cusp of being a playoff team, or a rebuilding team. I would think he needs to go to a contending team. Many have said Calgary....I keep thinking Colorado, personally.
-->Trading him risks upsetting the chemistry in the locker room. A lot has been said that Rutherford's trade of Hagelin in an attempt to shakeup the room backfired. Players were angry, not shaken.

With all that being said, I do think it is time to move on.
-->While he has a great net front presence and is very intense, I don't think of Hornqvist as a physical player.
-->It's outright ridiculous to me, but, Hornqvist takes a brutal beating on a nightly basis with almost no penalties called. It's kind of like, oh, it's Matt Cooke, that has to be a penalty on a weak play; It's, oh, that's Hornqvist, he always plays near the crease so it's ok for players to cross-check the **** out of him....none of that is interference, cross-checking, roughing, etc. The game is not called to Hornqvist's benefit, and, I really don't think he is going to hold up very long taking the abuse that he does.

The value really depends on the team and situation, IMO:
-->I could see a 2nd in 2020 being fair value. I'm not sure he'll get that, but it would be fair.
-->I could see a B level prospect as fair value, and probably most likely.
-->I could see a 3rd liner or an older (Late 20's) 3rd pairing type guy if acquiring team wants to move some salary out to bring in Hornqvist.

With Colorado, I wonder if something like Donskoi for Hornqvist. That would be a 1.4M cap gain. Colorado would have to be looking to change up the dynamic on RW, however, as I look at this further, I see Donskoi is having a pretty strong playoffs and probably wouldn't move him.

Really just depends on the team and their cap situation as to what a Hornqvist return would be.

GMJR should have signed Donskoi instead of Tanev1
sjnhiils
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,929
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 12:32 pm

Re: A GM's Blueprint

Postby IntangibleBeer on Thu Aug 20, 2020 5:14 pm

FLPensFan wrote:Awesome news Jack Johnson lovers.... :shock: :face: Josh Yohe spoke to Rutherford today. The important quotes from Rutherford:

1. “Here’s my summary of this situation,” a terse Rutherford said. “Maybe Jack Johnson isn’t as good as I think he is. Maybe. But he’s not as bad as all of the anti-Jack Johnson people think he is. I’ll tell you what he is: He’s a solid, third-pairing defenseman if he’s playing with the right guy. He’s a player that I happen to really like and I think he’s a better player than a lot of people want to give him credit for.”

2. “Jack was better this season and is a totally capable guy,” Rutherford continued. “A good team guy.”

3. “I think Jack was pretty good this season,” Rutherford said. “He changed up his training regimen before the season started and you could see the difference. He gained half a step. He’s one of those guys, he plays a very heavy game. He’s very hard to play against down low because he’s so big and strong. He’s also a very good penalty killer.”

4. “He’ll be able to play out his contract,” Rutherford said. “Whether it’s for someone else or it’s for the Penguins, he’ll play at least (three more seasons) what’s left on his deal. The thing about him is that he takes extremely good care of himself. He’s in great shape and he’ll continue to be in great shape because he’s such a professional. So I don’t have concerns.”

5. “His contract is not a problem for us,” Rutherford said. “His contract isn’t going to impact anything that we do in terms of the cap.”


I've also called out Yohe on his clickbait title, which mentions in the title that GMJR "wants him to finish his career as a Penguin." None of the quotes state that. The closest is #4 where he says Johnson will be able play out his contract, whether somewhere else or here in Pittsburgh. That's much, much different than Rutherford saying "I want Jack to retire a Penguin."


OMG :face:

It's not the contract, JR. It's the play on the ice. :scared:
IntangibleBeer
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,490
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:17 am
Location: Cranberry Township, PA

Re: A GM's Blueprint

Postby KG on Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:25 pm

God enough with JJ. The Rangers are paying Shattenkirk $6million in dead cap space to not play for them. The panthers paid Bob $10mill.

JJ and his $3.25Mill isn’t irreparable. I don’t like how JR defends him so much though. JR has been very fast to fix his mistakes. For some reason he can’t let his ego move on from this one.

Sully just don’t play the guy !

That said, I’m sure JJ will try very hard to move him this off season!
KG
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,700
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:53 am
Location: NY

Re: A GM's Blueprint

Postby thehockeyguru on Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:06 pm

FLPensFan wrote:
thehockeyguru wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
dark_forces wrote:
Pitts wrote:Hornqvist should be trade candidate #1 right now. He's no longer effective for this team. You want to get younger? Start there.


I think his intangibles would be hard to replace. He's so good in front of the net and really brings it every shift. I'd be inclined to keep him around and see where the team is near the trade deadline and how the younger forwards progress (like S. Poulin). However, if another team calls on him and presents a real nice offer, I'd listen. My question to the board is -- what would you consider a fair offer for Hornqvist? Would a 2nd round pick in 2020 do it? A B+ level prospect? An established 3rd liner/penalty killer, or a 4-5 defenseman who can skate?

Hornqvist is most definitely a tricky one.
-->He's no longer a top 6 forward. He doesn't have the speed to be effective there.
-->He's overpaid to be a bottom 6 player. Sometimes you can get away with it. On a team like Pittsburgh that is a bit cap strapped, it really won't work well.
-->He has a NMC which makes moving him more difficult. You likely can't dump him on a team on the cusp of being a playoff team, or a rebuilding team. I would think he needs to go to a contending team. Many have said Calgary....I keep thinking Colorado, personally.
-->Trading him risks upsetting the chemistry in the locker room. A lot has been said that Rutherford's trade of Hagelin in an attempt to shakeup the room backfired. Players were angry, not shaken.

With all that being said, I do think it is time to move on.
-->While he has a great net front presence and is very intense, I don't think of Hornqvist as a physical player.
-->It's outright ridiculous to me, but, Hornqvist takes a brutal beating on a nightly basis with almost no penalties called. It's kind of like, oh, it's Matt Cooke, that has to be a penalty on a weak play; It's, oh, that's Hornqvist, he always plays near the crease so it's ok for players to cross-check the **** out of him....none of that is interference, cross-checking, roughing, etc. The game is not called to Hornqvist's benefit, and, I really don't think he is going to hold up very long taking the abuse that he does.

The value really depends on the team and situation, IMO:
-->I could see a 2nd in 2020 being fair value. I'm not sure he'll get that, but it would be fair.
-->I could see a B level prospect as fair value, and probably most likely.
-->I could see a 3rd liner or an older (Late 20's) 3rd pairing type guy if acquiring team wants to move some salary out to bring in Hornqvist.

With Colorado, I wonder if something like Donskoi for Hornqvist. That would be a 1.4M cap gain. Colorado would have to be looking to change up the dynamic on RW, however, as I look at this further, I see Donskoi is having a pretty strong playoffs and probably wouldn't move him.

Really just depends on the team and their cap situation as to what a Hornqvist return would be.


The ideal play i think is to have Seattle select Hornqvist in the expansion draft.

This team can try and make 1 more run at the cup next season, then after that you have 1 more season of Letang and Malkin under contract. Serious decisions about the direction of the franchise will need to be made and getting Hornqvist's contract off the books will help.

I'm not taking him if I'm Francis. It will be very wishful thinking that Seattle is going to be as successful as Vegas right off the bat. Taking 34/35 year old overpaid forward who gets beat up on a nightly basis probably isn't a smart move.

This could be argued, but, let's say this is a pretty good bet to be the Penguins protected list:

Crosby, Malkin, Guentzel, Zucker, Rust, McCann, Tanev/Blueger
Letang, Dumouin, Marino
Jarry

If I were Seattle, I'd look at Pettersson, Tanev/Blueger types before I'd consider Hornqvist.


I agree, Pens would need to offer a sweetener for them to take Hornqvist
thehockeyguru
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,203
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: I'm 30 minutes away, I'll be there in 10.

Re: A GM's Blueprint

Postby longtimefan on Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:21 pm

FLPensFan wrote:
Ohio_Pens_fan wrote:Don't they have to protect Hornqvist in the expansion draft due to his NTC?

Only full no movement clauses have to be protected. I went back and looked at the rules, and it does say the player can waive their NMC and then be left unprotected.


Which is what Fleury did. Plus, Horny's contract was written with the expansion draft in mind. His full NTC ends after next season. The other deal on the team signed with an eye to the expansion draft is DeSmith's. It's not common to sign backup goalies to 3 year deals, but it assures the Pens a goalie to leave unprotected who fits the criteria. Which is why I never took any trade talk involving him seriously.
longtimefan
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 2,862
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:33 pm

Re: A GM's Blueprint

Postby longtimefan on Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:56 pm

FLPensFan wrote:
thehockeyguru wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
dark_forces wrote:
Pitts wrote:Hornqvist should be trade candidate #1 right now. He's no longer effective for this team. You want to get younger? Start there.


I think his intangibles would be hard to replace. He's so good in front of the net and really brings it every shift. I'd be inclined to keep him around and see where the team is near the trade deadline and how the younger forwards progress (like S. Poulin). However, if another team calls on him and presents a real nice offer, I'd listen. My question to the board is -- what would you consider a fair offer for Hornqvist? Would a 2nd round pick in 2020 do it? A B+ level prospect? An established 3rd liner/penalty killer, or a 4-5 defenseman who can skate?

Hornqvist is most definitely a tricky one.
-->He's no longer a top 6 forward. He doesn't have the speed to be effective there.
-->He's overpaid to be a bottom 6 player. Sometimes you can get away with it. On a team like Pittsburgh that is a bit cap strapped, it really won't work well.
-->He has a NMC which makes moving him more difficult. You likely can't dump him on a team on the cusp of being a playoff team, or a rebuilding team. I would think he needs to go to a contending team. Many have said Calgary....I keep thinking Colorado, personally.
-->Trading him risks upsetting the chemistry in the locker room. A lot has been said that Rutherford's trade of Hagelin in an attempt to shakeup the room backfired. Players were angry, not shaken.

With all that being said, I do think it is time to move on.
-->While he has a great net front presence and is very intense, I don't think of Hornqvist as a physical player.
-->It's outright ridiculous to me, but, Hornqvist takes a brutal beating on a nightly basis with almost no penalties called. It's kind of like, oh, it's Matt Cooke, that has to be a penalty on a weak play; It's, oh, that's Hornqvist, he always plays near the crease so it's ok for players to cross-check the **** out of him....none of that is interference, cross-checking, roughing, etc. The game is not called to Hornqvist's benefit, and, I really don't think he is going to hold up very long taking the abuse that he does.

The value really depends on the team and situation, IMO:
-->I could see a 2nd in 2020 being fair value. I'm not sure he'll get that, but it would be fair.
-->I could see a B level prospect as fair value, and probably most likely.
-->I could see a 3rd liner or an older (Late 20's) 3rd pairing type guy if acquiring team wants to move some salary out to bring in Hornqvist.

With Colorado, I wonder if something like Donskoi for Hornqvist. That would be a 1.4M cap gain. Colorado would have to be looking to change up the dynamic on RW, however, as I look at this further, I see Donskoi is having a pretty strong playoffs and probably wouldn't move him.

Really just depends on the team and their cap situation as to what a Hornqvist return would be.


The ideal play i think is to have Seattle select Hornqvist in the expansion draft.

This team can try and make 1 more run at the cup next season, then after that you have 1 more season of Letang and Malkin under contract. Serious decisions about the direction of the franchise will need to be made and getting Hornqvist's contract off the books will help.

I'm not taking him if I'm Francis. It will be very wishful thinking that Seattle is going to be as successful as Vegas right off the bat. Taking 34/35 year old overpaid forward who gets beat up on a nightly basis probably isn't a smart move.

This could be argued, but, let's say this is a pretty good bet to be the Penguins protected list:

Crosby, Malkin, Guentzel, Zucker, Rust, McCann, Tanev/Blueger
Letang, Dumouin, Marino
Jarry

If I were Seattle, I'd look at Pettersson, Tanev/Blueger types before I'd consider Hornqvist.


I'd rather trade Horny elsewhere, since I think he still carries some value. In order to ensure that Seattle takes him, the Pens would have to sweeten the pot, as they did with Fleury by sending a 2nd. Numerous teams made similar deals. Marino would be exempt with only two seasons as a pro. Which leaves a spot to protect MP. I think the general consensus is one of Blueger or Tanev would be left unprotected.

So put yourself in Francis' shoes. I'm not trying to disparage the two players, but this is a choice between two 4th liners on the wrong side of 25. At this point, a case can be made that the ceiling for either player is 15 goals and 3rd line duty. Granted, Horny's best days are behind him, but he could easily be the teams first captain, and he is a warrior, an emotional leader. Who would likely be an early fan favorite.

It's the Vegas model. Now, this worked out way better than most, but IIRC, the Wild sent Alex Tuch to Vegas so the VGK wouldn't take any of their defensemen, such as Dumba. In return for selecting Haula, they also received Tuch. From Seattle's POV, they can take a mid to late 20's potential 3rd liner, or acquire a veteran with a little left, plus a prospect. It's reasonable to think that a package of Hornqvist/Bjorqvist could be more valuable than Blueger or Tanev alone. Perhaps you have to go Horny/Hallander.

I'd prefer they move Horny now. He's got a bit of value, and, frankly, putting a lineup together including him as a RW may not best suit the Pens right now. But if they can't, I've long felt Seattle was a likely option. I don't see a downsize from Seattle's POV.
longtimefan
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 2,862
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:33 pm

Re: A GM's Blueprint

Postby Hatrick on Fri Aug 21, 2020 11:42 pm

FLPensFan wrote:
Hatrick wrote:I would do the Letang to Edmonton, I think Edmonton might consider it with maybe some adjustments.

The Horni to Calgary just for picks, I am honestly not sure what the flames cap situation is at, if you want to dump salary that is trade the penguins make, I don't think it really helps the team though since the PP struggles at times as it is, taking away another piece from that can not help.

I do not do the other deals, I would not even do JJ for Rask 1 for 1, that is one of the reasons I HATED the idea of the kessel+JJ to Minnesota for rask+zucker, if you are moving Letang than acquiring Dumba makes sense although I am not as big of a fan of his recently either.

Domi I would consider that deal, but my concern would be the contract, I might rather keep McCann who would be cheaper and keep Riikola for depth.

If you want an argument for keeping McCann, here is a good analytics based article that came out about a week ago McCann article

If you don't feel like sifting through the article, it basically says McCann played very well at 3C early in the season. It also talked about how McCann played with over 9 different teammates, and had no more than 84 minutes with a consistent line combination. That is an issue. He needs to get some consistency going with a line that he can stick with for awhile.

The article also went into some of his metrics, showing that he was actually taking more shots during his 24 game end of season slump, and also showing that, even though some say he isn't a defensive forward, his shot suppression numbers were better with him at center.

The quick summary was, McCann deserves another shot as the 3C. Get him some consistent linemates and be a little patient. Penguins shouldn't give up on him so soon.

I am not necessarily sure if he is the answer at 3c or not, to me he seemed better at wing but only getting a total of 84 minutes with a consistent line combination isn't a huge surprise and does make it difficult to actually evaluate. When an injury happened either on the 3rd line or the top two lines that meant constantly shuffling wingers around. The only line that really stayed intact was the fourth line who actually played well most of year(and because of so many injuries was basically the 3rd line for awhile). Some people went from wanting to keep McCann to get rid of him for peanuts in the span of four games. More evaluation is definitely needed.
Hatrick
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 945
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2017 10:48 pm

Re: A GM's Blueprint

Postby Hatrick on Fri Aug 21, 2020 11:55 pm

[quote="longtimefan]

I'd rather trade Horny elsewhere, since I think he still carries some value. In order to ensure that Seattle takes him, the Pens would have to sweeten the pot, as they did with Fleury by sending a 2nd. Numerous teams made similar deals. Marino would be exempt with only two seasons as a pro. Which leaves a spot to protect MP. I think the general consensus is one of Blueger or Tanev would be left unprotected.

So put yourself in Francis' shoes. I'm not trying to disparage the two players, but this is a choice between two 4th liners on the wrong side of 25. At this point, a case can be made that the ceiling for either player is 15 goals and 3rd line duty. Granted, Horny's best days are behind him, but he could easily be the teams first captain, and he is a warrior, an emotional leader. Who would likely be an early fan favorite.

It's the Vegas model. Now, this worked out way better than most, but IIRC, the Wild sent Alex Tuch to Vegas so the VGK wouldn't take any of their defensemen, such as Dumba. In return for selecting Haula, they also received Tuch. From Seattle's POV, they can take a mid to late 20's potential 3rd liner, or acquire a veteran with a little left, plus a prospect. It's reasonable to think that a package of Hornqvist/Bjorqvist could be more valuable than Blueger or Tanev alone. Perhaps you have to go Horny/Hallander.

I'd prefer they move Horny now. He's got a bit of value, and, frankly, putting a lineup together including him as a RW may not best suit the Pens right now. But if they can't, I've long felt Seattle was a likely option. I don't see a downsize from Seattle's POV.[/quote]

probably depends on what else Seattle does. Vegas was able to load up on side deals and be good instantly, I think a lot of teams might not be as willing to gift away assets. If seattle wants to contend immediately taking Horny is preferable to a Blueger even without extras thrown in because of what he brings in the playoffs, but if they expect to be more like what a normal expansion team is, it does not make sense from their perspective to grab an older veteran. Depending on what the penguins are willing to throw in(which should not be a lot tbh, do not make the same mistakes some of the teams made with giving vegas way too much), it could make that package more attractive than the other forwards left unprotected. Personally I wouldn't mind them taking Pettersson instead but I think the Pens will probably protect him.
Hatrick
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 945
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2017 10:48 pm

Previous

Return to Pittsburgh Penguins

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brwi, Ohio_Pens_fan and 22 guests


e-mail