Do you honestly think if Rutherford wanted to, he could trade Scuderi?
- jfkst1

With the cap likely staying the same, probably not.

Do you honestly think if Rutherford wanted to, he could trade Scuderi?
- jfkst1

He could, did he want to? No.

The term failure, to me, implies a total waste of a season. A season that was an embarrassment. A pathetic season that never should have been played.

The leafs season this year fits that term. A run to the SCF ultimately resulting in a loss is more of a disappointment than a failure.
- rangerdanger94

And to me, a failure is not achieving your ultimate, realistic goal.

Do you really think the players and management will be like "ah shucks, at least we made a deep run", or will they be looking to make changes, whether big or small, to try and get over that hump.

He has been an anchor on a team that has been top 5 defensively for the last 5 or more years.

Since his rookie season, he's played 603 out of a possible 608 regular season games and 89 out of a possible 89 playoff games. His durability is insane considering the minutes and competition he plays. The guy is a warrior and shuts the top players down every night. He's a great defenseman.
- rangerdanger94

I'm with you guys on this one.. I think Girardi is a solid, solid shut down defenseman.

He could, did he want to? No.
- znagle

They should have tried to trade him for Horton, or any other situation like that. Can't see how the Pens could possibly move him without taking back a toxic asset.

The Penguins are obviously a flawed team this season, but the bigger issue i see is whether they are headed in the right direction.

You can't control injuries (Maatta, Dupuis, & Ehrhoff) or what Rutherford inherited (ie, Scuderi, Adams, poor F depth, & lack of Top-6 W's), but what worries me is Rutherford's track record regarding what the Penguins can control is a mixed bag.

In my opinion...

Good Moves:

Traded Neal for Hornquvist + Spaling: Hornquvist has 1 more G than Neal and 10 more pts in 7 less gms & is more of a 2000ft player; Spaling has 25pts in 74 gms. The Penguins wanted more F depth & more rugged play on the wing, this move helped provide it.

Traded Samuelsson for Klinkhammer: Took a non-asset & turned it into a minor asset.

Traded Klinkhammer + 1st for Perron: Pens needed a younger 1st line W, they got it for this season and next; Very good move.

Traded Bortuzzo + 7th for Cole: Mostly a lateral move, but Cole (Puck Mover, Shooter) seems to fit more of what the Penguins are looking for in a 5/6/7 Dman than Bortuzzo (Physical).

Signed Ehrhoff for 1yr: Low-cost & has played well when healthy.

Signed Comeau for 1yr: Low-cost & provided a little secondary.

Re-signed Goc for 1yr: Low-cost & was a solid, defensive 4C. Didn't score, but does your 4C really need to light it up?

Extended Fleury: Has been very good & extension price isn't much of a raise.


Bad Moves:

Signed Sutter for 2yrs @ $3.3yr: Just because a player gets tendered as a RFA doesn't mean you have to sign him to a multi-year extension You can always trade his rights, move him at the deadline, or just let him play out his RFA on a 1-yr deal.

Signed Spaling for 2yrs @ $2.2M: Trading for Spaling as a RFA is one thing; Re-signing him for an additional, unnecessary year at $2.2M is another. Not a value re-signing.

Traded Despres for Lovejoy: Made a lateral move of 5/6 Dman where the Penguins got older, lose RFA years, & a more expensive player.

Traded Goc for Lapierre: Moved a non-discript player for a bad player in Lapierre.


Not Good, Not Bad Moves:

Signed Greiss for 1yr: Back-up G at market rate.

Signed Downie for 1yr: Low-cost & provided a little secondary scoring, but tons of penalty minutes. In short, Downie is what he has always been.

Traded 4th, future 2nd, and Sill for Winnik: Winnik has looked good, but it was a high price for a bottom-6 rental player. Winnik isn't a difference maker; Could have just waited & signed him as a UFA this offseason.


The fix for these issue's isn't hard, but i truly question whether the Penguins managment has the guts to implement them as a few of the fixes involve admiting mistakes & paying the cost associated with them.

- Keep up the value UFA signings; More Comeau, Downie, & even Greiss-types. There are always capable bottom-6 players available as UFA's. The Pens don't need homeruns via UFAs; just hit a few singles.

- Trade Sutter. Some team will be willing to move picks or players for him. Stop pretending he is better than he is & worth $3.3M.

- Trade, buy-out, or otherwise remove Scuderi from this team. He is terrible. Recognize the mistake & get rid of him instead of trying to justify his roster spot. Buy-Outs are expensive, but cut him a damn check & be done with it already.

And to me, a failure is not achieving your ultimate, realistic goal.

Do you really think the players and management will be like "ah shucks, at least we made a deep run", or will they be looking to make changes, whether big or small, to try and get over that hump.
- cap1681

Nobody is going to look back at a deep run and be satisfied. They will be disappointed. But they will use that deep run as motivation and as a learning experience for the future.

The Rangers made the SCF last year and while we lost and everybody was disappointed, that run has given the Rangers confidence that has helped them soar to the top of the league standings.

Again, the word failure implies a pathetic embarrassment. Not missing your goal by a hair.

They should have tried to trade him for Horton, or any other situation like that. Can't see how the Pens could possibly move him without taking back a toxic asset.
- jfkst1

If we did that, what would we do with the space? We have nothing to trade other than BB or Sutter. Either way, that hurts our D by getting rid of Scuds for nothing and trading a forward for a forward doesn't really help, especially if we want a better forward we would have to give more.

The Penguins are obviously a flawed team this season, but the bigger issue i see is whether they are headed in the right direction.

You can't control injuries (Maatta, Dupuis, & Ehrhoff) or what Rutherford inherited (ie, Scuderi, Adams, poor F depth, & lack of Top-6 W's), but what worries me is Rutherford's track record regarding what the Penguins can control is a mixed bag.

In my opinion...

Good Moves:

Traded Neal for Hornquvist + Spaling: Hornquvist has 1 more G than Neal and 10 more pts in 7 less gms & is more of a 2000ft player; Spaling has 25pts in 74 gms. The Penguins wanted more F depth & more rugged play on the wing, this move helped provide it.

Traded Samuelsson for Klinkhammer: Took a non-asset & turned it into a minor asset.

Traded Klinkhammer + 1st for Perron: Pens needed a younger 1st line W, they got it for this season and next; Very good move.

Traded Bortuzzo + 7th for Cole: Mostly a lateral move, but Cole (Puck Mover, Shooter) seems to fit more of what the Penguins are looking for in a 5/6/7 Dman than Bortuzzo (Physical).

Signed Ehrhoff for 1yr: Low-cost & has played well when healthy.

Signed Comeau for 1yr: Low-cost & provided a little secondary.

Re-signed Goc for 1yr: Low-cost & was a solid, defensive 4C. Didn't score, but does your 4C really need to light it up?

Extended Fleury: Has been very good & extension price isn't much of a raise.


Bad Moves:

Signed Sutter for 2yrs @ $3.3yr: Just because a player gets tendered as a RFA doesn't mean you have to sign him to a multi-year extension You can always trade his rights, move him at the deadline, or just let him play out his RFA on a 1-yr deal.

Signed Spaling for 2yrs @ $2.2M: Trading for Spaling as a RFA is one thing; Re-signing him for an additional, unnecessary year at $2.2M is another. Not a value re-signing.

Traded Despres for Lovejoy: Made a lateral move of 5/6 Dman where the Penguins got older, lose RFA years, & a more expensive player.

Traded Goc for Lapierre: Moved a non-discript player for a bad player in Lapierre.


Not Good, Not Bad Moves:

Signed Greiss for 1yr: Back-up G at market rate.

Signed Downie for 1yr: Low-cost & provided a little secondary scoring, but tons of penalty minutes. In short, Downie is what he has always been.

Traded 4th, future 2nd, and Sill for Winnik: Winnik has looked good, but it was a high price for a bottom-6 rental player. Winnik isn't a difference maker; Could have just waited & signed him as a UFA this offseason.


The fix for these issue's isn't hard, but i truly question whether the Penguins managment has the guts to implement them as a few of the fixes involve admiting mistakes & paying the cost associated with them.

- Keep up the value UFA signings; More Comeau, Downie, & even Greiss-types. There are always capable bottom-6 players available as UFA's. The Pens don't need homeruns via UFAs; just hit a few singles.

- Trade Sutter. Some team will be willing to move picks or players for him. Stop pretending he is better than he is & worth $3.3M.

- Trade, buy-out, or otherwise remove Scuderi from this team. He is terrible. Recognize the mistake & get rid of him instead of trying to justify his roster spot. Buy-Outs are expensive, but cut him a damn check & be done with it already.
- s0rcerer1984

I agree with all except the resigning of Fleury. Potential fallout of that contract is greater than the potential benefit, but clearly so far he has played well.

If we did that, what would we do with the space? We have nothing to trade other than BB or Sutter. Either way, that hurts our D by getting rid of Scuds for nothing and trading a forward for a forward doesn't really help, especially if we want a better forward we would have to give more.
- znagle

Addition by subtraction. He's a negative asset on this roster and completely unfit for Johnston's system.

Addition by subtraction. He's a negative asset on this roster and completely unfit for Johnston's system.
- jfkst1

How so?

Its actually the exact opposite, he is a far better fit in HCMJ's system than he was in Bylsma's stretch pass dependent system.

MJ's system is a quick transition, using the glass without icing; and knowing where you are going with the puck 2 steps ahead of the forwards forechecking you is detrimental to a quick transition game; Scuds does both of those things masterfully.

How so?

Its actually the exact opposite, he is a far better fit in HCMJ's system than he was in Bylsma's stretch pass dependent system.
- nbartley9

His play given his cap hit. If a player can't be traded for a positive return, then they are definably a negative asset. Same class as Mike Richards. If Scuderi were put on waivers, no team would claim him because they wouldn't want him for free; that's a negative asset.

His play given his cap hit. If a player can't be traded for a positive return, then they are definably a negative asset. Same class as Mike Richards. If you put Scuderi on waivers, no team would claim him because they wouldn't want him for free; that's a negative asset.
- jfkst1

Someone being over paid and someone being a negative asset are 2 far different things. The Kings didn't think Richards could help out at an NHL level any longer, that is not the case with Scuds. Scuds is one of the major reasons that our GA is as good as it has been this season.

I'm with you guys on this one.. I think Girardi is a solid, solid shut down defenseman.
- j.boyd919

Agreed. He may be a little over paid but plays hard every game

Someone being over paid and someone being a negative asset are 2 far different things. The Kings didn't think Richards could help out at an NHL level any longer, that is not the case with Scuds. Scuds is one of the major reasons that our GA is as good as it has been this season.
- nbartley9

ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh... I'm gonna just go with no on this one.

Someone being over paid and someone being a negative asset are 2 far different things. The Kings didn't think Richards could help out at an NHL level any longer, that is not the case with Scuds. Scuds is one of the major reasons that our GA is as good as it has been this season.
- nbartley9

Being overpaid for too much term is almost exclusively the reason players are negative assets. Scuderi at $1.3m/yr isn't a big deal. Richards would be fine at $1.5m/yr.

I agree with all except the resigning of Fleury. Potential fallout of that contract is greater than the potential benefit, but clearly so far he has played well.
- jfkst1

Fleury has been good, though not great. I see his deal as market value & fair to both sides.

ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh... I'm gonna just go with no on this one.
- j.boyd919

What is it that you disagree with?

I personally love the way Scuds plays and I think he has been fantastic all year long, he is the epitome of what I want in a Defensive Dman; the guy is always in position. Which you cant say for Letang and Martin.

The guy is a +7, and he plays mostly with our bottom 6.

What is it that you disagree with?
- nbartley9

Well he has been on the ice for 61 goals against, only Letang has more with 75.. but Tanger overcomes that by being on the ice for 105 Goals for. Meanwhile, Scuderi has been on the ice for 41 goals for. And those 61 goals against are when the majority of the time he is playing against below average Quality of Competition. I understand 29 of those goals have come on the PK, but I personally believe Letang, Martin, Cole, Lovejoy, Ehrhoff (if healthy) are much better on the PK.

He could, did he want to? No.
- znagle

Of course he could.

Scuderi and 4 1sts for Vinny Lecavalier.

I doubt the Flyers would say no.

Of course he could.

Scuderi and 4 1sts for Vinny Lecavalier.

I doubt the Flyers would say no.
- jmatchett383

Only if you throw in Zac Rinaldo and a few of Couterier's teeth.

Someone being over paid and someone being a negative asset are 2 far different things. The Kings didn't think Richards could help out at an NHL level any longer, that is not the case with Scuds. Scuds is one of the major reasons that our GA is as good as it has been this season.
- nbartley9

I view certain player’s contracts as essentially inflicting 'dead' cap space on the Penguins as their existance doesn't really improve the team at all & keeps the Penguins from making use of that Cap Space on the rest of their roster. ie, Oppurtunity cost, if you will. Scuderi ($3.375M/yr), Sutter ($3.3M/yr), & Spaling ($2.2M/yr) all fall into this category to a certain extent. Lapierre ($1.1M/yr) & Adams ($700K/yr) do not in my mind as any replacement would cost just as much, if not more.

Just as an exercise, image the following line-up. See below. This line-up would free up $6.575M/yr for the 3C slot (ie, -100K for Goc over Lapierre, +$3.3M for Sutter, and +$3.375M for Scuderi). The Penguins could have signed Grabavoski or Kulemin for that type of money & the 4th line would be vastly improved as well.

Perron-Crosby-Hornquvist
Kunitz-Malkin-Comeau
Winnik-?????-Downie
Spaling-Goc-Bennett
Adams

Letang-Martin
Ehrhoff-Pouliot
Cole-Lovejoy

Fleury
Greiss

Only if you throw in Zac Rinaldo and a few of Couterier's teeth.
- j.boyd919

Those teeth belong to James Neal. He broke into Couturier's house when he was sleeping, elbowed him in the mouth and stole them. Neal described it as "sleepwalking."

Well he has been on the ice for 61 goals against, only Letang has more with 75.. but Tanger overcomes that by being on the ice for 105 Goals for. Meanwhile, Scuderi has been on the ice for 41 goals for. And those 61 goals against are when the majority of the time he is playing against below average Quality of Competition. I understand 29 of those goals have come on the PK, but I personally believe Letang, Martin, Cole, Lovejoy, Ehrhoff (if healthy) are much better on the PK.
- j.boyd919

Well im not overly enamored with Scuds ability on the 4-5 PK, he does take away passing lanes very well which is big and he plays the net front man really well, not in an overly aggressive way but by taking away his stick. Scuds real value shorthanded is on the 5-3.

Im mostly referring to his 5-5 play, he is so sound in his positioning. I know it sounds like an easy thing but he does it better than anyone else on the team.

What is it that you disagree with?

I personally love the way Scuds plays and I think he has been fantastic all year long, he is the epitome of what I want in a Defensive Dman; the guy is always in position. Which you cant say for Letang and Martin.

The guy is a +7, and he plays mostly with our bottom 6.
- nbartley9

I would feel differently if Scuderi was a defensive Dman shutting down an opposing team's top line, but he isn't playing those tough minutes; Letang and Martin are.

Scuderi is being sheltered & treading water. Guys getting paid a lot less than $3.375M/yr can do that, such as Cole ($825K) & Lovejoy ($1.1M), a combined $1.925M/yr Cap Hit (or 57% of Scuderi's Cap Hit alone).