If you retain salary, does it count against your cap number?
- hipcheck_goalie

Yeah. So 25% of 3.375 million is 843k, + 589k to bring up Harrington is 1.43. So you save about 1.9 if you dealt Scuds like this, more if you retained less.

i disagree. if he has a bounceback year the pens may see him as a veteran guy who, after martin and erhoff possibly leave, could help mentor the youngins. that might be managements take. I'd prefer they move him... that being said, they couldn't even move him for washing machine parts now and only could get those if he plays better
- ChrisMS

Scuderi being this mythical mentor is not worth his salary. He's a liability on the ice and I don't think his post game critiques hold much weight anyway.

If you did retain salary and traded him for a 4th and a 7th somewhere, is there a decent enough dman you could call up? Is there anyone who can fill scuds shoes now?

retaining 25% and calling up Harrington at 590k still saves you almost 2 million for example.
- Morris

I dont see Maio and Ron burning money that way. haven't seen it yet. they will hope he plays better and see what the deal is next off season. pens probably reasonably have 3-4 minor league defensemen that could fill in. samuallson, doumalin, harrington. pouliot maybe if he returns strong

How does retaining salary work? Are we only retaining 25% for this year? Or for every year of the contract? If its only this year, I would do it. Thats enough savings for us this year and a huge savings through his remaining contract years.
- YouMeAndDupuis9

Unfortunately I think it's every year. I'll go check cap geek to see.

EDIT: Yeah it looks like it's for each year of the rest of the contract.

Scuderi being this mythical mentor is not worth his salary. He's a liability on the ice and I don't think his post game critiques hold much weight anyway.
- YouMeAndDupuis9

well that comment was on the speculation he played better and I agree for the most part. but letang/bortz/doumalin/maatta/pouliot/harrington/despres as a top d after this year is a gamble too. just saying if scuds bounces back to a reasonable top 6 player they may opt to keep him with ehrhoff and martin coming off the books. (obviously they could still resign, but going on what they have right now)

Unfortunately I think it's every year. I'll go check cap geek to see.
- Morris

it is. see example jokinen

I think the real question is where are we going to fit Pyatt?

Here's a random thought:

I'm almost positive we trade Sutter. We have the depth at center that we don't need to/can't overpay for what Sutter brings to the table, so the question becomes what do we get for him? I think most will agree that simply cap dumping Sutter for middling picks isn't quite satisfying, but when we look at the two teams that look like they could use Sutter the most in Colorado and Edmonton, there's no real way that we can get what we really want, which is a top 6 forward. So I think its time to lay those pipe dreams to rest and think of a way to make a hockey trade out of Sutter that isn't centered around a top 6 winger, but also isn't simply a cap dump. How bout this:

To Avs: Brandon Sutter

To Pittsburgh: Talbot, forward prospect, 3rd

The Avs are one of the most complete teams in hockey. The only thing that they're really missing is a legit 3C. We give them that with Sutter and allows them to comfortably continue to play Ryan O'Reilly and his 6 mil contract as a top 6 right wing instead of 3C which is a major asset mismanagement. In return, we get Talbot, a guy who becomes expendable to the Avs after acquiring Sutter due to center depth. to even out the trade, they give us a 3rd to replace the one we lost, and part with a forward prospect. For the most part, their forward prospects are middling talents, so they can stomach parting with one without feeling like they over payed for an average player in Sutter, especially since Colorado is so deep with youth anyways.

What this does for the Pens: gives us another guy for the bottom 6 on a reasonable contract who can play in various different rolls. The two major points with Talbot would be that he replenishes the center depth lost from trading away Sutter and gives us yet another option to choose from for our bottom 6 center roll, allowing us to boot Spaling to wing if he's not impressing. Secondly, he adds even more strength to the PK. Between Goc, Spaling, Talbot, and Dupuis, our PK core should be strong and deep enough that Adams can permanently start watching games from the press box.

This trade isn't flashy but I think its pretty fair. It provides us with cap relief to take care of signing one more forward, gives us even more flexibility on the bottom 6, makes our PK better, replenishes draft picks, and adds another forward prospect, even if its not a great forward prospect. Good mix of immediate help and future assets which is I think the best case scenario for a Sutter trade.
- Victoro311

I don't have a problem with this trade. Talbot is still an excellent PK guy, good locker room guy, and relatively cheap. It would depend on how good the forward prospect is in this deal.

I just think that while pipe dream trade scenario seems rather implausible, we could get a good top 6 wing prospect back for Sutter. Like the before mentioned trade of Moroz and a 2nd. Even if they can't play in the NHL this year, we need more guys in the system with top 6 potential. That will be invaluable in a few years as Kunitz/Dupuis get phased out. That has more value to me than Talbot who is the kind of player thats fairly easy to attain. Moroz could be that guy. There may be other guys out there that fit that bill.

i disagree. if he has a bounceback year the pens may see him as a veteran guy who, after martin and erhoff possibly leave, could help mentor the youngins. that might be managements take. I'd prefer they move him... that being said, they couldn't even move him for washing machine parts now and only could get those if he plays better
- ChrisMS

I see why that would be in almost any other situation, but the Pens are a cap ceiling team and need to constantly be thinking about what the most expendable large contracts are to make space for more assets. As far as contracts over 900k go I think here are the tiers.

Untouchables:
Malkin, Crosby

Do not moves:
Kunitz, Hornqvist, Dupuis, Ehrhoff, Griess, Bennett

Cautiously consider packages:
Martin, Letang, Fleury

The rest:
Downie, Despres, Goc, Spaling, Scuderi

Scuds is obviously the best bang for your buck here. His contract is a behemoth compared to the other guys we have that are expendable, and absurd to think that we're going to move any of the other guys we can afford to lose since we just signed them within the month. Despres is the other guy that would make sense to move, but you're only clearing out 900k in contrast with 3.25 mil.

I see why that would be in almost any other situation, but the Pens are a cap ceiling team and need to constantly be thinking about what the most expendable large contracts are to make space for more assets. As far as contracts over 900k go I think here are the tiers.

Untouchables:
Malkin, Crosby

Do not moves:
Kunitz, Hornqvist, Dupuis, Ehrhoff, Griess, Bennett

Cautiously consider packages:
Martin, Letang, Fleury

The rest:
Downie, Despres, Goc, Spaling, Scuderi

Scuds is obviously the best bang for your buck here. His contract is a behemoth compared to the other guys we have that are expendable, and absurd to think that we're going to move any of the other guys we can afford to lose since we just signed them within the month. Despres is the other guy that would make sense to move, but you're only clearing out 900k in contrast with 3.25 mil.
- Victoro311

scuderi is immovable at this point unless the pens PAY a team to take him... like scuds and a 4th for a 7th or something. he may be equally immovable next year.

oh and that trade propsal... not sure sutter for talbot straight up would be enough, let alone them adding in more. depends on sutters contract

it is. see example jokinen
- ChrisMS

Meh, hard to swallow paying a guy money to play for another team for 3 more years. But the space he is opening up for other players is still worth it in my eyes. We already have 3 or 4 cheaper guys who would be at least just as good in the AHL.

Meh, hard to swallow paying a guy money to play for another team for 3 more years. But the space he is opening up for other players is still worth it in my eyes. We already have 3 or 4 cheaper guys who would be at least just as good in the AHL.
- YouMeAndDupuis9

this is another reason scuds is here to stay this season. if he bombs again, then maybe they try to move him and retain salary for only two years... maybe see if they can get rid of him for 2.5 mil and retain 1.25 mil? There also has to be hope in the organization that if he really bombs that he might retire... though its a long shot.

Can't say I'm jumping for joy over this signing... but 2.25 was as high as I would tolerate without getting really pissed. 2 mil was where I think most of us hoped as the highest point... but the available players at this point, Spaling is among the better ones and less risky players for the 3rd line.

Now... back to trying to dump Scuderi off somewhere for a bag of pucks.

And of course... a way to look at it this way.

Glass at 1.5 million.
Engelland at 2.7 million
Spaling at 2.2.

Which would you rather take?

scuderi is immovable at this point unless the pens PAY a team to take him... like scuds and a 4th for a 7th or something. he may be equally immovable next year.

oh and that trade propsal... not sure sutter for talbot straight up would be enough, let alone them adding in more. depends on sutters contract
- ChrisMS

Wasn't making the argument that we can move him. Was just saying that if we could have our pick of moving anyone, even if Scuderi started playing well, it should be Scuderi because he is our largest expendable contract. Obviously everyone agrees that if you can move him at this juncture you do it without thinking. I was addressing the question of if we should keep him as a vet presence if he bounces back.

And I don't know. To me Sutter is more suited for a pure 3C roll than Talbot or anyone on the Avs roster right now is, and once they get that true 3C, Colorado is stuck with two fourth line wingers and plenty of bottom 6 forwards, making Talbot and his comparatively larger contract expendable. He's the guy I would see Colorado trying to move to make space for a true 3C, so why not just send him back in the same trade?

The forward that we would get back wouldn't be that good of a prospect, so I don't think that adding him in really dips the trade to an uneven balance especially since the Avs have so much talented youth. Perhaps the pick is wishful thinking, but I had to make a trade proposal in which the Pens won, or else what's the point.

Ah, forgot to ask.

What would the cost be of a regular buyout on Scuderi? I do not know the buy out rules on normal buyouts.

Ah, forgot to ask.

What would the cost be of a regular buyout on Scuderi? I do not know the buy out rules on normal buyouts.
- Guile

If you bought him out today,

his buyout cap hit would be 430k this year (2.9 in savings), then 1.4 mil, 1.9 mil. 1.05, 1.05, 1.05

Immediate relief, hurts you in the long run.

Can't say I'm jumping for joy over this signing... but 2.25 was as high as I would tolerate without getting really pissed. 2 mil was where I think most of us hoped as the highest point... but the available players at this point, Spaling is among the better ones and less risky players for the 3rd line.

Now... back to trying to dump Scuderi off somewhere for a bag of pucks.

And of course... a way to look at it this way.

Glass at 1.5 million.
Engelland at 2.7 million
Spaling at 2.2.

Which would you rather take?
- Guile

Spaling at 2.2 million. For sure.

If you bought him out today,

his buyout cap hit would be 430k this year (2.9 in savings), then 1.4 mil, 1.9 mil. 1.05, 1.05, 1.05

Immediate relief, hurts you in the long run.
- Morris

If it could be the 1.05 each year, that would be a bit more doable. Having 1.9 one year is a bit painful.

But, I don't doubt we could make better use of 2mil+ saved from his salary and put another rookie into his spot. Preferably, Bortuzzo... absolutely man crushing on his playing ability after the playoffs.

Wasn't making the argument that we can move him. Was just saying that if we could have our pick of moving anyone, even if Scuderi started playing well, it should be Scuderi because he is our largest expendable contract. Obviously everyone agrees that if you can move him at this juncture you do it without thinking. I was addressing the question of if we should keep him as a vet presence if he bounces back.

And I don't know. To me Sutter is more suited for a pure 3C roll than Talbot or anyone on the Avs roster right now is, and once they get that true 3C, Colorado is stuck with two fourth line wingers and plenty of bottom 6 forwards, making Talbot and his comparatively larger contract expendable. He's the guy I would see Colorado trying to move to make space for a true 3C, so why not just send him back in the same trade?

The forward that we would get back wouldn't be that good of a prospect, so I don't think that adding him in really dips the trade to an uneven balance especially since the Avs have so much talented youth. Perhaps the pick is wishful thinking, but I had to make a trade proposal in which the Pens won, or else what's the point.
- Victoro311

I also dont want to keep scuds as a vet presence but could see management doing so. Whats the point of making proposals that are completely lopsided and will not happen? wheres the debate there? sutter for talbot straight up was actually a pretty good idea... talbot is cheaper and slots in nice in the bottom six, colorodo has the space to take a 3-3.5 million sutter without it hurting them to much.

I don't have a problem with this trade. Talbot is still an excellent PK guy, good locker room guy, and relatively cheap. It would depend on how good the forward prospect is in this deal.

I just think that while pipe dream trade scenario seems rather implausible, we could get a good top 6 wing prospect back for Sutter. Like the before mentioned trade of Moroz and a 2nd. Even if they can't play in the NHL this year, we need more guys in the system with top 6 potential. That will be invaluable in a few years as Kunitz/Dupuis get phased out. That has more value to me than Talbot who is the kind of player thats fairly easy to attain. Moroz could be that guy. There may be other guys out there that fit that bill.
- YouMeAndDupuis9

Any other decent top 6 wing prospects out there we could get for Sutter?

If it could be the 1.05 each year, that would be a bit more doable. Having 1.9 one year is a bit painful.

But, I don't doubt we could make better use of 2mil+ saved from his salary and put another rookie into his spot. Preferably, Bortuzzo... absolutely man crushing on his playing ability after the playoffs.
- Guile

if he could play relatively consistant he will make a solid top 6 and replace a lot of what a young orpik brought... minus the homicidal stalker, free candy stare

Any other decent top 6 wing prospects out there we could get for Sutter?
- YouMeAndDupuis9

sutter alone? nope. nor will inlcuding martin in there at this point find you any either. sutter and one of the better d prospects? harrington/despres? maybe

sutter alone? nope. nor will inlcuding martin in there at this point find you any either. sutter and one of the better d prospects? harrington/despres? maybe
- ChrisMS

Really? Sutter can't even get a prospect? I'm not talking about anyone established. Swapping a known commodity as a decent 3rd center for a guy with higher upside but not yet in the NHL seemed like fair value.

if he could play relatively consistant he will make a solid top 6 and replace a lot of what a young orpik brought... minus the homicidal stalker, free candy stare
- ChrisMS

I think Bortuzzo is a younger version of Orpik... he played defense just as well, a tad less physical, but much faster. I don't see why he wasn't moved up instead of obtaining Scuds in the first place.

Really? Sutter can't even get a prospect? I'm not talking about anyone established. Swapping a known commodity as a decent 3rd center for a guy with higher upside but not yet in the NHL seemed like fair value.
- YouMeAndDupuis9

huh... i was thinking a young nhl ready prospect... maybe could get you a guy who is a couple years away... but nobody that really could slot in this year.