Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Forum for Pittsburgh Penguins-related messages.

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby FLPensFan on Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:40 am

Maestro wrote:I'd do Boone Jenner for Brassard - I think that'd be the main part of a CBJ-Pit trade. i think it just might happen too.

I do think that is possible and fair. Jenner is playing 2C for Columbus, and.....he's not a 2C. Brassard would be a better fit there, and Jenner would be a great fit here. Jenner can play center and LW, and once had 30 goals.

You put him as our 3C, you've got kind of a Jordan Staal light. Not as much top end production potential, but a guy that plays a little heavy.
FLPensFan
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 12,082
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby Cow_Master66 on Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:43 am

1st round pick, top prospect + good NHL player? I'd take any one of those options, but you are thinking all 3! Man I hope you are right!

Jenner for Brassard?


I really hope one of you guys are right and not just high on fentanyl....
Cow_Master66
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 8:41 am

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby FLPensFan on Thu Jan 17, 2019 9:56 am

lemieuxReturns wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
Hatrick wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:Very interesting on Brassard. Granted, these are fans, no team affiliations, but, looking around Twitter tonight on Brassard, there seem to be a lot of fans of teams that want to acquire Brassard.

I saw some Buffalo fans saying he would be their #3 target behind Silfverberg and I think Hayes.
Another Dallas fan asking if they should immediately jump on the chance to do Faksa for Brassard.
Saw some Chicago fans talking about an Anisimov for Brassard swap.
Saw a Bruins fan saying Bruins should go in on Brassard.
Another saying Brassard trade could set market for Kevin Hayes.

Again, these are random fans, but, the general talk out there around Brassard from other team fans is very favorable. Most seem to buy into the theory that he just isn't a fit here, and would work on a variety of other teams. So, don't be so sure to think we are going to get junk back in return for him. The general chatter on Brassard out there is good for Penguins possible returns in a trade.

if they were getting junk back then it wouldn't be worth it to trade him (although a certain reactionary portion of the fanbase might trade him for a bag of pucks, I don't think reasonable fans or Rutherford would).
Since he is just a rental for most teams I don't think they can shoot real high but some of those examples you named I think are possible, maybe with some minor retention or minor draft picks on one side or another depending on the player on the other side.

I don't think we will get junk either, but some seem to think because of his play with Pittsburgh he has little value. That doesn't seem to be the case.



To me, he is worth a 1st round pick, a top prospect, and a good NHL player. Because that is what we gave up. He is carrying a very good cap hit right now as well with Vegas eating some of it. To me at this point, if we don't get that kind of return back why trade the guy? Just put someone else in at 3rd line center and keep Brass for insurance. He is not costing much and it only makes sense to trade him if you get back what you gave to get him or at least something similar. The Brass for a 3rd talk is ridiculous.

Yeah, Penguins will NEVER get that kind of return. When the trade was made, Brassard had another year of term left on his deal. That increases the cost. There were also multiple teams bidding on him, which drove up the price.

It makes no sense to carry around 3M in dead cap space that isn't going to help the team. Move him for something that can help improve the team this year. I think you will likely be disappointed in any return for Brassard.
FLPensFan
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 12,082
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby FLPensFan on Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:17 am

Image

:thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

Yes, PLEASE!!!!
FLPensFan
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 12,082
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby lemieuxReturns on Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:23 am

FLPensFan wrote:
lemieuxReturns wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
Hatrick wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:Very interesting on Brassard. Granted, these are fans, no team affiliations, but, looking around Twitter tonight on Brassard, there seem to be a lot of fans of teams that want to acquire Brassard.

I saw some Buffalo fans saying he would be their #3 target behind Silfverberg and I think Hayes.
Another Dallas fan asking if they should immediately jump on the chance to do Faksa for Brassard.
Saw some Chicago fans talking about an Anisimov for Brassard swap.
Saw a Bruins fan saying Bruins should go in on Brassard.
Another saying Brassard trade could set market for Kevin Hayes.

Again, these are random fans, but, the general talk out there around Brassard from other team fans is very favorable. Most seem to buy into the theory that he just isn't a fit here, and would work on a variety of other teams. So, don't be so sure to think we are going to get junk back in return for him. The general chatter on Brassard out there is good for Penguins possible returns in a trade.

if they were getting junk back then it wouldn't be worth it to trade him (although a certain reactionary portion of the fanbase might trade him for a bag of pucks, I don't think reasonable fans or Rutherford would).
Since he is just a rental for most teams I don't think they can shoot real high but some of those examples you named I think are possible, maybe with some minor retention or minor draft picks on one side or another depending on the player on the other side.

I don't think we will get junk either, but some seem to think because of his play with Pittsburgh he has little value. That doesn't seem to be the case.



To me, he is worth a 1st round pick, a top prospect, and a good NHL player. Because that is what we gave up. He is carrying a very good cap hit right now as well with Vegas eating some of it. To me at this point, if we don't get that kind of return back why trade the guy? Just put someone else in at 3rd line center and keep Brass for insurance. He is not costing much and it only makes sense to trade him if you get back what you gave to get him or at least something similar. The Brass for a 3rd talk is ridiculous.

Yeah, Penguins will NEVER get that kind of return. When the trade was made, Brassard had another year of term left on his deal. That increases the cost. There were also multiple teams bidding on him, which drove up the price.

It makes no sense to carry around 3M in dead cap space that isn't going to help the team. Move him for something that can help improve the team this year. I think you will likely be disappointed in any return for Brassard.



That is my point though. If you cant get that kind of return for a guy who not even a year ago you felt was worth a 1st, a top prospect and an NHL player and he *is not* hurting the team then just keep him. Switch him out of the position you have him playing where it isn't working. Keep him for insurance come playoff time. 3 million is a great cap hit and we are not going to get anything better for less of a hit. If someone wants him, the way we wanted him not even a year ago, then make them pay for it. Otherwise, no thanks.
lemieuxReturns
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,194
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:00 am

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby Jim on Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:30 am

Brassard is in a bad spot here in Pittsburgh, but his current "performance" only is not what will set his value.
Jim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,503
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 9:18 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby joopen on Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:32 am

FLPensFan wrote:
Maestro wrote:I'd do Boone Jenner for Brassard - I think that'd be the main part of a CBJ-Pit trade. i think it just might happen too.

I do think that is possible and fair. Jenner is playing 2C for Columbus, and.....he's not a 2C. Brassard would be a better fit there, and Jenner would be a great fit here. Jenner can play center and LW, and once had 30 goals.

You put him as our 3C, you've got kind of a Jordan Staal light. Not as much top end production potential, but a guy that plays a little heavy.


You aren't getting Jenner for Brassard. He has 3 years remaining at $3.75M. Brassard is UFA. In order to do that you probably have to include Jarry since I don't think CBJ has much behind Bobrovski for after this year.

Edit: Perhaps Duclair is the return for Brassard 1 for 1 only if you can get another C you are comfortable with in another deal including whatever d-man is traded.
Last edited by joopen on Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
joopen
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,943
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:17 pm
Location: right behind you

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby Daniel on Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:36 am

lemieuxReturns wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:Yeah, Penguins will NEVER get that kind of return. When the trade was made, Brassard had another year of term left on his deal. That increases the cost. There were also multiple teams bidding on him, which drove up the price.

It makes no sense to carry around 3M in dead cap space that isn't going to help the team. Move him for something that can help improve the team this year. I think you will likely be disappointed in any return for Brassard.



That is my point though. If you cant get that kind of return for a guy who not even a year ago you felt was worth a 1st, a top prospect and an NHL player and he *is not* hurting the team then just keep him. Switch him out of the position you have him playing where it isn't working. Keep him for insurance come playoff time. 3 million is a great cap hit and we are not going to get anything better for less of a hit. If someone wants him, the way we wanted him not even a year ago, then make them pay for it. Otherwise, no thanks.


You'd rather keep dead weight that obviously doesn't fit the team, then lose him for nothing, rather than a 3rd round pick? Unless Brassard all of a sudden clicks, I think he'll be an anchor that ends any chance for a cup. Even a 3rd round pick is better than nothing, which is what Brassard offers today and after the season.
Daniel
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,093
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:10 pm
Location: Dallas

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby Maestro on Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:39 am

Pens need a replacement back 1 way or another which I think will happen. Too much smoke out there. Jenner was in trade rumor mill last year. They signed him to 15 over 4 in the summer.

If they are again down on him maybe he moves. That team is going to look very different next year.
Maestro
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 4,041
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:05 pm

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby Maestro on Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:41 am

joopen wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
Maestro wrote:I'd do Boone Jenner for Brassard - I think that'd be the main part of a CBJ-Pit trade. i think it just might happen too.

I do think that is possible and fair. Jenner is playing 2C for Columbus, and.....he's not a 2C. Brassard would be a better fit there, and Jenner would be a great fit here. Jenner can play center and LW, and once had 30 goals.

You put him as our 3C, you've got kind of a Jordan Staal light. Not as much top end production potential, but a guy that plays a little heavy.


You aren't getting Jenner for Brassard. He has 3 years remaining at $3.75M. Brassard is UFA. In order to do that you probably have to include Jarry since I don't think CBJ has much behind Bobrovski for after this year.


I'd still do it - but the deal only works if CBJ wants to move Jenner's contract. If they are happy with him and that deal then there is no deal to be made imo.
Maestro
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 4,041
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:05 pm

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby lemieuxReturns on Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:46 am

I think everyone needs to pump the breaks a bit. Brassard has been a disappointment. Certainly not lived up to what we gave up to get him. But an "anchor" he is not. Every team fighting for the playoffs would like to have a guy like him for 3m.... including us. We have other players who we could afford to trade if we need to address a position of weakness. No team should have 9 defensemen.
lemieuxReturns
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,194
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:00 am

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby Daniel on Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:53 am

lemieuxReturns wrote:I think everyone needs to pump the breaks a bit. Brassard has been a disappointment. Certainly not lived up to what we gave up to get him. But an "anchor" he is not. Every team fighting for the playoffs would like to have a guy like him for 3m.... including us. We have other players who we could afford to trade if we need to address a position of weakness. No team should have 9 defensemen.


He has little to no chemistry with anyone, any line he plays on isn't a threat to score unless it doesn't include him, he's not a fit for the team in any way shape or form, and his GM called him out (have you ever seen JR do that? It's rare at the most). I think that is the actual definition of an anchor. I see no way this team wins the cup with him on the team, unless he changes a lot from now until the end of the season.

He's an outstanding player and you're right, any team that needs a 2C would want him. I think he doesn't want to play 3C and it's affecting his on ice contributions. What contributions has he made to the team that makes you believe he isn't an anchor? Just because he was a good player elsewhere?
Daniel
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,093
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:10 pm
Location: Dallas

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby lemieuxReturns on Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:00 am

Daniel wrote:
lemieuxReturns wrote:I think everyone needs to pump the breaks a bit. Brassard has been a disappointment. Certainly not lived up to what we gave up to get him. But an "anchor" he is not. Every team fighting for the playoffs would like to have a guy like him for 3m.... including us. We have other players who we could afford to trade if we need to address a position of weakness. No team should have 9 defensemen.


He has little to no chemistry with anyone, any line he plays on isn't a threat to score unless it doesn't include him, he's not a fit for the team in any way shape or form, and his GM called him out (have you ever seen JR do that? It's rare at the most). I think that is the actual definition of an anchor. I see no way this team wins the cup with him on the team, unless he changes a lot from now until the end of the season.

He's an outstanding player and you're right, any team that needs a 2C would want him. I think he doesn't want to play 3C and it's affecting his on ice contributions. What contributions has he made to the team that makes you believe he isn't an anchor? Just because he was a good player elsewhere?


If we can get what we gave to get him fine. Otherwise, no thanks. Seguin is having an off year. So too is Benn. No one is saying "lets trade him for a 3rd round pick" in regards to those guys. My point is, Yes we should trade him if we can get back the value we sent or at least close to it. But otherwise, he is NOT hurting the team and he is at a great cap hit. He is the kind of player who despite his play so far has been known to step up big in the playoffs. He was hurt last season. I just do not see any point in selling low on anything in life. Its why I still own my shares in Windstream. Ugh.
lemieuxReturns
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,194
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:00 am

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby murphydump55 on Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:14 am

lemieuxReturns wrote:
Daniel wrote:
lemieuxReturns wrote:I think everyone needs to pump the breaks a bit. Brassard has been a disappointment. Certainly not lived up to what we gave up to get him. But an "anchor" he is not. Every team fighting for the playoffs would like to have a guy like him for 3m.... including us. We have other players who we could afford to trade if we need to address a position of weakness. No team should have 9 defensemen.


He has little to no chemistry with anyone, any line he plays on isn't a threat to score unless it doesn't include him, he's not a fit for the team in any way shape or form, and his GM called him out (have you ever seen JR do that? It's rare at the most). I think that is the actual definition of an anchor. I see no way this team wins the cup with him on the team, unless he changes a lot from now until the end of the season.

He's an outstanding player and you're right, any team that needs a 2C would want him. I think he doesn't want to play 3C and it's affecting his on ice contributions. What contributions has he made to the team that makes you believe he isn't an anchor? Just because he was a good player elsewhere?


If we can get what we gave to get him fine. Otherwise, no thanks. Seguin is having an off year. So too is Benn. No one is saying "lets trade him for a 3rd round pick" in regards to those guys. My point is, Yes we should trade him if we can get back the value we sent or at least close to it. But otherwise, he is NOT hurting the team and he is at a great cap hit. He is the kind of player who despite his play so far has been known to step up big in the playoffs. He was hurt last season. I just do not see any point in selling low on anything in life. Its why I still own my shares in Windstream. Ugh.



BRASSARD IS A UFA!! Seguin and Benn have 7 and 6 years left! How do you even make that comparison???

As was said before, Brassard had term left last year and was involved in a bidding war. Hence the pricetag. This shouldn't be hard to comprehend. Term left = higher price tag. Many teams involved for his services = higher pricetag.

He has 26 points in 63 games since joining the Pens. Teams will point to that as a way to knock down his value, even though he's capable of more. No term, bad play, possibly less teams involved = MUCH lower pricetag than last year.
murphydump55
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 12,643
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 1:06 pm
Location: the real hockeyville and apparently a janitor from Eastern Canada LOL

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby Daniel on Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:14 am

lemieuxReturns wrote:
Daniel wrote:
lemieuxReturns wrote:I think everyone needs to pump the breaks a bit. Brassard has been a disappointment. Certainly not lived up to what we gave up to get him. But an "anchor" he is not. Every team fighting for the playoffs would like to have a guy like him for 3m.... including us. We have other players who we could afford to trade if we need to address a position of weakness. No team should have 9 defensemen.


He has little to no chemistry with anyone, any line he plays on isn't a threat to score unless it doesn't include him, he's not a fit for the team in any way shape or form, and his GM called him out (have you ever seen JR do that? It's rare at the most). I think that is the actual definition of an anchor. I see no way this team wins the cup with him on the team, unless he changes a lot from now until the end of the season.

He's an outstanding player and you're right, any team that needs a 2C would want him. I think he doesn't want to play 3C and it's affecting his on ice contributions. What contributions has he made to the team that makes you believe he isn't an anchor? Just because he was a good player elsewhere?


If we can get what we gave to get him fine. Otherwise, no thanks. Seguin is having an off year. So too is Benn. No one is saying "lets trade him for a 3rd round pick" in regards to those guys. My point is, Yes we should trade him if we can get back the value we sent or at least close to it. But otherwise, he is NOT hurting the team and he is at a great cap hit. He is the kind of player who despite his play so far has been known to step up big in the playoffs. He was hurt last season. I just do not see any point in selling low on anything in life. Its why I still own my shares in Windstream. Ugh.


Seguin and Benn are younger, have longer contracts, and overall better than Brassard. Both have also proven they can play on the Stars, Brassard hasn't proven he can play with the Pens.

I think he is hurting the team. I think the fact that JR said something about him indicates it's even worse than we think. He just doesn't do that in the media too often, if at all. I think if he gets the kind of return we want, other pieces will have to go with him. Alone, I think he gets a minimal return for two reasons. First, how many teams even need him? Winnipeg for sure, maybe Colorado and Buffalo. I've read Dallas, but they have a lot of centers as it is, so dunno. Columbus is intriguing though, do they trade with a rival? Also, do the Pens trade with a rival, especially a 2C that might hurt them later?

While a team might give a nice return, JRs comments, the obvious lack of a fit, and his impending UFA status might lower the price a lot. I think JR almost has to trade him and everyone knows it.

Look, I like Brassard and loved the trade. I wish it worked out with him because he's the type of player that could make 3 legit scoring lines. It just hasn't worked out and I think the team is better off moving on from him. Since every team knows this, I can't see a large return unless it's in a bigger deal (then it's not a large return for Brassard, but a sum of all the parts ;) ).
Daniel
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,093
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:10 pm
Location: Dallas

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby Daniel on Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:17 am

murphydump55 wrote:
lemieuxReturns wrote:
Daniel wrote:
lemieuxReturns wrote:I think everyone needs to pump the breaks a bit. Brassard has been a disappointment. Certainly not lived up to what we gave up to get him. But an "anchor" he is not. Every team fighting for the playoffs would like to have a guy like him for 3m.... including us. We have other players who we could afford to trade if we need to address a position of weakness. No team should have 9 defensemen.


He has little to no chemistry with anyone, any line he plays on isn't a threat to score unless it doesn't include him, he's not a fit for the team in any way shape or form, and his GM called him out (have you ever seen JR do that? It's rare at the most). I think that is the actual definition of an anchor. I see no way this team wins the cup with him on the team, unless he changes a lot from now until the end of the season.

He's an outstanding player and you're right, any team that needs a 2C would want him. I think he doesn't want to play 3C and it's affecting his on ice contributions. What contributions has he made to the team that makes you believe he isn't an anchor? Just because he was a good player elsewhere?


If we can get what we gave to get him fine. Otherwise, no thanks. Seguin is having an off year. So too is Benn. No one is saying "lets trade him for a 3rd round pick" in regards to those guys. My point is, Yes we should trade him if we can get back the value we sent or at least close to it. But otherwise, he is NOT hurting the team and he is at a great cap hit. He is the kind of player who despite his play so far has been known to step up big in the playoffs. He was hurt last season. I just do not see any point in selling low on anything in life. Its why I still own my shares in Windstream. Ugh.



BRASSARD IS A UFA!! Seguin and Benn have 7 and 6 years left! How do you even make that comparison???

As was said before, Brassard had term left last year and was involved in a bidding war. Hence the pricetag. This shouldn't be hard to comprehend. Term left = higher price tag. Many teams involved for his services = higher pricetag.

He has 26 points in 63 games since joining the Pens. Teams will point to that as a way to knock down his value, even though he's capable of more. No term, bad play, possibly less teams involved = MUCH lower pricetag than last year.


Not to mention a cup or bust team, GM comments about the player, an obvious lack of fit with the team, and it's obvious that he needs to be traded. Ottawa wanted to get rid of him and could have wait until the offseason. JR needs to trade him or they don't win the cup.
Daniel
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,093
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:10 pm
Location: Dallas

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby lemieuxReturns on Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:20 am

BRASSARD IS A UFA!! Seguin and Benn have 7 and 6 years left! How do you even make that comparison???

As was said before, Brassard had term left last year and was involved in a bidding war. Hence the pricetag. This shouldn't be hard to comprehend. Term left = higher price tag. Many teams involved for his services = higher pricetag.

He has 26 points in 63 games since joining the Pens. Teams will point to that as a way to knock down his value, even though he's capable of more. No term, bad play, possibly less teams involved = MUCH lower pricetag than last year.


Wow. Calm down. I was being lazy and not looking up a better comparison. My point is that for some reason when we have guys who are playing poorly; all of a sudden its "lets try and get a 3rd". Whereas, when other players around the league are having a bad season people are suggesting pairing a 1st with a top prospect and whatever else to obtain the guy. Sometimes things don't work out, but usually if a player has a history of strong play, time is the key. For the price we paid for the guy and the cap hit he currently has I am ok with seeing it through.
lemieuxReturns
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,194
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:00 am

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby NJ5934 on Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:40 am

I'm not getting my hopes up but Jenner and Ferland would make this a COMPLETELY different team. We haven't punished opposing blueliners with any regularity in a long long time now.
NJ5934
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 4,067
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 12:33 pm
Location: Toms River, NJ

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby Cow_Master66 on Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:48 am

Daniel wrote:
lemieuxReturns wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:Yeah, Penguins will NEVER get that kind of return. When the trade was made, Brassard had another year of term left on his deal. That increases the cost. There were also multiple teams bidding on him, which drove up the price.

It makes no sense to carry around 3M in dead cap space that isn't going to help the team. Move him for something that can help improve the team this year. I think you will likely be disappointed in any return for Brassard.



That is my point though. If you cant get that kind of return for a guy who not even a year ago you felt was worth a 1st, a top prospect and an NHL player and he *is not* hurting the team then just keep him. Switch him out of the position you have him playing where it isn't working. Keep him for insurance come playoff time. 3 million is a great cap hit and we are not going to get anything better for less of a hit. If someone wants him, the way we wanted him not even a year ago, then make them pay for it. Otherwise, no thanks.


You'd rather keep dead weight that obviously doesn't fit the team, then lose him for nothing, rather than a 3rd round pick? Unless Brassard all of a sudden clicks, I think he'll be an anchor that ends any chance for a cup. Even a 3rd round pick is better than nothing, which is what Brassard offers today and after the season.


I'd take Brassard as insurance at the C position over a 3rd round pick any day of the week. Losing him for nothing vs. losing him for a 3rd round pick is pretty close to equal.
Cow_Master66
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 8:41 am

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby pens_CT on Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:55 am

Cow_Master66 wrote:
Daniel wrote:
lemieuxReturns wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:Yeah, Penguins will NEVER get that kind of return. When the trade was made, Brassard had another year of term left on his deal. That increases the cost. There were also multiple teams bidding on him, which drove up the price.

It makes no sense to carry around 3M in dead cap space that isn't going to help the team. Move him for something that can help improve the team this year. I think you will likely be disappointed in any return for Brassard.



That is my point though. If you cant get that kind of return for a guy who not even a year ago you felt was worth a 1st, a top prospect and an NHL player and he *is not* hurting the team then just keep him. Switch him out of the position you have him playing where it isn't working. Keep him for insurance come playoff time. 3 million is a great cap hit and we are not going to get anything better for less of a hit. If someone wants him, the way we wanted him not even a year ago, then make them pay for it. Otherwise, no thanks.


You'd rather keep dead weight that obviously doesn't fit the team, then lose him for nothing, rather than a 3rd round pick? Unless Brassard all of a sudden clicks, I think he'll be an anchor that ends any chance for a cup. Even a 3rd round pick is better than nothing, which is what Brassard offers today and after the season.


I'd take Brassard as insurance at the C position over a 3rd round pick any day of the week. Losing him for nothing vs. losing him for a 3rd round pick is pretty close to equal.


They will get better than a 3rd round pick for Brassard if they go that route. Too many teams seem interested for the return to be that low. If they move him for a pick, they will make another move using that pick + player/prospect to get Brassard's replacement.
pens_CT
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,196
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 5:47 pm

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby pens_CT on Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:58 am

NJ5934 wrote:I'm not getting my hopes up but Jenner and Ferland would make this a COMPLETELY different team. We haven't punished opposing blueliners with any regularity in a long long time now.


That combination would seem to be the optimum. I don't see Columbus making a deal with us unless they have plans to use Jenner's cap hit on somebody else moving forward and they think Brassard gives them a better chance in the playoffs this year.
pens_CT
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,196
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 5:47 pm

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby largegarlic on Thu Jan 17, 2019 12:02 pm

pens_CT wrote: They will get better than a 3rd round pick for Brassard if they go that route. Too many teams seem interested for the return to be that low. If they move him for a pick, they will make another move using that pick + player/prospect to get Brassard's replacement.


Yeah, it would be great if Rutherford could pull a 1-for-1 deal and swap Brassard directly for a better fit at 3C, but I still think it's more likely that Brassard is moved for a pick, and then that pick maybe plus one of the surplus d-men is used to get a new 3C.
largegarlic
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 2,329
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby FLPensFan on Thu Jan 17, 2019 12:04 pm

Cow_Master66 wrote:
Daniel wrote:
lemieuxReturns wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:Yeah, Penguins will NEVER get that kind of return. When the trade was made, Brassard had another year of term left on his deal. That increases the cost. There were also multiple teams bidding on him, which drove up the price.

It makes no sense to carry around 3M in dead cap space that isn't going to help the team. Move him for something that can help improve the team this year. I think you will likely be disappointed in any return for Brassard.



That is my point though. If you cant get that kind of return for a guy who not even a year ago you felt was worth a 1st, a top prospect and an NHL player and he *is not* hurting the team then just keep him. Switch him out of the position you have him playing where it isn't working. Keep him for insurance come playoff time. 3 million is a great cap hit and we are not going to get anything better for less of a hit. If someone wants him, the way we wanted him not even a year ago, then make them pay for it. Otherwise, no thanks.


You'd rather keep dead weight that obviously doesn't fit the team, then lose him for nothing, rather than a 3rd round pick? Unless Brassard all of a sudden clicks, I think he'll be an anchor that ends any chance for a cup. Even a 3rd round pick is better than nothing, which is what Brassard offers today and after the season.


I'd take Brassard as insurance at the C position over a 3rd round pick any day of the week. Losing him for nothing vs. losing him for a 3rd round pick is pretty close to equal.

Even if the Penguins traded Brassard for a 3rd (they won't), GMJR isn't going to just say "Woo, we got rid of that Brassard guy, got a pick, we are done." He'd take that 3rd and something else (d-man) and go get another 3C.
FLPensFan
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 12,082
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby Cow_Master66 on Thu Jan 17, 2019 12:15 pm

FLPensFan wrote:
Cow_Master66 wrote:
Daniel wrote:
lemieuxReturns wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:Yeah, Penguins will NEVER get that kind of return. When the trade was made, Brassard had another year of term left on his deal. That increases the cost. There were also multiple teams bidding on him, which drove up the price.

It makes no sense to carry around 3M in dead cap space that isn't going to help the team. Move him for something that can help improve the team this year. I think you will likely be disappointed in any return for Brassard.



That is my point though. If you cant get that kind of return for a guy who not even a year ago you felt was worth a 1st, a top prospect and an NHL player and he *is not* hurting the team then just keep him. Switch him out of the position you have him playing where it isn't working. Keep him for insurance come playoff time. 3 million is a great cap hit and we are not going to get anything better for less of a hit. If someone wants him, the way we wanted him not even a year ago, then make them pay for it. Otherwise, no thanks.


You'd rather keep dead weight that obviously doesn't fit the team, then lose him for nothing, rather than a 3rd round pick? Unless Brassard all of a sudden clicks, I think he'll be an anchor that ends any chance for a cup. Even a 3rd round pick is better than nothing, which is what Brassard offers today and after the season.


I'd take Brassard as insurance at the C position over a 3rd round pick any day of the week. Losing him for nothing vs. losing him for a 3rd round pick is pretty close to equal.

Even if the Penguins traded Brassard for a 3rd (they won't), GMJR isn't going to just say "Woo, we got rid of that Brassard guy, got a pick, we are done." He'd take that 3rd and something else (d-man) and go get another 3C.


Yes, possibly, he might make another deal. But does that make us a better team? Trading a proven playoff performer, and now a D-man for another 3C that comes with no guarantees.
And also, which Dman? The D has steadily improved and shows no signs of slowing down, so now we are mixing that up? Yes, I know Shultz is coming back, and I'm a huge fan of his, but there's going to be a rust period and it's highly possible he's not back to his "usual self" until next season.

Shipping out Brassard for a 3C doesn't guarantee we will be better down the middle.
The 3C we bring back PROBABLY won't be in the 2C mold like he is, so if we lose one of the top two guys we could be in big trouble (hence the insurance Brassard brings); on top of that, we just traded a C that could have manned the 4th line in an emergency situation.
Shipping out a Dman is banking a lot on Shultz being at 100%, and coming off a broken leg doesn't instill a lot of confidence in that happening.

I don't think this team needs to take those kinds of risks. If you get a good deal that has a good chance of helping us this year for Brass, then make it. Otherwise, this team shouldn't feel obligated to make a move for anything other than depth because they are not in a desperate position.

All IMHO of course :pop:
Cow_Master66
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 8:41 am

Re: Shaking up the Penguins, Part 2

Postby Daniel on Thu Jan 17, 2019 12:27 pm

Cow_Master66 wrote:Yes, possibly, he might make another deal. But does that make us a better team? Trading a proven playoff performer, and now a D-man for another 3C that comes with no guarantees.
And also, which Dman? The D has steadily improved and shows no signs of slowing down, so now we are mixing that up? Yes, I know Shultz is coming back, and I'm a huge fan of his, but there's going to be a rust period and it's highly possible he's not back to his "usual self" until next season.

Shipping out Brassard for a 3C doesn't guarantee we will be better down the middle.
The 3C we bring back PROBABLY won't be in the 2C mold like he is, so if we lose one of the top two guys we could be in big trouble (hence the insurance Brassard brings); on top of that, we just traded a C that could have manned the 4th line in an emergency situation.
Shipping out a Dman is banking a lot on Shultz being at 100%, and coming off a broken leg doesn't instill a lot of confidence in that happening.

I don't think this team needs to take those kinds of risks. If you get a good deal that has a good chance of helping us this year for Brass, then make it. Otherwise, this team shouldn't feel obligated to make a move for anything other than depth because they are not in a desperate position.

All IMHO of course :pop:


Shipping out Brassard prior to Pittsburgh, I agree. Shipping out Brassard in Pittsburgh, I think it'd be addition by subtraction.

I don't think the return from trading Brassard is the final return. I just used a 3rd as an example because it's just a mediocre return and the bare minimum starting point, it's still better than the effort Brassard has shown. Unless it's a top 15 pick, it doesn't really matter whether it's a 16th pick on since we likely won't see dividends for the next 2-3 years minimum.

I'd be surprised if Brassard on his own got anything worthwhile for the Pens (I think he'll part of a multiplayer trade), but I still believe it would improve the team just by him being gone. Anyone within the organization can play 3C as well as he's performing. That said, no one in the organization can match what he's capable of.
Daniel
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,093
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:10 pm
Location: Dallas

PreviousNext

Return to Pittsburgh Penguins

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests


e-mail