Ryan Wilson: Making sense of the Conor Sheary situation Making sense of the Conor Sheary situation

I think a four year offer at 3.25M for each season would be a gamble worth offering Sheary

If Sheary was amenable to that deal, the Pens should ink that without a second thought

Sheary is one of those players the Patriots would churn and burn. Amazingly productive on ELC, has good trade value, I would trade him to bring in the 3rd line C and let our wing depth replenish itself cheaply.

AGree that 4 year 13 million I'd ink in a heartbeat.

I always view RW salary numbers as wishful thinking and too low for what a guy will get. I personally wouldn't accept that number if I'm sheary.

Sheary has a good case in arbitration and I would assume he gets more than 3.25. If I were him I'd just roll the arbitration game until UFA in 2 years at that offer level. And hope that I maintain my performance.

I think its mostly based on size; but sheary reminds me of tyler kennedy. A player who had a very sharp decline.

I'm also very concerned sheary's game isn't good for the playoffs. It is no offense to him, but they call the rule book differently during the playoffs and I'm not sure if his size is ideal when the other team can do a lot of things to slow you down in the playoffs that they can't do in the regular season.

I've never thought Sheary would sign for anything less than $3.75M especially looking at comparables or even other guys on the team (HQ/Hags/ Kunitz previously). I always felt we should've packaged Sheary in a trade earlier in the offseason

I think he's getting $5 per for 5. Not just because it's round numbers.

Strong possession metrics but seems to have the puck taken from him quite easily. I really do hope he can repeat his production from last year but it is certainly not guaranteed.

Great blog Ryan!

Count me among those who wants to see Sheary do it again. Unless a great 3C is coming our way, I'd like to keep him and see what the does in a full year with Crosby and Guentzel. Eventually his salary will get too high to pay playing with those to, but I don't think we're there yet. And if he continues to put up top 4 numbers he'll have an even higher trade value later.

So I think as an asset we'd be better off holding on to him a little longer. But again, if the return is right, he's movable.

$3.25M for 3 years I'm fine with it. Anything above I'd consider an overpayment for someone who doesn't play the body in the playoffs.

We'd be paying for the Great chemistry with Guentzel and Crosby. It's worth it.

He is a very small player who could be easily injured. He has a scoring touch no doubt.
If MAF had not left none of these players could be signed at these prices.

I think there's something that gets overlooked when people use the argument that numbers are inflated when playing with Sid, and that's how many players have failed playing next to Sid.

It's really not that easy to find players who are on the same wavelength as Sid. By wavelength I clearly don't mean skill-level, but know how to play with him. Would Sheary produce the same numbers on the third line? Maybe not, but that doesn't make him less effective IMO.

If it was so easy to find players who can play Sid's game we would be having this discussion because the Pens would have bargain-basement hunted with success the last ten years.

Now, I'm not saying there isn't argument that his smaller sample size is cause for concern, but the other argument just isn't valid IMO.

I think there's something that gets overlooked when people use the argument that numbers are inflated when playing with Sid, and that's how many players have failed playing next to Sid.

It's really not that easy to find players who are on the same wavelength as Sid. By wavelength I clearly don't mean skill-level, but know how to play with him. Would Sheary produce the same numbers on the third line? Maybe not, but that doesn't make him less effective IMO.

If it was so easy to find players who can play Sid's game we would be having this discussion because the Pens would have bargain-basement hunted with success the last ten years.

Now, I'm not saying there isn't argument that his smaller sample size is cause for concern, but the other argument just isn't valid IMO.
- Rinosaur

Who all has failed at playing with Sid? Kessel and Neal before him didn't get much of a chance at playing with him. I can't really think of someone who got a long chance with him and failed.

Bennett, Iggy, and the guy we traded from Edmonton... dang... what's his name... we traded him to Anaheim for Hagelin...they all didn't do well with Sid.

Bennett, Iggy, and the guy we traded from Edmonton... dang... what's his name... we traded him to Anaheim for Hagelin...they all didn't do well with Sid.
- hipcheck_goalie

Perron. He had a good start with Sid and then did a nosedive which he still hasn't recovered from. Iggy was a shadow of himself at that point, Neal and Sid worked fine, he just had better chemistry with Geno. Phil wasn't there long cause he kept deferring and wouldn't shoot. HCMS ended that experiment after 8 or so games and it was never re visited.

Bennett, Iggy, and the guy we traded from Edmonton... dang... what's his name... we traded him to Anaheim for Hagelin...they all didn't do well with Sid.
- hipcheck_goalie

Bennett sucks and has always sucked.

Iggy played almost exclusively with Malkin and Neal - IIRC Crosby got hit in the face with the Orpik slapper the night Iggy made his Penguins debut.

Perron pretty much sucks, too.

I think there's something that gets overlooked when people use the argument that numbers are inflated when playing with Sid, and that's how many players have failed playing next to Sid.

It's really not that easy to find players who are on the same wavelength as Sid. By wavelength I clearly don't mean skill-level, but know how to play with him. Would Sheary produce the same numbers on the third line? Maybe not, but that doesn't make him less effective IMO.

If it was so easy to find players who can play Sid's game we would be having this discussion because the Pens would have bargain-basement hunted with success the last ten years.

Now, I'm not saying there isn't argument that his smaller sample size is cause for concern, but the other argument just isn't valid IMO.
- Rinosaur

Yes, it's a thing to say he gets his points because he plays with Sid. Well, are we going to sign him & not play him with Sid?

If he can score well with Sid that's great - let him. The thing is, who will replace him? It's easy saying it, but actually having someone else step in & get his scoring is another thing. Pay him (not too well), if he can score a lot, even if it's only with Sid in my opinion.

Who all has failed at playing with Sid? Kessel and Neal before him didn't get much of a chance at playing with him. I can't really think of someone who got a long chance with him and failed.
- hardnosed

Perron? Geno? Horny?

Bennett sucks and has always sucked.

Iggy played almost exclusively with Malkin and Neal - IIRC Crosby got hit in the face with the Orpik slapper the night Iggy made his Penguins debut.

Perron pretty much sucks, too.
- hardnosed

Maybe better saying others don't score as well as Shears.

Who all has failed at playing with Sid? Kessel and Neal before him didn't get much of a chance at playing with him. I can't really think of someone who got a long chance with him and failed.
- hardnosed

With regards to Neal I remember a Kunitz-Crosby-Neal line, when Malkin was out for a bit, being super dominate.

Kessel has very rarely been paired with Crosby but when he has Ive thought they've looked good. See: Sullivan's double shift of Crosby to be with Kessel vs Caps game 2 1-1 game in the second period. Crosby makes one of the best plays of the playoffs to gain the zone and then feeds it to a streaking Kessel on his right wing. Kessel buries it top shelf on Holtby. They would be very effective if they stayed together but theres no need of it.

For all these mentions of "failed" wingers why doesnt anyone ever mention the wingers he's elevated/made better? Dupuis, Armstrong, Kunitz, Malone, (ageing) Recchi, etc

I'm confused as to why people think Sheary will get less than Doums...

Sheary is one of those players the Patriots would churn and burn. Amazingly productive on ELC, has good trade value, I would trade him to bring in the 3rd line C and let our wing depth replenish itself cheaply.
- YouMeAndDupuis9

I agree with all of that. I really think he's the one, or one of the ones, that goes.

I agree with all of that. I really think he's the one, or one of the ones, that goes.
- MattStrat

We might get a feel if GMJR is thinking of trading Sheary, by when he gets a deal, if he goes to arbitration, and how long his deal is. In other words, if Sheary goes all the way to arbitration and/or only gets two years at around $3M or lower, then he might be a trade piece. GMJR might be trying to keep his term at 2yrs and his price a little lower if he wants to trade Sheary. If he plans on seeing how Sheary does before giving him a big/longer contract, I could see a one year deal. If GMJR thinks Sheary is the real deal, then he gets 4-6 yrs and the bigger contract. JMO.

Just looking for an excuse to use this

Just looking for an excuse to use this
- xShoot4WarAmpsx

I've already sent it to a couple of buds...they enjoyed it as well

Perron? Geno? Horny?
- Aussiepenguin

I wouldn't say horny failed.