Outside of OEL i really dont know anyone on the AZ roster. I can't follow the NHL as much as I use to but if Malkin were moved thats what a deal would look like. Im not sure it makes much sense to either team TBH.
- sammy87

OEL had a really Up and down season. For long stretches he looked like a $4MM #3 D man and he regained #1 status as the season went along. He’s soft. He doesn’t take hits. He’s not successful when he tries to be physical. He’s kind of a meh defender most of the time and he’s obviously good when he’s got the puck. He’s no Karlsson in my mind. If the Penguins wanted to they could sign Karlsson and trade away cap space and this is actually what I want them to do. We should’ve kept Cole - we didn’t. We should’ve signed De Haan instead of JJ, we didn’t.

A trade of Malkin going to AZ would likely bring a center coming back and the trade would be a blockbuster. I would imagine it would be Malkin and Maatta for Keller, Stepan, Chychrun, and a 1st. AZ gets a legit #1 center and likely keeps Maatta while moving out Connauton. Pittsburgh gets better defensively, adds more skill on the wing, gets a 1st for the future and gets better on D (I do think Chychrun absolutely bounces back). I don’t see it happening, but that’s a possibility of what it could resemble. Maybe Tocchet would welcome JJ but Chayka wouldn’t and I don’t think GMJR would admit his fault, that’s why it’s Maatta instead. No reason to think Stepan couldn’t return to 50 point form with Kessel and Rust on his wings. Maybe Bjugstad flirts with the same pace playing with Keller and Simon? Crosby returns to playing with Hornqvist and Guentzel for one more year. Frick who knows!

Not really.

First, JJ isn’t a “lower pairing dman” considering he played top 2nd pairing minutes all year.

Second, mentioning Guddy isn’t about the individual. It’s about the overall direction and makeup of the team. Guddy played well while he was here. I agree with most on that but he still isn’t the type of defenseman that helps push the pace like guys like Letang, Schultz, Daley, Maatta, etc. (guys who can move the puck).

Third, the team suffered from an identity crisis. The best players on this team play hockey a certain way. The worst players on this team do not accentuate the way that they play. It was a horrible mismatch of players that don’t work well together.

It starts with the GM. He acquired poor fits for the team. He saw how the Pens won their second cup and thought that was a good model to base the team off of, while anyone who’s anything realized that trying to model a team about the second cup is a recipe for unsustainable success. Meanwhile the rest of the NHL looked at what made the buzz saw penguins of the first cup successful and replicated that model. The Pens own GM missed what made them successful. That’s where the problem is. The GM made stupid decisions.
- j.boyd919

I can't really disagree with any of this, and it could help answer the lack of team chemistry I too have called out. To me it seemed Sully was pushing to play fast all season while JR was bringing in Navy Seals to fight the battle. I think the other thing that played into the lack of chemistry/identity is the fact that the core is also two years older, and maybe not as fast as they used to be.
But man, they played SO well in March, without the two biggest free-wheelers in the Pens lineup. It was fun to watch them play that stretch because they looked like they knew what they were doing, and were moving the puck up ice with ease.
And I'm not mentioning 71 and 58 as individuals either, responsible for the two year slide. I just don't think they fit Sully's game plan... and he's staying for now...

I can't really disagree with any of this, and it could help answer the lack of team chemistry I too have called out. To me it seemed Sully was pushing to play fast all season while JR was bringing in Navy Seals to fight the battle. I think the other thing that played into the lack of chemistry/identity is the fact that the core is also two years older, and maybe not as fast as they used to be.
But man, they played SO well in March, without the two biggest free-wheelers in the Pens lineup. It was fun to watch them play that stretch because they looked like they knew what they were doing, and were moving the puck up ice with ease.
And I'm not mentioning 71 and 58 as individuals either, responsible for the two year slide. I just don't think they fit Sully's game plan... and he's staying for now...
- Cousinskrid

Sully is far easier to replace than Geno and Letang.

If the Penguins were smart - and their recent acquisitions of Eric Gudbranson and Jack Johnson indicate that they are not - then they would load up and try to win once more with this group, since it's basically a once in a lifetime roster.
- James_Tanner

The 1990-91 Pittsburgh Penguins had Mario Lemieux, Jaromir Jagr, Mark Recchi, Kevin Stevens, Ron Francis, Larry Murphy, and Paul Coffey, as well as Hall of Famers Joe Mullen and Brian Trottier in the late-stages of their careers. At best, the current make-up of the Pens is a twice-in-a-lifetime roster, and that's without even looking outside of the franchise.

The 1990-91 Pittsburgh Penguins had Mario Lemieux, Jaromir Jagr, Mark Recchi, Kevin Stevens, Ron Francis, Larry Murphy, and Paul Coffey, as well as Hall of Famers Joe Mullen and Brian Trottier in the late-stages of their careers. At best, the current make-up of the Pens is a twice-in-a-lifetime roster, and that's without even looking outside of the franchise.
- tkecanuck341

Is their no minutia too minute to not get complained about in a comment section?

Is their no minutia too minute to not get complained about in a comment section?
- James_Tanner

Tanner: hypothetically what would you give up for Malkin or Kessel? Assume that Maatta comes as well as part of the blockbuster

Is their no minutia too minute to not get complained about in a comment section?
- James_Tanner

I'm not complaining about the terminology used, but the conclusions that you're making because of it. You're suggesting that the Pens need to continue to load up because this type of roster will never come around again. History suggests otherwise. Less than 30 years ago, they had a better roster than they did today, and after their consecutive Cup championships, never were able to capture another Cup with that core. Less than 15 years later, they drafted Malkin and Crosby and started to build their current "once-in-a-lifetime" roster.

Is it so stupid to look at the fate of the 1990s Penguins and conclude that it might be better to trade away some of their aging superstars while they have trade value instead of trying to salvage something that may well not be salvageable?

I'll back JT up here. The rosters of the 91-92 pens, late 90s Avs and Wings, Early 2000s Red Wings, and others are all pre-salary cap era. The '08 Wing's and '10-15+/- Hawk's rosters were certainly as good and/or similar rosters to the best rosters of the Crosby/Malkin era, but the possibility for the "All-Pro" roster is a thing of the past. Therefore the argument exists that they could have a roster that is similar in quality, but probability suggests it won't be anytime in the near future when the Crosby/Malkin era expires.

I think the concept of "loading up" is misguided though. The pens have "loaded up" every year of the Crosby/Malkin era, and will continue to do so after they've gone if they remain a very competitive team. The fan market is there to drive them to be a cap ceiling team every season. It's how you spend the money that matters.

I'm not complaining about the terminology used, but the conclusions that you're making because of it. You're suggesting that the Pens need to continue to load up because this type of roster will never come around again. History suggests otherwise. Less than 30 years ago, they had a better roster than they did today, and after their consecutive Cup championships, never were able to capture another Cup with that core. Less than 15 years later, they drafted Malkin and Crosby and started to build their current "once-in-a-lifetime" roster.

Is it so stupid to look at the fate of the 1990s Penguins and conclude that it might be better to trade away some of their aging superstars while they have trade value instead of trying to salvage something that may well not be salvageable?
- tkecanuck341

Also too, to paraphrase Lemieux's stance on the subject. He still regrets the Penguins trading Jagr in '01. He doesn't want to see history to repeat itself with another franchise icon. Certain players reach a status where their legacy with a franchise and city are much more important (even from a competitive and financial standpoint) than their trade value as it relates to transitioning from one core's era to the next. Geno certainly fits that bill (58 and 81 aren't far off either).