It's actually not what a 3rd pair costs, it's what a team can afford to pay its 3rd pair.

Yes if they didn't spend the money on the 3rd pair, well money could be spent elsewhere - that's a fact. But it's not necessarily an obligation. It's the same as teams 4th lines. Tampa had a 4th line worth around 10m & really they 'could' or 'should' have won Stanley.

If your team has cheaper top 4 options then spending more on the 3rd pair isn't that silly.

To correctly identify what positions cost what, you need to look at the whole team as a whole unit not isolated to prove Jack Johnson isn't a good signing!

Also, each team will be different depending on cost of other positions relative to their overall budget.

Holy poop, breaking down budgets & players worth trying to compare all teams the same is like well, (frank)ing Corsi!

Maatta’s going to be on the third pair this year. Doesn’t he make like 6 million? To be a orange cone who does t put up enough points. JJ>Maatta anyday.

Maatta’s going to be on the third pair this year. Doesn’t he make like 6 million? To be a orange cone who does t put up enough points. JJ>Maatta anyday.
- Grinder47

Maatta makes just over 4 mil a year and this is just another attempt to hate on the singing of JJ with facts that aren't presented correctly. The Pens have a bottom 4 that can be interchangeable. To me that's a win because you know someone is going to miss time this year.

This is such a bush league article looks like it was developed by a teenage blogger new to industry. RW isn’t a great blogger but should be better then this nonsense. Do some research and make it accurate before typing up false data

Ok...but...how many of the lower cap hit bottom pairing D teams have a 1st line winger for 925k this season?

Cost is not as relevant as how you spend. I remember the on-going debate about not wanting Player X to play 3C because they cost as much as a 2C. Look, if Pens or any team for that matter, spend more on a certain position than other teams, what does it matter if they're not sacrificing quality in other parts of the lineup?

I don't care if the Pens spend $5M on a 3C or $3M on a 4C if the player is worth it, makes the team much better and it doesn't stop the Pens from both filling other spots or get them into a jam in seasons to come.

Right now I'm not happy with how the Pens are spending their money. I have no issues with spending $3.25M on a 3rd pairing dmen. The Pens are in a position to do so, but I'm not happy with whom they're spending it on. I freaked out about Oleksiak's salary, but it's honestly not bad, but it's more than I hoped for considering his partner.

Again, cost doesn't matter. It's how you choose to spend.

Cost is not as relevant as how you spend. I remember the on-going debate about not wanting Player X to play 3C because they cost as much as a 2C. Look, if Pens or any team for that matter, spend more on a certain position than other teams, what does it matter if they're not sacrificing quality in other parts of the lineup?

I don't care if the Pens spend $5M on a 3C or $3M on a 4C if the player is worth it, makes the team much better and it doesn't stop the Pens from both filling other spots or get them into a jam in seasons to come.

Right now I'm not happy with how the Pens are spending their money. I have no issues with spending $3.25M on a 3rd pairing dmen. The Pens are in a position to do so, but I'm not happy with whom they're spending it on. I freaked out about Oleksiak's salary, but it's honestly not bad, but it's more than I hoped for considering his partner.

Again, cost doesn't matter. It's how you choose to spend.
- Rinosaur

Racist

Racist
- 668710

LOL

Provorov bottom pairing ? Sure why not
- rinaldo

Bottom Blogger

Even stats guys aren’t on board with this one.

Cost is not as relevant as how you spend. I remember the on-going debate about not wanting Player X to play 3C because they cost as much as a 2C. Look, if Pens or any team for that matter, spend more on a certain position than other teams, what does it matter if they're not sacrificing quality in other parts of the lineup?

I don't care if the Pens spend $5M on a 3C or $3M on a 4C if the player is worth it, makes the team much better and it doesn't stop the Pens from both filling other spots or get them into a jam in seasons to come.

Right now I'm not happy with how the Pens are spending their money. I have no issues with spending $3.25M on a 3rd pairing dmen. The Pens are in a position to do so, but I'm not happy with whom they're spending it on. I freaked out about Oleksiak's salary, but it's honestly not bad, but it's more than I hoped for considering his partner.

Again, cost doesn't matter. It's how you choose to spend.
- Rinosaur

There is some truth to this. Vegas wasn't built on star power. They were built on having a lot of solid hockey players. It worked and a few guys had career years, but they also had solid depth throughout their roster.

I honestly think that there is too much focus on the Pens' defense and not enough on the offense's support of the defense. Yeah, the Pens did not have the greatest defense last season but they weren't really that bad. However, they were constantly put in bad situations by how the offense played (often irresponsibly).

Much like with how the defense has to support the offense by setting up plays the offense has to support the defense by not constantly turning over the puck and at least maintaining longer puck possession (to give the defense a short break), even if they can't get any great shots off. The defense can easily get burned out when it has to constantly recover from mistakes made by the offense. I think this was the defense's biggest problem last season. If the offense can play a little more responsibly with the puck, especially when the bottom pairing is on the ice, I don't think the team will have any problems on defense this year with their current lineup.

I can't stand Tortorella and he is probably the biggest Penguins-hater outside of Philly and DC but I do like the comment he made to Ian Cole in practice when Cole got traded last season - "You're not Bobby Orr so just try to keep it simple". This is really true for all bottom paring defensemen but even to a lesser extent with better ones - when they are forced to do too much they will make mistakes.

Auston Matthews, by this reasoning, would be Toronto's 4th line center.

But really, let's not kid ourselves: we know EXACTLY what the point of this blog is.

Auston Matthews, by this reasoning, would be Toronto's 4th line center.

But really, let's not kid ourselves: we know EXACTLY what the point of this blog is.
- jmatchett383

Is the point to say that he loves the signing of JJ???

Auston Matthews, by this reasoning, would be Toronto's 4th line center.

But really, let's not kid ourselves: we know EXACTLY what the point of this blog is.
- jmatchett383

Trade Crosby for Kris Beech?

Bottom Blogger
- sammy87

LMAO.

Auston Matthews, by this reasoning, would be Toronto's 4th line center.

But really, let's not kid ourselves: we know EXACTLY what the point of this blog is.
- jmatchett383

I honestly think that there is too much focus on the Pens' defense and not enough on the offense's support of the defense. Yeah, the Pens did not have the greatest defense last season but they weren't really that bad. However, they were constantly put in bad situations by how the offense played (often irresponsibly).

Much like with how the defense has to support the offense by setting up plays the offense has to support the defense by not constantly turning over the puck and at least maintaining longer puck possession (to give the defense a short break), even if they can't get any great shots off. The defense can easily get burned out when it has to constantly recover from mistakes made by the offense. I think this was the defense's biggest problem last season. If the offense can play a little more responsibly with the puck, especially when the bottom pairing is on the ice, I don't think the team will have any problems on defense this year with their current lineup.

I can't stand Tortorella and he is probably the biggest Penguins-hater outside of Philly and DC but I do like the comment he made to Ian Cole in practice when Cole got traded last season - "You're not Bobby Orr so just try to keep it simple". This is really true for all bottom paring defensemen but even to a lesser extent with better ones - when they are forced to do too much they will make mistakes.
- PghPens668771

I said the same thing all last season. There was simply a lot less effort from the forwards with the back check. Not only did it have a negative effect on our defense, but on Murray too. This problem plagued them the entire season. Hell, I thought I was watching the Dan Bylsma Penguins with all the odd man breaks against us.

As far as the premise of the blog. I just don't believe you can judge a teams spending on a specific slot without looking at the spending of the entire roster. It's obvious this is a anti-JJ blog. I'll say this again.... If our worst contract is only 3.25, we'll be fine. Sure the term hurts, but I don't believe JJ will be a Penguin at the end of the contract.

Why no blog on how inefficient the spending is on Hags? $4+mil for a top 9F that only puts up 10G?

Why no blog on how inefficient the spending is on Hags? $4+mil for a top 9F that only puts up 10G?
- sammy87

Because that's not part if RW's narrative.

Because that's not part if RW's narrative.
- jmatchett383

The concept of how much a player should cost does have a little merit though. But like a lot of things hockey, there are a lot of dynamic aspects that really make things impossible to make concrete. Especially now where there are more & more younger players coming in making an impact making some older players obsolete to a certain extent, although experience certainly helps defenders I think better than forwards.

Would you say a lot of players (forwards), tend to fall back into team first play rather than individual point creation? Hence 'a' reason for the 'alleged' age points curve? There are certainly a lot of players that keep scoring well after they turn 30 which contradicts that analytical theory, but do players develop a 'fuller' game as they get older?

Auston Matthews, by this reasoning, would be Toronto's 4th line center.

But really, let's not kid ourselves: we know EXACTLY what the point of this blog is.
- jmatchett383

F yeah.

I guess we saved money on our 4th line then eh Wilson?

Guentzel Cullen Sprong

Only cost about 2 million in total

That 1st line of Malkin Crosby Kessel is gonna be killer though...

The concept of how much a player should cost does have a little merit though. But like a lot of things hockey, there are a lot of dynamic aspects that really make things impossible to make concrete. Especially now where there are more & more younger players coming in making an impact making some older players obsolete to a certain extent, although experience certainly helps defenders I think better than forwards.

Would you say a lot of players (forwards), tend to fall back into team first play rather than individual point creation? Hence 'a' reason for the 'alleged' age points curve? There are certainly a lot of players that keep scoring well after they turn 30 which contradicts that analytical theory, but do players develop a 'fuller' game as they get older?
- Aussiepenguin

Perfect Example: Steve Yzerman

Stopped bulk point totals and became the best 2 way player in the game at the time

Oh ya, that’s when he was winning his cups