I agree with that. The 2013 finally added some depth for Sid and Geno. Even the 2014 team had some depth, albeit the 4th line wasn't that good if I remember, but it's only a 4th line. Bylsma was a guy I liked in 2009 but not sure where he went wrong, just that he did.
- Thrill81

Over the years DK did a ton of reporting on "what happened". Bottom line, Dan got over confident in his abilities and refused to listen to criticisms and advice. One of the reasons they brought JM on board (at the insistence of the owners) was to help Dan with making defensive/strategic adjustments. Apparently Dan completely ignored him. Dan should have been fired after the Philly fiasco in all honesty. Then maybe they don't waste the 2013 team.

Over the years DK did a ton of reporting on "what happened". Bottom line, Dan got over confident in his abilities and refused to listen to criticisms and advice. One of the reasons they brought JM on board (at the insistence of the owners) was to help Dan with making defensive/strategic adjustments. Apparently Dan completely ignored him. Dan should have been fired after the Philly fiasco in all honesty. Then maybe they don't waste the 2013 team.
- madmike71

Honestly every team from 2010-2014 team was kind of a waste. 2012 I believe was the year we faced Tampa without Sid or Geno, and 2015 we were in the midst of a retool (and were missing like 4 defense men) but it still amazes me how management couldn't get the penguins to even a conference final (I'm gonna ignore the embarrassment of a 3rd round that was Pit vs Bos).

I certainly would have spent the Sheary and Hunwick savings differently, but none of JR's moves are close to being crippling. .
- madmike71

These are famous last words. We don't know the ramifications of the JJ signing as of yet. It can obviously go one of three ways...

1) JJ will be terrible

2) JJ will surprise all of us detractors

3) The defense will be about the same as they were last year.

The Pens are a team against the cap and having any amount of space is beneficial. Locking someone like JJ up for FIVE YEARS could have affects on building the team moving forward.

These are famous last words. We don't know the ramifications of the JJ signing as of yet. It can obviously go one of three ways...

1) JJ will be terrible

2) JJ will surprise all of us detractors

3) The defense will be about the same as they were last year.

The Pens are a team against the cap and having any amount of space is beneficial. Locking someone like JJ up for FIVE YEARS could have affects on building the team moving forward.
- Rinosaur

Honestly the signing of JJ itself wasn't a terrible move imo. Rutherford likes his projects and I'm okay with that. I initially thought the cap was too high, but seeing guys like beagle and cole get north of 3 million, I was thinking, it's not terrible, but 5 years is rough. If it was a 1 year deal and it doesn't work, hey we let him go. I want him to be good, and if he isn't, it's a rough contract.

{JJ}it's not terrible, but 5 years is rough.
- Thrill81

On first sight it indeed was a shock, but on a second look... if he really is a little better than most think, it could be a steal... though not very likely, but i will give him this [second] chance.

Honestly the signing of JJ itself wasn't a terrible move imo. Rutherford likes his projects and I'm okay with that. I initially thought the cap was too high, but seeing guys like beagle and cole get north of 3 million, I was thinking, it's not terrible, but 5 years is rough. If it was a 1 year deal and it doesn't work, hey we let him go. I want him to be good, and if he isn't, it's a rough contract.
- Thrill81

A 31 year old with 800 NHL GP is not a project.

At best JJ will be NOT awful.

At worst JJ will be a terrible, over-utilized, cap burden.

Also justifying a terrible signing by comparing it to other terrible signings is ass backwards logic.

On first sight it indeed was a shock, but on a second look... if he really is a little better than most think, it could be a steal... though not very likely, but i will give him this
- VeryModernMan[second] chance.

There is literally ZERO chance of this signing having a positive impact on the team.

A 31 year old with 800 NHL GP is not a project.

At best JJ will be NOT awful.

At worst JJ will be a terrible, over-utilized, cap burden.

Also justifying a terrible signing by comparing it to other terrible signings is ass backwards logic.
- Feds91Stammer

I'm not trying to justify the cap hit, I'm just saying the homer within me can live with it. I don't think JJ will be more than a bottom pair D for this team. I'm just hoping he becomes more for the sake of the team. JJ is a penguin now so I'm gonna hope he's good.

Honestly the signing of JJ itself wasn't a terrible move imo. Rutherford likes his projects and I'm okay with that. I initially thought the cap was too high, but seeing guys like beagle and cole get north of 3 million, I was thinking, it's not terrible, but 5 years is rough. If it was a 1 year deal and it doesn't work, hey we let him go. I want him to be good, and if he isn't, it's a rough contract.
- Thrill81

I think the existing CBA is due to expire in two years. I'm not entirely sure about that, but I know it's coming up. I haven't read this anywhere, but I have a hunch that some teams are expecting a couple of "get out of jail free" cards with the signing of the new CBA. Think of Carey Price's deal. Ryan McDonagh and Jack Johnson too. I'm sure there's more. These deals were all too long for declining players.

I think the existing CBA is due to expire in two years. I'm not entirely sure about that, but I know it's coming up. I haven't read this anywhere, but I have a hunch that some teams are expecting a couple of "get out of jail free" cards with the signing of the new CBA. Think of Carey Price's deal. Ryan McDonagh and Jack Johnson too. I'm sure there's more. These deals were all too long for declining players.
- madmike71

Toews and Seabrook are names that comes to mind too.

These are famous last words. We don't know the ramifications of the JJ signing as of yet. It can obviously go one of three ways...

1) JJ will be terrible

2) JJ will surprise all of us detractors

3) The defense will be about the same as they were last year.

The Pens are a team against the cap and having any amount of space is beneficial. Locking someone like JJ up for FIVE YEARS could have affects on building the team moving forward.
- Rinosaur

Sure it's a bad deal, but 3.25 mil in the context of an 80mil cap is hardly crippling. The reason it stings so bad is because it was entirely avoidable. I think JR was bidding against himself.

Sure it's a bad deal, but 3.25 mil in the context of an 80mil cap is hardly crippling. The reason it stings so bad is because it was entirely avoidable. I think JR was bidding against himself.
- madmike71

I guess I'm more troubled by the term. JR didn't really give himself an out with questionable player. He's not going to be able to pull a Scuderi move if this blows up in his face.

I guess I'm more troubled by the term. JR didn't really give himself an out with questionable player. He's not going to be able to pull a Scuderi move if this blows up in his face.
- Rinosaur

My main concern. Even if Jr thought he'd be a good fit, I thought Gms had learned about giving role players term. Although this free agency has shown me Gms haven't learned much at all.

Toews and Seabrook are names that comes to mind too.
- Thrill81

I don't think the Hawks signed those deals expecting them to fall off a cliff like they have, but yes, those are two "crippling contracts". Especially Seabrook. Seabrook is the definition of paying a guy for past performance.

Tom Wilson and TJ Oshie are two contracts that scream compliance buyout. Like I said earlier, Ryan McDonagh and Cary Price were deals that are brutal considering the term.

John Carlson too. He got 8 x 8. Yuck.

My main concern. Even if Jr thought he'd be a good fit, I thought Gms had learned about giving role players term. Although this free agency has shown me Gms haven't learned much at all.
- Thrill81

Definitely an issue. I hate to take media conjecture as law, but some outlets have reported the Pens think he could possibly be playing the 1st pair. That's fine, if they're right then they look like geniuses, he's still a gamble of a player and you don't go five years.

IMO you go five years for top-six forwards and top-three dmen. Everyone else I wouldn't want to do more than three years. I can't understand what they did here. It wasn't like there was a massive bidding war for him. They probably could have done three years on him.

Definitely an issue. I hate to take media conjecture as law, but some outlets have reported the Pens think he could possibly be playing the 1st pair. That's fine, if they're right then they look like geniuses, he's still a gamble of a player and you don't go five years.

IMO you go five years for top-six forwards and top-three dmen. Everyone else I wouldn't want to do more than three years. I can't understand what they did here. It wasn't like there was a massive bidding war for him. They probably could have done three years on him.
- Rinosaur

JJ likely wanted more, like 4 or 5 mil a year, on a shorter contract. Which wouldn't have been out of the question from some team - remember that McKenzie was floating a 6 mil deal for him. I mean Cody Ceci just got 4.3 mil from an arbitrator.

So the Penguins are gambling a couple extra years in return for getting him cheaper per year.

And if it doesn't work in few years they can just bury him in Arizona for a 5th round pick.

And if it doesn't work in few years they can just bury him in Arizona for a 5th round pick.
- hardnosed

Arizona sadly prefers HOF-contracts!

And if it doesn't work in few years they can just bury him in Arizona for a 5th round pick.
- hardnosed

That's not something you bank on being able to do if worse comes to worse.

JJ likely wanted more, like 4 or 5 mil a year, on a shorter contract. Which wouldn't have been out of the question from some team - remember that McKenzie was floating a 6 mil deal for him. I mean Cody Ceci just got 4.3 mil from an arbitrator.

So the Penguins are gambling a couple extra years in return for getting him cheaper per year.

And if it doesn't work in few years they can just bury him in Arizona for a 5th round pick.
- hardnosed

Getting rid of his contract likely means letting go of a decent player or prospect too. It took us Sheary to get rid of Hunwick.

It took us Sheary to get rid of Hunwick.
- Thrill81

Never understood that Hunwick-signing... he played 60 or less games in 9 of his 11 NHL-seasons, and we grant him an upgrade from $1,6M to $2,25M for 3 years... it was already questionable the time the ink dried. With us he further dropped to 42 games...

Never understood that Hunwick-signing... he played 60 or less games in 9 of his 11 NHL-seasons, and we grant him an upgrade from $1,6M to $2,25M for 3 years... it was already questionable the time the ink dried. With us he further dropped to 42 games...
- VeryModernMan

I had no issue with the Hunwick signing at the time. I expected nothing more than a solid 3rd pairing dman, but he was just a terrible fit in this system.

Never understood that Hunwick-signing... he played 60 or less games in 9 of his 11 NHL-seasons, and we grant him an upgrade from $1,6M to $2,25M for 3 years... it was already questionable the time the ink dried. With us he further dropped to 42 games...
- VeryModernMan

I didn't quite understand it, but I wasn't expecting someone awful. Leafs fans seemed to prefer him to Ron Hainsey in my experience when that signing happened. However didn't take long for Hunwick to change that perception once he started playing.

I expected nothing more than a solid 3rd pairing dman, but he was just a terrible fit in this system.
- Rinosaur

Yes, but even a 3rd pairing dman can play 82 games in a while... with 60 max. it was basically a 2,25/60*82=$3,075M signing... way too much!

Never understood that Hunwick-signing... he played 60 or less games in 9 of his 11 NHL-seasons, and we grant him an upgrade from $1,6M to $2,25M for 3 years... it was already questionable the time the ink dried. With us he further dropped to 42 games...
- VeryModernMan

I think they expected Hunwick to replace Daley. A guy that doesn't cost too much, skates well and is competent with the puck on his stick. It turned out he was just awful defensively and continually out of position. You'd think he'd settle in but it never got any better. They also assumed he could play RD. JR basically missed on every projection with Hunwick. I was elated with the Hunwick/Sheary deal. I just expected JR to use the savings on a better player.