So you deny that you take salary as an indication of ability and then proceed to admit that you do think it is? I know that you don’t think more $$$ = more skill in a vacuum, no one is that stupid, but you and Grinder are the kings of deferring to FO Infallibility Doctrine. Every debate begins and ends with NHL GMs know better than us, so you’re wrong because this guy’s getting paid. I think that train of thought is not nuanced and that there’s plenty of evidence to show that many FOs across the league are incompetent, and even those that aren’t are plenty susceptible to making massive mistakes seeing as how pretty much every team in the league has at least one bad contract.

As far as your question, which I actually answered, I think the evidence is in favor of there not being a huge gap between Ruhwedel and Johnson and Ruhwedel actually being a slightly better player. The one thing that you’re right about is that we don’t know if a change in scenery will help Johnson or not, so there’s a chance he could be better here. But when you make that argument you need to understand that argument doesn’t have any on-ice play to back it up and you’re making assumptions based external forces that are impossible to quantify. The people who aren’t optimistic about Johnson have legitimate cause to not be.
- Victoro311

Thats all very well said. There's a ton of stats and metrics showing that he's not that hot in his own end haha. I didnt think the Pens would win the cup with Hainsey on the 1st pair and Letang up in the press box....its not that far fetched to me that they are a solid team with JJ on one of the pairings. We'll just have to wait and see how it all plays out. Wont be long now.

What was so bad about his 2016/2017 (2 seasons ago) season?
- MattStrat

His production relative to his ice time was pretty mediocre, and that was an uptic from the prior season. When you’re an offensive blueliner who has been mediocre to bad in his own end for years, you need to produce. Johnson has been comfortably playing at a bottom pairing level for at least three years, and I personally think it’s been more like 5.

I have no idea if you put any stock into relative possession, but if you do that was atrocious last year as well.

Thats all very well said. There's a ton of stats and metrics showing that he's not that hot in his own end haha. I didnt think the Pens would win the cup with Hainsey on the 1st pair and Letang up in the press box....its not that far fetched to me that they are a solid team with JJ on one of the pairings. We'll just have to wait and see how it all plays out. Wont be long now.
- MattStrat

Look, I’ve been saying all along that the Penguins didn’t get substantially worse this offseason. I think we stayed relatively flat. My issue has always been that we didn’t get better, and I think Johnson will have pretty serious future cap implications. But yeah, I’m not saying Johnson is gonna sink this team or anything, but that also doesn’t mean I need to be fine with what I believe to be a high risk minimal upside move.

His production relative to his ice time was pretty mediocre, and that was an uptic from the prior season. When you’re an offensive blueliner who has been mediocre to bad in his own end for years, you need to produce. Johnson has been comfortably playing at a bottom pairing level for at least three years, and I personally think it’s been more like 5.

I have no idea if you put any stock into relative possession, but if you do that was atrocious last year as well.
- Victoro311

How was it in 2016/2017?

Personally I hope he ends up on 3rd pair and sheltered...but I just cant help but think HCMS will stubbornly try and keep him in top 4/give more minutes.

As for your very first point I think its very possible he ends up producing more in the Pens system surrounded by the Pens personnel, than he has in previous years.

Look, I’ve been saying all along that the Penguins didn’t get substantially worse this offseason. I think we stayed relatively flat. My issue has always been that we didn’t get better, and I think Johnson will have pretty serious future cap implications. But yeah, I’m not saying Johnson is gonna sink this team or anything, but that also doesn’t mean I need to be fine with what I believe to be a high risk minimal upside move.
- Victoro311

Touché

Jackass Johnson isn’t playing second pairing, that’s above his pay grade.
Why does everyone insist on putting Hornqvist with Crosby in their lineups? He plays better with Malkin and Haglen. The only line I agree with is your third line. I’d put Sprong with Sid and Jake(he played with them last year). And Rust, Sheahan, Simon on the fourth or Cullen instead of Simon if Brass can’t kill penalties. Grant and his 24% shooting pct can only play if there are injuries to the 4th line.

Why do you insist on playing Sprong with Crosby? Crosby likes playing players that work hard in all parts of the ice, Sprong has never shown that. Apparently he is a mirror image of Kessel. Great Shot, doesn't play defence and won't go into the corners. And for (frank)s sake, use your brain, we did not give Rust a raise to have him play 4th line, that is absolutely ridiculous.

Nice to see some of you guys heating up... In a few weeks, our friend from Scandinavia will join, and then we're complete and ready da rumble... yeah.

The mirror ball set was going to be the most interesting thing at Curveball. Their summer has been the most pedestrian in 3.0 so far. I had 40.00 Labor Day weekend tickets in my hometown and went to cookouts instead. (site changes venue name to Richard. Jeez.)

Vic is all fired up after the ND win I see

How was it in 2016/2017?

Personally I hope he ends up on 3rd pair and sheltered...but I just cant help but think HCMS will stubbornly try and keep him in top 4/give more minutes.

As for your very first point I think its very possible he ends up producing more in the Pens system surrounded by the Pens personnel, than he has in previous years.
- MattStrat

Sorry. I meant two years ago. It was like -7 in 2016/2017 and it climbed to -14 or something like that last year.

Its important to keep in mind that Johnson was being played wayyyy out of his depth in C Bus. That hopefully won't happen here and he'll be given the Cole role of being the guy on the 3rd pairing, which is a much more appropriate role and easier to hide. Johnson shouldn't be as gaudily inefficient here with a diminished role, but I still think we'll be lucky if he ends up being a net neutral, especially since I think him and Oleksiak will be a terrible pairing together.

Vic is all fired up after the ND win I see
- Feds91Stammer

I have thoughts on that game and they change wildly depending on whether I'm on my manic or depressive end at that particular moment.

At the end of the day I think its impossible to gage that game since Michigan is supposedly one of the best defenses in the league, but also has one of the worst offenses, particularly their O line. Our pass rush looked as good if not better than it did in 2012, but how much is that just your line being swiss cheese? Also how good is the Michigan defense actually? They didn't look super special, but our offensive line and running attack looked like it was in shambles? If the Michigan defense is actually as good as they say, then our O Line actually put in a valiant effort, which is pretty promising, but if you guys our overrated, that's going to be a problem. Wimbush is not good and we're gonna need a great running game to be able to hide him.

Basically if Michigan's front 7 starts wrecking people in the coming weeks, I'll feel really good about that game. If Michigan's front 7 isn't all its cracked up to be, Notre Dame will have a 10-3 season with a Camping World or Music City Bowl victory against either TCU or fake USC, which so far has been Brian Kelly's peak.

I have thoughts on that game and they change wildly depending on whether I'm on my manic or depressive end at that particular moment.

At the end of the day I think its impossible to gage that game since Michigan is supposedly one of the best defenses in the league, but also has one of the worst offenses, particularly their O line. Our pass rush looked as good if not better than it did in 2012, but how much is that just your line being swiss cheese? Also how good is the Michigan defense actually? They didn't look super special, but our offensive line and running attack looked like it was in shambles? If the Michigan defense is actually as good as they say, then our O Line actually put in a valiant effort, which is pretty promising, but if you guys our overrated, that's going to be a problem. Wimbush is not good and we're gonna need a great running game to be able to hide him.

Basically if Michigan's front 7 starts wrecking people in the coming weeks, I'll feel really good about that game. If Michigan's front 7 isn't all its cracked up to be, Notre Dame will have a 10-3 season with a Camping World or Music City Bowl victory against either TCU or fake USC, which so far has been Brian Kelly's peak.
- Victoro311

Didn't catch any of the game. But Michigan's D was stellar against the run last season and had the best pass D in the county and almost all starters returned.

From what I was told it seems as Michigan will once again be held back by a poor O-Line and lackluster play calling on offense.

Le’Veon Bell doe

Le’Veon Bell doe
- Nucker101

More like Lea'Veon Bell amirite

Didn't catch any of the game. But Michigan's D was stellar against the run last season and had the best pass D in the county and almost all starters returned.

From what I was told it seems as Michigan will once again be held back by a poor O-Line and lackluster play calling on offense.
- Feds91Stammer

There's no reason to believe that the Michigan defense isn't cracked up to be besides how decently we moved the ball in the first half. I'm just used to Notre Dame Notre Daming my hopes and dreams so I'm trying to latch onto any reason to maintain skepticism. The Michigan O Line making our defense look way better than it actually is is probably the more likely reason Notre Dame is actually not that good.

If you havent seen it already you should check out Jarry's new mask. Pretty sweet IMO.

Id post a pic of it with imgur but I dont wanna ruin the thread with a ginormous pic....because I suck at doing such things....

Sorry. I meant two years ago. It was like -7 in 2016/2017 and it climbed to -14 or something like that last year.

Its important to keep in mind that Johnson was being played wayyyy out of his depth in C Bus. That hopefully won't happen here and he'll be given the Cole role of being the guy on the 3rd pairing, which is a much more appropriate role and easier to hide. Johnson shouldn't be as gaudily inefficient here with a diminished role, but I still think we'll be lucky if he ends up being a net neutral, especially since I think him and Oleksiak will be a terrible pairing together.
- Victoro311

I think that too and think we end up seeing JJ-Schultz as the 2nd pair...for large chunks of this season....

I think that too and think we end up seeing JJ-Schultz as the 2nd pair...for large chunks of this season....
- MattStrat

Very likely, as the general idea was to have three "equal" pairings saving Letang a few seconds here and there.

Edit: Our first captain passed away today... rest in peace Ab! https://mobile.twitter.co...s/1037391391243071488?p=p

Jackass Johnson isn’t playing second pairing, that’s above his pay grade.
Why does everyone insist on putting Hornqvist with Crosby in their lineups? He plays better with Malkin and Haglen. The only line I agree with is your third line. I’d put Sprong with Sid and Jake(he played with them last year). And Rust, Sheahan, Simon on the fourth or Cullen instead of Simon if Brass can’t kill penalties. Grant and his 24% shooting pct can only play if there are injuries to the 4th line.
- dcoms77

Because Phil will be with Geno and Horny with Sid and Guentz was incredible.

So you deny that you take salary as an indication of ability and then proceed to admit that you do think it is? I know that you don’t think more $$$ = more skill in a vacuum, no one is that stupid, but you and Grinder are the kings of deferring to FO Infallibility Doctrine. Every debate begins and ends with NHL GMs know better than us, so you’re wrong because this guy’s getting paid. I think that train of thought is not nuanced and that there’s plenty of evidence to show that many FOs across the league are incompetent, and even those that aren’t are plenty susceptible to making massive mistakes seeing as how pretty much every team in the league has at least one bad contract.

As far as your question, which I actually answered, I think the evidence is in favor of there not being a huge gap between Ruhwedel and Johnson and Ruhwedel actually being a slightly better player. The one thing that you’re right about is that we don’t know if a change in scenery will help Johnson or not, so there’s a chance he could be better here. But when you make that argument you need to understand that argument doesn’t have any on-ice play to back it up and you’re making assumptions based external forces that are impossible to quantify. The people who aren’t optimistic about Johnson have legitimate cause to not be.
- Victoro311

I disagree. Same as I disagreed with Palat having top line caliber seasons.

It's pretty arrogant saying a GM is incompetent when you don't know the entire history of a trade. You don't know what circumstances surround decisions - & will never know.

'Every debate ends with GM's knowing more than us? Well I'd like some evidence on that little beauty. Sure I've said a lot of times the 'coach' knows more than us while he played certain players which is 100% correct, & from time to time GM's are paid to do things & know things we don't. It's a stretch to say every debate & in fact pretty much wrong.

My reply was to an opinion that Wilson values Ruhwedel & Johnson equally by putting the / in there. Can I not put out there that $ would indicate Johnson has more value than Ruhwedel?

I think you are wrong to say Ruhwedel is better than Johnson, but that's my opinion.

Edit: Do I think according to your logic, that Sid isn't as good as Tavares & Stamkos & Kopitar? Youre in need of a holiday if you think I think that!

So you deny that you take salary as an indication of ability and then proceed to admit that you do think it is? I know that you don’t think more $$$ = more skill in a vacuum, no one is that stupid, but you and Grinder are the kings of deferring to FO Infallibility Doctrine. Every debate begins and ends with NHL GMs know better than us, so you’re wrong because this guy’s getting paid. I think that train of thought is not nuanced and that there’s plenty of evidence to show that many FOs across the league are incompetent, and even those that aren’t are plenty susceptible to making massive mistakes seeing as how pretty much every team in the league has at least one bad contract.

As far as your question, which I actually answered, I think the evidence is in favor of there not being a huge gap between Ruhwedel and Johnson and Ruhwedel actually being a slightly better player. The one thing that you’re right about is that we don’t know if a change in scenery will help Johnson or not, so there’s a chance he could be better here. But when you make that argument you need to understand that argument doesn’t have any on-ice play to back it up and you’re making assumptions based external forces that are impossible to quantify. The people who aren’t optimistic about Johnson have legitimate cause to not be.
- Victoro311

Bullpoop bullpoop bullpoop



Muzza certainly doesn't agree

So you're saying you can't show me one example?

I mean I think we all know Johnson is playing, but I don't see what's so wrong. He was asked to name his best line up and I do think Maatta, Schultz, Letang, and Dumo are all better than Johnson. Johnson is still a question mark so I think start of the season RW got the best line up, except for Sprong as a 4th liner.
- Thrill81

You're not even giving him a chance? I mean, he's only played 12 seasons in the NHL.
Seems pretty foolish to assume these things based on very large samples sizes, no?

Bullpoop bullpoop bullpoop



Muzza certainly doesn't agree

So you're saying you can't show me one example?
- Rinosaur

[img]
We have a saying over here, once a Richard always a Richard.

You seem to be living proof of that saying! [/img]

[img]
We have a saying over here, once a Richard always a Richard.

You seem to be living proof of that saying!
- Aussiepenguin[/img]

Dancing around the point as usual

You clearly can't give any valid points

We have a saying over here
- Aussiepenguin

You two seem to have an intense love-affair...

I want to suggest a nice little 80ies Aussie-song to chill out this day:
"Mental As Anything - Live It Up!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kK_eQImKnPA