If you would go after granlund for 5m you might as well just go after the Hoffman. That bumps a better winger down to the 3rd line who could help McCann drive play. If Poulin can even be carried by Sid or geno, let alone hold his own, you now have a pretty solid possible 3rd line with 2 better players supporting McCann.

I think that would have a better net benefit even though it doesn’t directly address centre. For remaining teams with cap space Pitt prob is a good destination for a goal scorer on a 1 or 2 yr contract.

Just gotta keep hoff’s gf away from mrs malkin.
- 10inchTerror

dude i could never remember if that was hoffmans's gf or Stone's. female doges be (frank)ing conniving.

FWIW

Elliotte Friedman
@FriedgeHNIC
·
2m
Hearing AHL is now targeting a Feb 5 start date. Board of Governors approved today

Yooo that Alex Jones Rogan podcast though. Pure entertainment.

If you would go after granlund for 5m you might as well just go after the Hoffman. That bumps a better winger down to the 3rd line who could help McCann drive play. If Poulin can even be carried by Sid or geno, let alone hold his own, you now have a pretty solid possible 3rd line with 2 better players supporting McCann.

I think that would have a better net benefit even though it doesn’t directly address centre. For remaining teams with cap space Pitt prob is a good destination for a goal scorer on a 1 or 2 yr contract.

Just gotta keep hoff’s gf away from mrs malkin.
- 10inchTerror

I would rather have Granlund than Hoffman. Granlund can play center, is 2+ years younger, and is better defensively. I still think Granlund can be a top 6 winger if that's what is deemed the best spot for him and it would bump Kap down to the third line. Or this:

McCann - Granlund - Tanev
Jank - Blueger - Sceviour

Edit: I just realized that my previous scenario to get Granlund was to dump Tanev and his contract. I guess this scenario would rely heavily on Poulin to play RW.

One minor point about JR's offseason is that even after acquiring Kap, we were still thin at RW and he goes out and gets two LW/Cs.

I don't see a viable path to signing either Granlund (or Hoffman) unless we trade Petts which I would probably be on board with if it meant getting one of the two aforementioned. Is it worth doing this over just signing Haula? Maybe not (even though it's yet another LW/C and he sucks at defense).

I would rather have Granlund than Hoffman. Granlund can play center, is 2+ years younger, and is better defensively. I still think Granlund can be a top 6 winger if that's what is deemed the best spot for him and it would bump Kap down to the third line. Or this:

McCann - Granlund - Tanev
Jank - Blueger - Sceviour

Edit: I just realized that my previous scenario to get Granlund was to dump Tanev and his contract. I guess this scenario would rely heavily on Poulin to play RW.

One minor point about JR's offseason is that even after acquiring Kap, we were still thin at RW and he goes out and gets two LW/Cs.

I don't see a viable path to signing either Granlund (or Hoffman) unless we trade Petts which I would probably be on board with if it meant getting one of the two aforementioned. Is it worth doing this over just signing Haula? Maybe not (even though it's yet another LW/C and he sucks at defense).
- Hockey66

I'd rather JR not make a signing that would force us to move a bigger salary out. It was just (frank) us. So maybe just signing Haula and buring Scevior, Jank, Erod etc.. would be the better move. Because no one is just taking salary it's mostly been swaps.

dude i could never remember if that was hoffmans's gf or Stone's. female doges be (frank)ing conniving.
- joecool2931

Hahaha Hoffman's crazy ass wife.

I'd rather JR not make a signing that would force us to move a bigger salary out. It was just (frank) us. So maybe just signing Haula and buring Scevior, Jank, Erod etc.. would be the better move. Because no one is just taking salary it's mostly been swaps.
- 668710

I think we could move Tanev and/or Petts to a bottom-feeder with a high draft pick attached but yeah, it's probably not worth it. Also, I don't know if we'll be able to bury Sceviour due to our lack of RWs. Maybe if Poulin comes through.

I think we could move Tanev and/or Petts to a bottom-feeder with a high draft pick attached but yeah, it's probably not worth it. Also, I don't know if we'll be able to bury Sceviour due to our lack of RWs. Maybe if Poulin comes through.
- Hockey66

As much as I’d love to trade petts he has some value and I’d not use a pick to get rid of his salary. He does his role fine and I’d keep him or tanev till he can be traded to benefit us.

As much as I’d love to trade petts he has some value and I’d not use a pick to get rid of his salary. He does his role fine and I’d keep him or tanev till he can be traded to benefit us.
- 10inchTerror

Yeah, I think with him it would be mostly a cap dump - I don't think we would need to add much. I guess it comes down to how much better is Petts than Matheson vs. how much better is Granlund than Jankowski.

Petts and Tanev were fully compensated before the flat cap and now they are overpaid. Yes, both are useful, but it comes down to roster balance and value. As of now, our third line (and bottom six) sucks.

I think Jankowski and ERod are good depth pieces, emphasis on "depth." Expecting them to succeed in a third line role is a reach to put it mildly.

I think we could move Tanev and/or Petts to a bottom-feeder with a high draft pick attached but yeah, it's probably not worth it. Also, I don't know if we'll be able to bury Sceviour due to our lack of RWs. Maybe if Poulin comes through.
- Hockey66

We really really really need Poulin to come through haha.

I disagree with the last statement and think they're all cause and effect. The Pens 4th line can probably eat 3rd line minutes, but that just makes them the new 3rd line and they will be a shut-down line. I don't think they're capable of producing the way the Pens need them as a "third line."

I think the McCann line has the potential to get severely caved in and constantly hemmed in their own zone. Jankowski and Erod are support players and you have two of them on the same line. Neither are good a driving play.

I think a stronger third line that can drive offense and control territorially is more important and funnels everything down.

I'm definitely concerned about the 3rd pair and if they're a disaster along with the McCann line, then Jarry will need to make Vezina performances on a regular basis.
- Rinosaur

I don't really disagree with anything you said there. 3rd line is a problem, a strong 4th line instead of a junk 4th line only somewhat helps.

Just personally more concerned with other areas. Hopefully ones like goaltending do work out fine. Question marks aren't always failures, just areas I'm concerned with.

All I have been hearing for the past two years is how Jack Johnson was the reason we couldn't win. Are you saying the reason for the Pens losing is actually deeper than Johnson. Or are you saying lacking a solid third line is a bigger reason than the narrative we have been believing.

I am not just saying here on this board but just about every media outlet here has ripped JJ without even considering or identifying another possible problem/solution.
- Thunderbolt

I don't know that anyone actually called JJ the whole problem. A major one, perhaps the biggest, certainly the most discussed, and the easiest to fix. People just got that impression because he's brought up so much, but he was hardly their only issue.

Matheson isn't terrible at getting the puck out, and these metrics show he is at least 3rd pairing quality in this area, but Ceci on the other hand is in JJ territory and we all know what having someone like that on a pairing will do.

If you have this pair out with the McCann line? You could have Price, Vas or Gibson out there it's more likely than not that a goal is going in.
- Rinosaur

There are several things to like about Matheson's game, but the turnovers he creates without the rewards make him pretty much the player the biggest Letang haters think Letang is and gives back any positives. He somehow learns decision-making, they might have something, but that should have developed by now.

I think its much more possible for Ceci to get scratched than JJ due to JR not being in love with him since drafting him and him also not being Sids bff. So I'm not sure we'll see him in the lineup every night if he stinks it up.

Individual stats kind of foreshadow that the 3rd line might not be good but we dont know for sure how those 3 ingredients will mix. There's a guy 2 season removed from potting 17 and then 14 the next going to be there, and I really did like a lot of what I saw from ERod whenever he had a chance. At one point I said Id try him with Sid the way he was playing. Again, stats seem to tell us it will be bad but for me this is more of a wait and see/give it a chance than say Ceci or JJ haha. I'm not even cautiously optimistic about it, just think maybe they might mix well.

Its a low paid gamble, the 3rd line, and I'd much rather of paid a bit more for more sure fire pieces. What's being gambled here is Sid and Geno's window time.
- MattStrat

I'd feel a lot better if Jankowski and ERod were competing for a spot, not both on the 3rd line trying to hold off prospects with no roster player to really push them unless you count Lafferty.

I understand what you mean ... But I still can't totally wrap my head around it because its still only 10 to 15 games (I think).
- MattStrat

That's part of why I never got much into micro stats. Way too many games are left off so a couple good or bad games can really skew the results. I prefer pulling back and just seeing the overall possession metrics. Micro stats really just help you figure out how you got there anyways. If I guy is great at zone exits and entries but still has poor possession numbers, does it really matter?

There are several things to like about Matheson's game, but the turnovers he creates without the rewards make him pretty much the player the biggest Letang haters think Letang is and gives back any positives. He somehow learns decision-making, they might have something, but that should have developed by now.
- Tojo.

This is why I would much rather him play with Marino. I know Petts is wasted on a 3rd pair, but they'd probably be able to divide the time more efficiently if they pair Pettersson with Ceci/Ruh and Matheson with Marino.

I don't really disagree with anything you said there. 3rd line is a problem, a strong 4th line instead of a junk 4th line only somewhat helps.

Just personally more concerned with other areas. Hopefully ones like goaltending do work out fine. Question marks aren't always failures, just areas I'm concerned with.
- Tojo.

I honestly feel very comfortable with Jarry. I just think if both the 3rd line and 3rd pair are a disaster it wouldn't matter if they had Price in net. Teams will be able to exploit them on a regular basis.

This is why I would much rather him play with Marino. I know Petts is wasted on a 3rd pair, but they'd probably be able to divide the time more efficiently if they pair Pettersson with Ceci/Ruh and Matheson with Marino.
- Rinosaur

I've considered that as well. Pettersson played pretty well with JJ and Gudbranson, so balancing the 2nd and 3rd pairs and putting him with Ceci might be worth trying.

I've considered that as well. Pettersson played pretty well with JJ and Gudbranson, so balancing the 2nd and 3rd pairs and putting him with Ceci might be worth trying.
- Tojo.

Or, hear me out here, Matheson is actually bad like his sample size suggests and all this does is spread the stink between two pairings leaving Dumtang as our only viable pairing against opposing top sixes.

Look, what is the one thing that pissed us off about Johnson when he was here? It’s that he sucked and the entire game plan revolved around making him suck less. What ended up happening was that Johnson would suck less at other players‘ expenses because the only way to make him “work“ was either putting him with Letang or giving him overly offensive deployments with Malkin. We all know how these guys did when saddled with the Johnson anchor. With our forward and scoring depth being what it is next season we cannot afford to shackle our best players with any kind of handicap. We need to give them the absolute best chance to succeed and put up points when they’re on the ice and just hope Jarry ate his wheaties when they’re off it.

If Matheson ends up taking a huge leap out of no where from mediocre bottom pairing D man to second pairing caliber puck mover, then we can revisit this conversation. But right now there is no reason to even consider breaking up Pettrino, which by all the stats are a very solid second pairing, for the sake of hiding Matheson and Ceci slightly better.

Or, hear me out here, Matheson is actually bad like his sample size suggests and all this does is spread the stink between two pairings leaving Dumtang as our only viable pairing against opposing top sixes.

Look, what is the one thing that pissed us off about Johnson when he was here? It’s that he sucked and the entire game plan revolved around making him suck less. What ended up happening was that Johnson would suck less at other players‘ expenses because the only way to make him “work“ was either putting him with Letang or giving him overly offensive deployments with Malkin. We all know how these guys did when saddled with the Johnson anchor. With our forward and scoring depth being what it is next season we cannot afford to shackle our best players with any kind of handicap. We need to give them the absolute best chance to succeed and put up points when they’re on the ice and just hope Jarry are his wheaties when they’re off it.

If Matheson ends up taking a huge leap out of no where from mediocre bottom pairing D man to second pairing caliber puck mover, then we can revisit this conversation. But right now there is no reason to even consider breaking up Pettrino, which by all the stats are a very solid second pairing, for the sake of hiding Matheson and Ceci slightly better.
- Victoro311

I agree, however this is how I envision it going down if Matheci doesn't work...
1)They will swap Petts and Math
2)They will bench Ceci for Ruh
3)Then it will eventually end up..
Dumtang
Pettrino
Mathedal

Yooo that Alex Jones Rogan podcast though. Pure entertainment.
- j.boyd919

Im halfway through this morning. Alex Jones is the (frank)ing man.

Or, hear me out here, Matheson is actually bad like his sample size suggests and all this does is spread the stink between two pairings leaving Dumtang as our only viable pairing against opposing top sixes.

Look, what is the one thing that pissed us off about Johnson when he was here? It’s that he sucked and the entire game plan revolved around making him suck less. What ended up happening was that Johnson would suck less at other players‘ expenses because the only way to make him “work“ was either putting him with Letang or giving him overly offensive deployments with Malkin. We all know how these guys did when saddled with the Johnson anchor. With our forward and scoring depth being what it is next season we cannot afford to shackle our best players with any kind of handicap. We need to give them the absolute best chance to succeed and put up points when they’re on the ice and just hope Jarry are his wheaties when they’re off it.

If Matheson ends up taking a huge leap out of no where from mediocre bottom pairing D man to second pairing caliber puck mover, then we can revisit this conversation. But right now there is no reason to even consider breaking up Pettrino, which by all the stats are a very solid second pairing, for the sake of hiding Matheson and Ceci slightly better.
- Victoro311

The only counter I will offer here is that Matheson, while he draws some parallels to JJ, is not JJ. Mind you, I’m very skeptical of Matheson, but I’m considering that he has more strengths than JJ and that SOME of his weakness MAY be able to be mitigated by pairing him with the right partner.

The stats I provided are the same that caused Dom to pause and want to do a deeper dive into Matheson.

So, while at the end of the day you may and probably are right, I’m just saying there may be something to giving him the right partner.

Can't wait to start the season and see some rocks thrown @ some cherry picked scapegoats on this team Matheson and Ceci are the chosen ones so far haha

Can't wait to start the season and see some rocks thrown @ some cherry picked scapegoats on this team Matheson and Ceci are the chosen ones so far haha
- Barnaby36

If by cherry picking you mean guys who have a large sample size of being bad in the league then sure, they’re cherry picked.

Like I’ve said before, I think Matheson has the potential to be an ok bottom pairing d man. Contract is awful, but he may be useful on the ice so long as he’s sheltered. I think the worst regulars we will have from an on ice perspective are Ceci and Sceviour.

Im halfway through this morning. Alex Jones is the (frank)ing man.
- joecool2931

He’s hilarious but (frank) does he need to stop interrupting people all the god damn time. He doesn’t let Rogan get a thought out before interrupting him. Giving him whiskey was a huge mistake hahah