I'm beginning to think that GMRS...

[SolidSnake]

Have another beer Jordan

[shmenguin]

Yeah, that's what I'm saying. I know it's not a popular stance, but I'll take a big shot at the cup this year and deal with the repercussions of losing staal for nothing.

I could be proven wrong, and I'll fess up to it if that happens

[slappybrown]

Yeah, that's what I'm saying. I know it's not a popular stance, but I'll take a big shot at the cup this year and deal with the repercussions of losing staal for nothing.

I could be proven wrong, and I'll fess up to it if that happens

You crazy for this one shmenguin.

[shafnutz05]

I don't understand that at all. This team didn't sniff the SCF the last three years with Staal.

[Idoit40fans]

I don't understand that at all. This team didn't sniff the SCF the last three years with Staal.

But thats because Dan Bylsma was the coach.

[shmenguin]

I don't understand that at all. This team didn't sniff the SCF the last three years with Staal.

it's that simple, eh?

[Ossa]

A lot of people in this thread seem to forget we are in the salary cap. Of course Jordan Staal is better and I'd rather have him. But, Sutter at 2 million is a much better value than Jordan Staal at 6 million. No question.

[largegarlic]

I think the evaluation of the deal is pretty simple...

Jordan Staal > Brandon Sutter

Therefore, if neither Dumoulin nor Pouliot make it to the NHL, Canes win the deal.
If either Dumoulin or Pouliot become solid NHL d-men, Pens win the deal.
If both Dumoulin and Pouliot become solid NHL d-men, Pens win the deal by a wide margin.

[slappybrown]

Its not that simple though.

Staal refused to sign an extension. You risk losing him for nothing. So unless you are willing to do that as shmenguin is, you can't really do such a straightforward analysis.

[Idoit40fans]

A lot of people in this thread seem to forget we are in the salary cap. Of course Jordan Staal is better and I'd rather have him. But, Sutter at 2 million is a much better value than Jordan Staal at 6 million. No question.

No one is forgetting that. The Pens could afford that $4 million this year.

[Ossa]

A lot of people in this thread seem to forget we are in the salary cap. Of course Jordan Staal is better and I'd rather have him. But, Sutter at 2 million is a much better value than Jordan Staal at 6 million. No question.

No one is forgetting that. The Pens could afford that $4 million this year.

Thus, it is a win-win for both teams. The Pens get the better end of the deal because of the great value due to our cap issues, Canes got a good deal because they got a great player and they don't have any cap issues to worry about. It seems to me a lot of people here think the Canes got the better end of the deal which doesn't make much sense to me or maybe I'm just not understanding everyone's viewpoint.

[Rylan]

lol the trade was fair no matter what happens (barring injuries)

[DesertPenguin]

I'm wondering if other GMs are getting wary of dealing with Shero. He doesn't lose trades, and ends up making the other GM look really stupid. The deal with Dallas for Neal AND Niskanen was train robbery. Neal leaves the Stars and scores 40 the following year. Niskanen goes from barely serviceable 3rd pairing guy to solid top 4 dman in the same amount of time. All for our #5. Whitney for Kunitz? We won that, especially considering Whitney's injury problems. Guerin for a conditional pick? Getting Dupuis as a throw in on the Hossa deal? Sutter, #8 Pick and Dumoulin for one year of Jordan Staal? I'd be afraid to deal with him.

[Rylan]

Jordan Staal signed a 10 year $60 million deal with Carolina.

[DesertPenguin]

Sutter hasn't really impressed me on faceoffs which is what we need him for. The other night he lost like six in a row in are end. Brutal

Here's a crazy idea: What about putting Joe Vitale on Sutter's RW? Vitale is a great faceoff guy that could help him out when he's struggling. FWIW, Staal was never great at faceoffs either.

[Ossa]

Jordan Staal signed a 10 year $60 million deal with Carolina.

But the trade itself was for 1 year of Jordan Staal. Then they signed him.

[Rylan]

But it wasn't for 1 year. Sure, technically it was, but he signed that deal so shortly after that it is irrelevant.

[slappybrown]

CAR knew he was signing a long term deal. It wasn't a trade for one year of Staal.

[shafnutz05]

I don't understand that at all. This team didn't sniff the SCF the last three years with Staal.

it's that simple, eh?

You posit that we would have been better off taking the risk on not getting anything in return for Staal and tried to win the Cup this year. I can see this being a much more tempting argument if the Penguins were serious contenders the last several years, but they simply weren't.

Say you have $500. Someone comes up to you and says that you can trade that $500 for a sum of $400. Or, you can wager the entire $500 on a 1 in 15 bet that you will win $5000. Obviously this analogy is a little loose, but it boils down to taking a sizable risk now on a reward that isn't remotely guaranteed. It just isn't smart, forward thinking.

And as I stated before, Sutter is not a massive drop-off from what we would have had with Staal this year. He has five less points than him over a span of 30 games, and is soundly beating him in +/-. And I contend that if he wasn't dragging around dead weight this year for his line mates (yes, that includes Kennedy), he would probably have as many if not more points. The reason for his extremely low assist total (5) is largely due to the fact that Kennedy, and Cooke to an extent, forgot how to score this year.

The faceoffs have been blah, but I don't think our Cup chances plummeted because we have Sutter instead of Staal, so I don't get your argument at all.

[no name]

CAR knew he was signing a long term deal. It wasn't a trade for one year of Staal.

This is where GMRS gained some traction dealing with Carolina. He could of held on to Jordan for another year (just to spite Jordan and Carolina) and then dealt him at the dead line or used him during the playoffs.

If the deal would of been Jordan for Brandon it would of been a bad trade. The fact Shero got the 8th overall pick (which i think he blew) and Dumoulin a blue chip prospect... Well i think it was a good deal. And honestly we didn't need to deal with Jordans new contract when dealing with Tanger and Malkin this offseason.

[Ossa]

CAR knew he was signing a long term deal. It wasn't a trade for one year of Staal.

This is where GMRS gained some traction dealing with Carolina. He could of held on to Jordan for another year (just to spite Jordan and Carolina) and then dealt him at the dead line or used him during the playoffs.

If the deal would of been Jordan for Brandon it would of been a bad trade. The fact Shero got the 8th overall pick (which i think he blew) and Dumoulin a blue chip prospect... Well i think it was a good deal. And honestly we didn't need to deal with Jordans new contract when dealing with Tanger and Malkin this offseason.

Why is Staal straight up for Sutter a bad trade? Knowing what we know now, I would definitely do that trade. But I also think he blew the 8th pick, but we will know in a few years if he pans out or not.

[slappybrown]

If you think Pouliot was a reach at 8, that's fine, but saying he "blew" the pick, without ever knowing what Pouliot might become as a player or what he might be turned into in terms of asset management isn't fair to Shero IMO.

[slappybrown]

CAR knew he was signing a long term deal. It wasn't a trade for one year of Staal.

This is where GMRS gained some traction dealing with Carolina. He could of held on to Jordan for another year (just to spite Jordan and Carolina) and then dealt him at the dead line or used him during the playoffs.

If the deal would of been Jordan for Brandon it would of been a bad trade. The fact Shero got the 8th overall pick (which i think he blew) and Dumoulin a blue chip prospect... Well i think it was a good deal. And honestly we didn't need to deal with Jordans new contract when dealing with Tanger and Malkin this offseason.

Why is Staal straight up for Sutter a bad trade? Knowing what we know now, I would definitely do that trade. But I also think he blew the 8th pick, but we will know in a few years if he pans out or not.

Staal for Sutter straight up is unquestionably a bad hockey trade.

[thehockeyguru]

I think the evaluation of the deal is pretty simple...

Jordan Staal > Brandon Sutter

Therefore, if neither Dumoulin nor Pouliot make it to the NHL, Canes win the deal.
If either Dumoulin or Pouliot become solid NHL d-men, Pens win the deal.
If both Dumoulin and Pouliot become solid NHL d-men, Pens win the deal by a wide margin.

I dont think anyone who plays Jordan Staal 6M a year can be called a winner.

[shmenguin]

I don't understand that at all. This team didn't sniff the SCF the last three years with Staal.

it's that simple, eh?

You posit that we would have been better off taking the risk on not getting anything in return for Staal and tried to win the Cup this year. I can see this being a much more tempting argument if the Penguins were serious contenders the last several years, but they simply weren't.

Say you have $500. Someone comes up to you and says that you can trade that $500 for a sum of $400. Or, you can wager the entire $500 on a 1 in 15 bet that you will win $5000. Obviously this analogy is a little loose, but it boils down to taking a sizable risk now on a reward that isn't remotely guaranteed. It just isn't smart, forward thinking.

And as I stated before, Sutter is not a massive drop-off from what we would have had with Staal this year. He has five less points than him over a span of 30 games, and is soundly beating him in +/-. And I contend that if he wasn't dragging around dead weight this year for his line mates (yes, that includes Kennedy), he would probably have as many if not more points. The reason for his extremely low assist total (5) is largely due to the fact that Kennedy, and Cooke to an extent, forgot how to score this year.

The faceoffs have been blah, but I don't think our Cup chances plummeted because we have Sutter instead of Staal, so I don't get your argument at all.

you "get it". you don't agree with it.

also, based on your explanation, you don't agree with giving up assets for playoff rentals because of the lack of guarantee on your return. which means you must disagree with the hossa trade as well, obviously.