Forums/NHL Signings

Pittsburgh Penguins signed Marcus Pettersson (5 Years / $4,025,175 AAV)

Was this a good signing?
Le graphique a été masqué

Options de sondage

 

30 jan à 10 h 59
#151
DoubleM24
Rejoint: oct 2016
Messages: 25
Mentions "j'aime": 1
Pens fan here. My opinion is just as valuable / worthless as everyone else's here.

I think this is a slight but acceptable overpayment.

All the above mentioned comparables exhibit the same basic characteristics of this contract: this is the cost of a 2nd pairing defenseman.

I don't think Pettersson is anywhere near the best 2nd pairing Dman and also don't think he's a bum. What I DO know is that right now his chemistry with his team mates and his buy-in to Pittsburgh's system is working. That's more than I can say for other defenders who have passed through in recent years.

Ultimately he's a relatively young guy who may pan out, and maybe his contract is a great deal in 3 years, maybe its a trash deal in 3 years; but at the end of it all, if Pitt can make deep runs in the post season or navigate the rest of the roster moves and future signings with better clarity than this is simply what had to be done.

What were the other options? Not sign the dude? Create a charade? Have this get in the way of resigning our goalies? Alienate the relationship with the coach? Disrupt locker room chemistry?

**** it, just give him a borderline deal and see if it works.

There are more factors to consider than eye ball tests, stats, advanced metrics etc.
vmark a aimé ceci.
30 jan à 13 h 17
#152
mhockey91
Rejoint: jun 2015
Messages: 8,728
Mentions "j'aime": 2,603
Quoting: Random2152
Not sure why he got so much. Good dman and all but he should have been closer to the holl contract than this massive overpay


He blows holl out of the water
30 jan à 13 h 22
#153
mhockey91
Rejoint: jun 2015
Messages: 8,728
Mentions "j'aime": 2,603
Quoting: hockeyfanatic05
You compared him to Justin Holl. A player that signed for less term, is less experienced, plays less time, and this is his only first full season.


It’s such a bad comparison bro. Petterson is much better. Plays more minutes and is younger. It’s a good deal. Everyone reporting the deal has said its a good deal. Petterson is only getting better too

Maatta signed for 5.72% of the cap hit, dumo signed for 5.47%.
Petterson signed for 4.92% of the cap hit. It was a good deal and it will only get better. Petterson is already a good 2nd pairing D.
vmark a aimé ceci.
30 jan à 13 h 24
#154
mhockey91
Rejoint: jun 2015
Messages: 8,728
Mentions "j'aime": 2,603
Quoting: Brian2016
Not much downside. Compare to Maatta: Pettersson is 2 years younger and already better on both sides of the puck. He signed for 4.94% of the cap while Maatta signed for 5.72% of the cap in 2016.

CGY just signed Rasmus Andersson (also 23 y.o.) long term at 5.58% of the cap. Most people in the hockey universe approved and his contract was approved by more than a 2:1 margin on this site.

Andersson might have the higher ceiling, but I think right now Pettersson is better defensively by a solid margin.

Conclusion: In my opinion, Marcus Pettersson was the best signing of the 3.



Nailed it bro
30 jan à 13 h 41
#155
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 5,173
Mentions "j'aime": 2,345
Quoting: mhockey91
He blows holl out of the water


Not really no. I am perfectly happy to say he should have gotten more, but not this much more.
30 jan à 13 h 44
#156
mhockey91
Rejoint: jun 2015
Messages: 8,728
Mentions "j'aime": 2,603
Quoting: Random2152
Not really no. I am perfectly happy to say he should have gotten more, but not this much more.


https://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=103921

there's your advanced stats breakdown on Petterson. Hes a very good 2nd pairing D and hes young. making around 5% of the cap hit on a 5 year deal is a very fair contract for him.
30 jan à 14 h 16
#157
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 5,173
Mentions "j'aime": 2,345
Quoting: mhockey91
https://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=103921

there's your advanced stats breakdown on Petterson. Hes a very good 2nd pairing D and hes young. making around 5% of the cap hit on a 5 year deal is a very fair contract for him.


I've already posted the rapm model in this thread. He is alright but nothing special. A 4-5.
30 jan à 14 h 26
#158
mhockey91
Rejoint: jun 2015
Messages: 8,728
Mentions "j'aime": 2,603
Quoting: Random2152
I've already posted the rapm model in this thread. He is alright but nothing special. A 4-5.


hes a top 4 D. thats what top 4 D's make in 2020. look at Rasmus Anderson. its not a "steal" of a contract but its not an overpay either. it was market value. a top 4 of: Dumo,Letang, Petterson, Marino is gonna be very solid
Brian2016 et vmark a aimé ceci.
30 jan à 15 h 04
#159
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 5,173
Mentions "j'aime": 2,345
Quoting: mhockey91
hes a top 4 D. thats what top 4 D's make in 2020. look at Rasmus Anderson. its not a "steal" of a contract but its not an overpay either. it was market value. a top 4 of: Dumo,Letang, Petterson, Marino is gonna be very solid


Since when is an average dman considered a top 4 d?
30 jan à 15 h 25
#160
Rejoint: aoû 2017
Messages: 1,668
Mentions "j'aime": 525
Quoting: gregb569
aren't jokes supposed to be funny..? weird concept I know


Well ... you did spend a fair amount of time digging through my past CapFriendly contributions ... and then took the time to post about them on a forum.

Sooo ... whatever you want to call it ... we can both consider it a massive success.

Thanks for taking an interest Gregory ... and stay tuned for more!
vmark a aimé ceci.
30 jan à 17 h 07
#161
mhockey91
Rejoint: jun 2015
Messages: 8,728
Mentions "j'aime": 2,603
Quoting: Random2152
Since when is an average dman considered a top 4 d?


hes not an "average d man". hes a very underrated top 4. you dont watch him everynight like I do. his advance stats are very solid as I provided an example of that, and he passes the eye test. its a very fair signing. Anyone who doesn't think so doesn't know hockey
vmark a aimé ceci.
30 jan à 17 h 30
#162
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 5,173
Mentions "j'aime": 2,345
Quoting: mhockey91
hes not an "average d man". hes a very underrated top 4. you dont watch him everynight like I do. his advance stats are very solid as I provided an example of that, and he passes the eye test. its a very fair signing. Anyone who doesn't think so doesn't know hockey


Do I really need to go to page one just to repost something I've already posted in this thread? His isolated impact is that if an average dman. Look on page 1, it it right there bud
30 jan à 17 h 45
#163
mhockey91
Rejoint: jun 2015
Messages: 8,728
Mentions "j'aime": 2,603
Quoting: Random2152
Do I really need to go to page one just to repost something I've already posted in this thread? His isolated impact is that if an average dman. Look on page 1, it it right there bud


okay and the article that I posted contained advanced stats that said he's a good top 4 D. I trust my sources over yours. I've never seen the chart you posted. All the penguins writers heavy into analytics said its a good signing. I think ill trust their opinions over some dude on capfriendly.
https://twitter.com/jmarshfof/status/1222184498701402113?s=20
30 jan à 18 h 07
#164
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 5,173
Mentions "j'aime": 2,345
Quoting: mhockey91
okay and the article that I posted contained advanced stats that said he's a good top 4 D. I trust my sources over yours. I've never seen the chart you posted. All the penguins writers heavy into analytics said its a good signing. I think ill trust their opinions over some dude on capfriendly.
https://twitter.com/jmarshfof/status/1222184498701402113?s=20


Yeah, that chart is from one of the professional stats guys. That is a rapm regression model that isolates for an individuals threat.

Or you can just use base stats without context, I'm sure that is better since it confirms your opinion.

It says right on the chart where it is from btw
30 jan à 18 h 11
#165
mhockey91
Rejoint: jun 2015
Messages: 8,728
Mentions "j'aime": 2,603
Quoting: Random2152
Yeah, that chart is from one of the professional stats guys. That is a rapm regression model that isolates for an individuals threat.

Or you can just use base stats without context, I'm sure that is better since it confirms your opinion.

It says right on the chart where it is from btw


I will trust the sources of all of the penguins writers I follow that are defending the contract. its a good contract, like it or not. leafs would love to have Petterson on their D core (even though they already have too many LHD).

people on this site are so bias against Pittsburgh. you defended the Anderson contract saying he has potential and most people voted it was a "fair contract" meanwhile Petterson is a similar age, makes less money, and has been better in the NHL. its a good contract today and it will be a great contract in 3-4 years when he hits his prime.
30 jan à 18 h 32
#166
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 5,173
Mentions "j'aime": 2,345
Quoting: mhockey91
I will trust the sources of all of the penguins writers I follow that are defending the contract. its a good contract, like it or not. leafs would love to have Petterson on their D core (even though they already have too many LHD).

people on this site are so bias against Pittsburgh. you defended the Anderson contract saying he has potential and most people voted it was a "fair contract" meanwhile Petterson is a similar age, makes less money, and has been better in the NHL. its a good contract today and it will be a great contract in 3-4 years when he hits his prime.


I never defended the Andersson contract. I voted no. I specifically said "he hasn't earned it"

Christ imagine thinking that using a professional stats guys stats is biased against the pens. Good lord man get over your victim complex.
30 jan à 19 h 30
#167
mhockey91
Rejoint: jun 2015
Messages: 8,728
Mentions "j'aime": 2,603
Quoting: Random2152
I never defended the Andersson contract. I voted no. I specifically said "he hasn't earned it"

Christ imagine thinking that using a professional stats guys stats is biased against the pens. Good lord man get over your victim complex.


Your opinion is so wrong. I’m just correcting you because you have no idea what you’re talking about. No need to get so defensive. I’ll trust my stats over yours.
30 jan à 19 h 34
#168
best poster
Rejoint: jui 2019
Messages: 1,999
Mentions "j'aime": 1,131
Quoting: mhockey91

people on this site are so bias against Pittsburgh.


giphy.gif
30 jan à 19 h 38
#169
mhockey91
Rejoint: jun 2015
Messages: 8,728
Mentions "j'aime": 2,603
Quoting: mondo
giphy.gif


You’re right I don’t care if some keyboard warriors **** talk Pittsburgh. I’ve seen 3 cups in my life and chances are with this core i can probably see another. Rutherford knows what he’s doing. You guys can hate all you want
30 jan à 23 h 30
#170
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 5,173
Mentions "j'aime": 2,345
Modifié 30 jan à 23 h 48
Quoting: mhockey91
Your opinion is so wrong. I’m just correcting you because you have no idea what you’re talking about. No need to get so defensive. I’ll trust my stats over yours.


****ing lol.
Imagine trusting bloggers with access to primitive stats over a data scientist with one of the best public models available.
31 jan à 8 h 15
#171
mhockey91
Rejoint: jun 2015
Messages: 8,728
Mentions "j'aime": 2,603
Quoting: Random2152
****ing lol.
Imagine trusting bloggers with access to primitive stats over a data scientist with one of the best public models available.


A “data scientist” lmao get out of here. And they’re not “bloggers”. Only the one article was. The rest of the articles I’ve read were from guys from the athletic, Pittsburgh Tribune, etc. It’s a good contract but clearly you’re too stubborn and focused on ONE single model to see it. Oh well not my problem. Advanced analytics should be taken with a grain of salt anyways. They can be useful but they don’t paint the full picture.
31 jan à 9 h 37
#172
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 5,173
Mentions "j'aime": 2,345
Quoting: mhockey91
A “data scientist” lmao get out of here. And they’re not “bloggers”. Only the one article was. The rest of the articles I’ve read were from guys from the athletic, Pittsburgh Tribune, etc. It’s a good contract but clearly you’re too stubborn and focused on ONE single model to see it. Oh well not my problem. Advanced analytics should be taken with a grain of salt anyways. They can be useful but they don’t paint the full picture.


I mean, you can look him up you know that right? And it's amazing that you are the one trying to tell me that I am stubborn
31 jan à 10 h 01
#173
Rejoint: mai 2015
Messages: 16,734
Mentions "j'aime": 4,349
Holy hell......... Are you guys still going at this? flushed cheeks

I never in a million years thought a Marcus Pettersson contract would be this hotly debated.
mhockey91, Hockeylover360, DragonRaptorHybrid and 1 other person a aimé ceci.
31 jan à 11 h 09
#174
Habs/Pens fan
Rejoint: oct 2017
Messages: 838
Mentions "j'aime": 259
Quoting: F50marco
Holy hell......... Are you guys still going at this? flushed cheeks

I never in a million years thought a Marcus Pettersson contract would be this hotly debated.


I love this site sometimes. Making arguments out of nothing.?
mhockey91 a aimé ceci.
31 jan à 11 h 24
#175
best poster
Rejoint: jui 2019
Messages: 1,999
Mentions "j'aime": 1,131
Quoting: F50marco
Holy hell......... Are you guys still going at this? flushed cheeks

I never in a million years thought a Marcus Pettersson contract would be this hotly debated.


It was a collision course of two people who could not bare to be wrong in an online argument.
mhockey91 a aimé ceci.
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Soumettre les modifications du sondage