Ryan Wilson: Ray Shero's Lasting Impact On The Pittsburgh Penguins Ray Shero's Lasting Impact On The Pittsburgh Penguins

Interesting write up. Stan Bowman being another GM who was gifted with generational talent...Toews and Kane. But opposite directions. The hard loyalty that Shero had was something that wasn't an option for Stan, as the salary cap dictated necessary moves. Buff, Ladd, Sharp, Bolland, Oduya, Niemi...all casualties that had to be moved, and are fan favorites for their time with Chicago. It would be interesting to draw correlations between the two organizations on their paths.

It's so easy to see how mismaneged we were. Chicago had the right approach from the beggining. They, like us, have a core. But the rest is just spare parts. They had no problem trading soon to be UFAS to re-stock. They deserve to be where they are and unfortunately for us and 87/71 we deserve to be what we are.

Carry over from last blog:

Would you have preferred Farnham over Porter (assuming someelse would play C)? How about Kennedy?


I personally think Sheary should get a few shift on Sids left. Cullen is a good 4th line guy and should stay there.
- Zac_O

They did try Sheary there. Several times. He sucked.

Good question. Porter is vanilla. He doesn't do anything particularly good, but he also doesn't hurt the team. Farnham isn't vanilla. His energy is a positive but he also does things that hurt the team. His desire to go for the big hit leaves him out of position a lot, he's fast but can't control his skating well, and his lack of hands kills his line's offensive potential. If the rest of our fourth line was offensively inept then I'd go with Farnham, but since Sheary and Wilson are somewhat offensively capable id go with Porter.

I used to hate TK but that was mostly because of the way he was used by the coaching staff. I'd rather have Kennedy on the fourth line than Porter

Shero's drafting was definitely his biggest disgrace. Not taking Toews instead of Staal was a blunder(although we did get ok pieces for Jordo when we traded him). They could have easily got Beau Bennet in the second round but he was swinging for the fences with him(swing and a miss so far but not his fault Beau is comedically made of glass and stretched beyond capacity balloons). It's obvious that the later rounds of the draft were handled by other people because we did get some useful players in later rounds that make the losers we got in the early rounds a little more bearable. Rust, Wilson, Murray, Sudndquist, Kuhnhaclke, Taylor(I haven't given up on him yet), are all third rounders and later and all have parts to play in the future of the team and will make the 2-3 years of losing we will have to do in 4 years much more palatable. The only good first round he had was Maatta and Pouliot and some days that looks bad too).

Well, given that JR seems to be following the same strategy, I would say that this comes from higher up than the GM...

Carry over from last blog:


They did try Sheary there. Several times. He sucked.

Good question. Porter is vanilla. He doesn't do anything particularly good, but he also doesn't hurt the team. Farnham isn't vanilla. His energy is a positive but he also does things that hurt the team. His desire to go for the big hit leaves him out of position a lot, he's fast but can't control his skating well, and his lack of hands kills his line's offensive potential. If the rest of our fourth line was offensively inept then I'd go with Farnham, but since Sheary and Wilson are somewhat offensively capable id go with Porter.

I used to hate TK but that was mostly because of the way he was used by the coaching staff. I'd rather have Kennedy on the fourth line than Porter
- Victoro311

I enjoyed watching Farnham play both in Pitts and WBS and he's a fascinating guy to boot. He could easily make twice as much money working for his families company with his degree from Brown than he does in the NHL. He doesn't have to risk his health every day, he does it because he loves what he does. If you mixed his love of the game with Malkins level of talent and skill you would have the best player to have ever played. Watching Porter's uselessness every game makes my skin crawl. He doesn't hurt the team is the most ridiculous argument ever, there are better options that should be getting groomed to be bottom 6 mainstays in the near future. The roster spot should not be wasted on a guy who is on the wrong side of 30 and brings nothing unique or special to the team what so ever. Safe bets are for also-rans.

I'm glad he at least drafted Murray and Jarry. The Pens have two good young goalies in the pipeline so goalie shouldn't be a worry in the future unlike the other positions he failed to address in the draft.

Shero's drafting was definitely his biggest disgrace. Not taking Toews instead of Staal was a blunder(although we did get ok pieces for Jordo when we traded him). They could have easily got Beau Bennet in the second round but he was swinging for the fences with him(swing and a miss so far but not his fault Beau is comedically made of glass and stretched beyond capacity balloons). It's obvious that the later rounds of the draft were handled by other people because we did get some useful players in later rounds that make the losers we got in the early rounds a little more bearable. Rust, Wilson, Murray, Sudndquist, Kuhnhaclke, Taylor(I haven't given up on him yet), are all third rounders and later and all have parts to play in the future of the team and will make the 2-3 years of losing we will have to do in 4 years much more palatable. The only good first round he had was Maatta and Pouliot and some days that looks bad too).
- Dcoms

I would never dispute Shero's draft struggles because the evidence is overwhelming but I still don't understand the Toews over Staal arguements, sure Toews is a better player but Toews did not fit with Pittsburgh as well as Staal did and just like Staal, Toews would have been impossible to keep and would no longer be on the team. Overall the paths of the franchise probably wouldn't have changed much over the time that either player would have been with the organization and there's just no way of knowing if Toews would be the player he is today if he would have been drafted by the Pens and would have been buried in a 3C role behind Sid & Geno. All in all Toews is the better player but the Toews/Staal situation is pretty much irrelevant to the history and success of the team.

Shero wasn't as good as we thought he was when In Shero We Trust was the mantra around here, and he wasn't as bad as he's been made out to be since he left.

According to the Penguins' website today, no team won more regular season games than the Penguins during Shero's tenure. We at this board loved pretty much every move Shero made at the deadline at the time it was made, and we all thought those moves would lead to playoff success that didn't happen. Even Murray - fans were pining for a big defenseman who could clear the crease and Ray went out and got Hal Gill part II in Crankshaft and fans loved him until the Penguins didn't win the Stanley Cup.

And enough about Jagr and Despres. Despres was no where near ready to play a significant playoff role in 2013, he was behind where Pouliot is today. And sure, Jagr's teams beat the Penguins in back to back years. But Jagr had 1 measly goal in the 33 playoff games the Rangers and Bruins played during those playoff runs. He certainly wasn't the missing piece.

Shero had solid, deep squads after the Cup run that were derailed by injuries to Malkin and Crosby. That was his big window.

Well, given that JR seems to be following the same strategy, I would say that this comes from higher up than the GM...
- mventres

True dat.

It's so easy to see how mismaneged we were. Chicago had the right approach from the beggining. They, like us, have a core. But the rest is just spare parts. They had no problem trading soon to be UFAS to re-stock. They deserve to be where they are and unfortunately for us and 87/71 we deserve to be what we are.
- Conse

Chicago's situation is very different from the situation the Pens were in and it makes it very difficult to compare the paths each team has taken. Pittsburgh was handed a situation few other franchise have had to deal with in that their generational players(stars) outperform potential bridge deal coming out of their ELCs and jumped straight to 8.7M/year(17.4M combined) players, Chicago had the advantage of being able to lock Toews/Kane up to bridge deals which were around 6-6.5M/year(12-13M combined), that additional 4.4-5.4M/year makes a huge difference when filling out the depth around the core.

unpopular opinion: Kunitz has been worth his contract and Dupuis would have been if he hadnt had such bad luck.

But ya. scuderi was a bad idea.

Also, the stockpiling of D prospects didn't really *not* work.

I would never dispute Shero's draft struggles because the evidence is overwhelming but I still don't understand the Toews over Staal arguements, sure Toews is a better player but Toews did not fit with Pittsburgh as well as Staal did and just like Staal, Toews would have been impossible to keep and would no longer be on the team. Overall the paths of the franchise probably wouldn't have changed much over the time that either player would have been with the organization and there's just no way of knowing if Toews would be the player he is today if he would have been drafted by the Pens and would have been buried in a 3C role behind Sid & Geno. All in all Toews is the better player but the Toews/Staal situation is pretty much irrelevant to the history and success of the team.
- jaydogg1974

Toews was a btter prospect and higher rated. And whos to say Toews or Malkin aren't a winger now if the team kept all 3. And who's to say they would not have had more success during the first 5 years of Toews NHL career had he been a Penguin? And one more who's to say it was Toews that would be playing elsewhere? If we could have gotten 2 scoring wingers for Malkin we would be in a much better place right now and had Neal and Kunitz in the fold. Obviously hind site is 20/20 and you could play this game till you are blue in the face but Toews was the consensus number 1 forward that year so it's not out of line in questioning that pick.

Carry over from last blog:


They did try Sheary there. Several times. He sucked.

Good question. Porter is vanilla. He doesn't do anything particularly good, but he also doesn't hurt the team. Farnham isn't vanilla. His energy is a positive but he also does things that hurt the team. His desire to go for the big hit leaves him out of position a lot, he's fast but can't control his skating well, and his lack of hands kills his line's offensive potential. If the rest of our fourth line was offensively inept then I'd go with Farnham, but since Sheary and Wilson are somewhat offensively capable id go with Porter.

I used to hate TK but that was mostly because of the way he was used by the coaching staff. I'd rather have Kennedy on the fourth line than Porter
- Victoro311

Farbham has more goals than anyone in our bottom six. He gets to the loose pucks around the net with speed and reckless abandon, his size also makes it difficult for d to box him out. If rust had his attitude he would be a nhl regular by now too.

Honestly? Toews is the better player but Staal was magnificent for the Pens in the cup run. I'm glad Geno meshed well with Fedotenko/Sykora and Sid with Kunitz/Guerin/Dupuis.

clendening on waivers

@martox: Lolz do we?

@martox: Lolz do we?
- Victoro311

Nah. He couldn't even crack the lineup with Scuderi in Pittsburgh

Honestly? Toews is the better player but Staal was magnificent for the Pens in the cup run. I'm glad Geno meshed well with Fedotenko/Sykora and Sid with Kunitz/Guerin/Dupuis.
- Barnaby36

That's the way I look at it. Jordie Staal was exactly what we needed. Toews is much better, but what do we really want? A perfect fit or a more talented player? Probably wouldn't have been able to keep either and have it not bite us in the ass so that shouldn't be taken into account. Shero had a lot of draft day crimes, but Staal over Toews shouldn't be considered one of them

Honestly? Toews is the better player but Staal was magnificent for the Pens in the cup run. I'm glad Geno meshed well with Fedotenko/Sykora and Sid with Kunitz/Guerin/Dupuis.
- Barnaby36

I gotta agree here. Right now, you take Toews all day. However, getting Staal led to a Cup. Getting Toews may have led to one Cup, multiple Cups, or zero Cups (and one of Sid/Geno would be gone or playing wing by now). Staal led to a Cup, so it was a good pick.

I was astonished that the Pens took Staal over Toews. Toews just got done being superhuman at the World Jr's for Canada and was no doubt going to be a star. I still think Staal is a very good player but Toews, then and now, is on a different level. This was a terrible draft blunder. Malkin is a phenomenal talent but not a good centerman and the Pens would have been 100x better served having Toews center Malkin long term.

All of the BS that went on with Jagr and not getting him signed in free agency was a huge missed opportunity also. His leadership, persona and ability would have been a huge boost for the Pens and would have taken a lot of pressure off of Crosby.

Kunitz and Dupuis extensions were at least a year too long but I don't think they were the worst signings. Especially Kunitz, he might not be here forever but he has been fantastic for the Pens. He will never get as much credit as he deserves for the simple reason he played on a line with Crosby.

@Victoro311: maybe pick him up and trade him for some help

sid accepting the puppy challenge. what father would be stupid enough to accept that bet. "hey dad if crosby scores a goal can we get a dog". I would be like get out of here I ain't taking that bet

Well, given that JR seems to be following the same strategy, I would say that this comes from higher up than the GM...
- mventres

Very good assumption.