Ryan Wilson: Pittsburgh's draft focused on defense help Pittsburgh's draft focused on defense help

Woah - Clayton Phillips was born the day the Dreamcast came out.

I'm ok with another Brian dumoulin. Plays well with our top dman and isn't a liability with the puck

Dumoulin was also drafted 51st overall

Sure seems like a reach in the 2nd. Welcome all Pens draftees. Looking forward to seeing their progress in the years coming.

Now we wait for July 1.

WIll they waive the Gretzky rule and let Phillips wear 99?? LOL

This management team has a thing with drafting guys who have been skipped over in a couple prior drafts.... 2 1997's this year, Dominick SImon when we took him was a couple years passed over, and I THINK there have been others too....not critizing it, just a observation since GMJR took over.

Also, for the hockeydb folks... give eliteprospects.com a try, seems to be a little more comprehensive.

I'm ok with another Brian dumoulin. Plays well with our top dman and isn't a liability with the puck

Dumoulin was also drafted 51st overall
- drummer829

By JR!

Sure seems like a reach in the 2nd. Welcome all Pens draftees. Looking forward to seeing their progress in the years coming.

Now we wait for July 1.
- acdc1206

I really expected a lot more player movements today... I am hopeful JR gets ahead of the others prior to July 1.

Ryan Reaves possession numbers are pretty good. He has a gf%: 55.3 and his ppg/60 is .6 ... He has decent hands, Jan 24th vs Pens If you don't recall, and upgrades our PK. He's an everyday player that would be a starter for every team in the league. He's ideal and was worth the move.

https://youtu.be/FADQPwGKj-0

Let me preface this by saying Rutherford has been a great GM for us and I wouldn't have anything different and I don't want to take anything away from him. He's been a top GM in this league for the past 3 years.

Now that that's out of the way, this is the kind of move that I expected him to make when when he was hired after his stint in Carolina. Trading a first for an unimpressive 4C on one year of term isn't a great move. Liveable but not a great move. Giving up Sundqvist as well really makes me upset. I don't kid myself here. Sundqvist isn't a blue chip prospect and his ceiling is no more than 4C, but I think this was an overpayment without Sundqvist, let alone with him.

Let me preface this by saying Rutherford has been a great GM for us and I wouldn't have anything different and I don't want to take anything away from him. He's been a top GM in this league for the past 3 years.

Now that that's out of the way, this is the kind of move that I expected him to make when when he was hired after his stint in Carolina. Trading a first for an unimpressive 4C on one year of term isn't a great move. Liveable but not a great move. Giving up Sundqvist as well really makes me upset. I don't kid myself here. Sundqvist isn't a blue chip prospect and his ceiling is no more than 4C, but I think this was an overpayment without Sundqvist, let alone with him.
- Victoro311

I think Reeves is a good roster player for the 4th ljne. I just didn't like leaving a guy like Timmins on the board.

This combined with the 51st pick "reach" (when consensus had him a 3rd or 4th round selection) leads me to believe JR and Co think it's a very top heavy and weak draft class

I think Reeves is a good roster player for the 4th ljne. I just didn't like leaving a guy like Timmins on the board.
- DeflatedPucks

Reaves is whatever. He's a pretty run in the mill 4C. Do you feel comfortable trading down for any 4C 20 selections and giving up Sundqvist? I sure don't Maybe Cullen but he's not a 4th line player, we just had him there due to center depth.

What gets me is that we have serious holes at 3C and defense that need to be addressed and that 1st and Sundqvist could have been valuable assets in acquiring those pieces. We were fine at 4C with Rowney and Sundqvist competing for that spot.

Reaves is whatever. He's a pretty run in the mill 4C. Do you feel comfortable trading down for any 4C 20 selections and giving up Sundqvist? I sure don't Maybe Cullen but he's not a 4th line player, we just had him there due to center depth.

What gets me is that we have serious holes at 3C and defense that need to be addressed and that 1st and Sundqvist could have been valuable assets in acquiring those pieces. We were fine at 4C with Rowney and Sundqvist competing for that spot.
- Victoro311

We dropped 20 slots in a weak draft. If anyone thought Sundqvist was worth a nickel, we probably would have moved him for that.

It was Reeves for a 20 spot drop in a weak draft and a throw in who was set to be taking up space and ice time in Wilkes barre. Chalk this up as an easy win

A lot of teams took liberties on the Pens last year and really, the only person to stand up for himself or his team mates was Geno. That's not good imo. Reaves may not totally deter everything but at least people will have to answer to him instead of Geno.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYebTPuIsmA

Victoro311: Why do you call Reaves a 4C? He is a winger.

This looks like a very underwhelming draft... our 2nd round pick being possibly snagged in the 4th or 5th round really irks me.

We dropped 20 slots in a weak draft. If anyone thought Sundqvist was worth a nickel, we probably would have moved him for that.

It was Reeves for a 20 spot drop in a weak draft and a throw in who was set to be taking up space and ice time in Wilkes barre. Chalk this up as an easy win
- TheGame316

Every report out of Pittsburgh said that management loved him to the point they were considering protecting him. Don't know how you can just assume that.

Obviously he fell out favor to the point he was included in this deal, but I really just don't see the asset in this. Sundqvist would have been better served as a throw in on some other deal.

Victoro311: Why do you call Reaves a 4C? He is a winger.
- T-Train

You're right. I had a rough night last night and just woke up. I (frank)ed up.

You're right. I had a rough night last night and just woke up. I (frank)ed up.
- Victoro311

No problem - I wish he was a center since we have next to nothing past Sid and Geno.

Every report out of Pittsburgh said that management loved him to the point they were considering protecting him. Don't know how you can just assume that.

Obviously he fell out favor to the point he was included in this deal, but I really just don't see the asset in this. Sundqvist would have been better served as a throw in on some other deal.
- Victoro311

THat was probably spin trying to drive up his value to move him. Kinda like when they played Scuderi every night trying to find a taker. The book was out and StLoius was probably one of the only teams willing to take a flier on him

Too slow to be a center on this team. End Of Story

No problem - I wish he was a center since we have next to nothing past Sid and Geno.
- T-Train

I'm cool with Rowney as 4C. He was at least a net neutral throughout the playoffs, which is pretty much all you can ask for from your 4C. I liked the idea of Sundqvist and Rowney having a healthy competition for that slot. I think if Rutherford wanted a 4th line guy to provide what Reaves brings, tons of guys are available in free agency every year that don't cost a 1st and a prospect.

THat was probably spin trying to drive up his value to move him. Kinda like when they played Scuderi every night trying to find a taker. The book was out and StLoius was probably one of the only teams willing to take a flier on him

Too slow to be a center on this team. End Of Story
- TheGame316

Nick Bonino.

That's the wrong hill to die on when defending this trade.

Nick Bonino.

That's the wrong hill to die on when defending this trade.
- Victoro311

Sundqvists game is nothing like Nick Boninos, Bonino does "other things" face offs, PK, blocking shots, which aren't Subdqvists attributes, but everyone knows Cullen was a better fit at 3C for this teams style anyways

This actually reminds me when all the "experts" here thought GMJR was an idiot for giving Cullen 1 year and 800k when he was an "over the hill bum"

I'm cool with Rowney as 4C. He was at least a net neutral throughout the playoffs, which is pretty much all you can ask for from your 4C. I liked the idea of Sundqvist and Rowney having a healthy competition for that slot. I think if Rutherford wanted a 4th line guy to provide what Reaves brings, tons of guys are available in free agency every year that don't cost a 1st and a prospect.
- Victoro311

I like Rowney's game, too, but it is a really small sample size with limited minutes. There is probably a reason he is making his NHL debut at age 28. Also, is he a natural center? Going forward, I don't know that I would want to rely on him to anchor a line on a Cup contending team.

Sundqvists game is nothing like Nick Boninos, Bonino does "other things" face offs, PK, blocking shots, which aren't Subdqvists attributes, but everyone knows Cullen was a better fit at 3C for this teams style anyways

This actually reminds me when all the "experts" here thought GMJR was an idiot for giving Cullen 1 year and 800k when he was an "over the hill bum"
- TheGame316

Sundqvist actually does PK and block shots. I remember in 2016 when Crosby said that Sundqvist was already a grown man when it came to his defensive game.

I don't love Sundqvist and I really don't care that we dealt him, per se. I also don't mind bringing in Ryan Reaves which I wouldn't have done but its whatever. 4th line guy with speed. Cool. I just don't like the specific deal.

My point was that I don't think this trade is indefensible but boiling it down to Sundqvist is too slow is silly and simplistic. We have a couple guys on this team who really aren't that fast. And then to punctuate that lazy argument with "clear win" is nonsense.