I don't do this often, but I actually like that Hanifin trade. I don't think you can bring Zucker back though. The team has to change and get younger and signing him is the complete opposite of that.

He's washed, hiding him on the 4th line is the best option (other than a buyout)

Could easily see Bunting taking Zucker's spot for sure.

I hope not. I feel he is going to be way over paid and not live up to the contract.

So who do you want then lol

This is the correct Granlund take. If he stays of course. He could still be useful as a facilitator in the top 6. Obviously buyout is the better option - but if that doesn't happen

Not a guy who is expected to make between 5 and 6 million a year on a long term deal that is past his prime scoring years and has season point totals of 1, 13, 63, and 49.

So no answer. Cool

Interesting how you don't add the games played to those point totals. Weird. I wonder why?

Yes. Another reason I wouldn't want him. His games played. Thank you for bringing it up. He will be 28 when the season starts and has played 187 NHL games. He has 1 good season and 1 okay season. Not worth the risk given the size of the contract he is going to get.

I would like to have Austin Matthews and Leon draisaitl. How is that for an answer. Maybe they can trade Jeff Carter and mikael Granlund for them. And get the other teams to retain salary. That is what I would like.

It's an embarrassing answer. Just as I expected. You can't crap on people's options - especially good ones - when you have zero counter options.

Another L take. You seem to be the king of those. Should change your name to Donkey L's. And you still have yet to provide any better options I see. Big surprise there.

Sometimes the best option is doing nothing. Just because you have the ability to sign a player doesn't mean you should. He is going to be way overpaid for what he brings to the table. There doesn't have to be a "who do you sign instead" answer. This year's free agent class is a disaster. Which will make prices go up even higher. This team has a real chance to get out of cap hell this year. The last thing they should do is waste space on bad contracts. They need to sign good bottom six players to affordable contracts and try and use whatever trade capital they have to aquire young players with contract control and promising upside. There are no "L's" being taken here. Just because I don't give an example of who to sign instead of Bunting when a contract proposal wasn't even made in the first place does not negate the fact that he will most likely be overpaid by whichever team signs him.

You have to fill out a roster though lol - you can't just sign nobody. Yes - there has to be an answer. You have to field a full team.

Nothing but rambling nonsense and deflections haha. C'mon man. You can't just say they shouldn't sign Zucker, they shouldn't sign Bunting, they shouldn't sign anyone. This team has no 2LW - which means they have to sign a 2LW. If you have issues with Bunting and Zucker, then who do you want there? That's all I'm asking

I can just say they shouldn't sign someone. If I feel like that contract will be an anchor to the team, then I can say don't sign that guy. There are hundreds of available players that the roster can be filled out with. The roster that is presented in this post does that just as well as any I have seen. And get this, Michael Bunting isn't on it. Even with taking Zucker of of the roster there is still a viable top 6 and a possibly improved bottom 6. Why do I need to validate a viable replacement for someone mentioned in the comment section?

No - you can't. You have to fill out a roster. You can say you don't want them to sign a guy - but then you need to have an alternative. Hence my question - that's the entire point here.

Who cares that Bunting was mentioned in the comment section lol - why do you keep focusing on this. It's irrelevant. You're just rambling nonsense to deflect from the point. This isn't just about Bunting, it's about Zucker too. It's about you saying don't sign this guy, don't sign that guy, don't sign anyone - you have to sign someone brother. I don't get how you are struggling to understand this. You can't just say don't sign anyone haha. I'm sorry if I'm coming off rude - you just aren't making any sense.

If your plan is just call up AHL guys and suck, that's fine. Just say that though - at least that's an answer

You cared that bunting was mentioned and got upset when I said to stay away from him. There are signings and a trade in this post. Did you read the post that PensGMwannabe made? I offered one critique on one signing. The penguins have players in their system that they need to give a chance to see if they are ready. I can't believe it needs to be spelled out for you so precisely. Do you not have critical thinking skills? Reasoning abilities? Does someone have to hold your hand while you read things and explain every last detail to you? You can take out the one signing I disagreed with and still have a full roster. How are you this dense.

No - I care that you crapped on his options(Zucker and Bunting) and have no alternative. Zero. You still have yet to give one name.

Oh look more rambling nonsense and deflections. This conversation has been going on for how long now and you still can't answer the simple question? And yet you're insulting me lololololol? Arrogant and stupid is no way to go through life son.

Like I said - if you just want to call up AHL players and suck - then just say that. Just say the name Puustinen/Nylander as a Bunting alternative. It's a ridiculously terrible decision, but at least you will have finally answered the incredibly simple question. If you want the Pens to suck - that's your prerogative - but at least stand behind it. It was an incredibly simple question. I asked who you wanted - and your response was naming two players you didn't want. This whole conversation would have been avoided if you just simply gave an answer. If you want the Pens to waste the final years of Crosby/Malkin/Letang - just say it

There is no name you jerk.
Guentzal-crosby-rakell
Rust-malkin-granlund
Oconnor-haula-nylander
Phoeling-kampf-carter
Then fill in with whoever for the scratches. Ahl call-ups. Cheap bottom 6 free agents. It doesn't matter. Just don't give yourself another unmovable anchor of a contract. Why are you so hurt over this? And you still have plenty of cap space to add via trade as the season goes on. I don't understand why you need me to rewrite this person's entire armchair gm for it to make sense to you.

Nobodys hurt bud lol. I mean - maybe you are. I'm good. I hope you are too. This is all friendly discussion to me. Don't take anything to heart.

AHL call ups. That's all you needed to say when I first asked you the question. It was that simple. Instead you lead us on this ridiculous path. Enjoy 7th in the metro and 14th in the east with that team btw. Not sure why you would be against signing good players that would help the team in the final years of the core.

I don't understand why you needed the scratches spelled out for? Why that was so important and hard for you to come up with yourself. I have an idea though.


That team is no worse than last year's. Better defense group. Better bottom 6. The only real question is Granlund in the top 6. He showed ability to do most things well except produce points. Sometimes that happens with deadline acquisitions. They need time to adjust. Probably won't happen though. But by not wasting cap space on a player that isn't going to perform the way they need ( a half a point per game player isn't going to fix any problems this team has) they have room to add as the season goes on. By signing those players they are left with not even enough space to have a full roster. Let alone add in the future.

I didn't need the scratches spelled out for. Zucker/Bunting are 2LWs - I was asking who is going to replace them and play 2LW.

The team in this ACGM is fairly equal sure - your team is worse. Bunting isn't a 0.5 point per game player - so you're just wrong there lol. And no - they would have enough for a full roster. Have you not looked at the ACGM above? Adding in the future isn't going to matter if you're out of the playoff picture come the trade deadline. You're intentionally not signing good players that would help the team to leave cap space open - it makes no sense.

The Penguins have limited prospect talent. One of them should make the top 6(Puustinen/Nylander), but there's no reason to ice the team you listed if you're going to leave like 5mil in cap space available. It clearly needs a forward upgrade. That's all I'm saying. Pens are trying to compete in the final couple years of the core. They aren't a bottom team that's just going to throw a bunch of prospects out to go for a test run. If they were in cap hell - then sure - I'd agree with you. But they aren't. I just don't see why you wouldn't want to maximize the level of talent on this team? This is the thing I can't understand

Bunting had .59 points per game last season. His only full NHL season. He will be 28 when the season starts.

The roster above has 22 players. Not a full roster. It has cap space of just over $850,000. Enough for just about no player of real significance. One minor injury and they have no space to call up a replacement. Adding older expensive players to this roster doesn't do anything but hinder it.

Brother......... that's not his only full NHL season lol. He played a full year the season before. 63 points. He's at .67 points per game for his career - 0.7 over the last 2 seasons. Not to mention acting like 0.6 points per game is bad is crazy talk. And I'm not even going to get into the fact that there's more to hockey than just points per game.

22 players is a full roster bud - 20 player minimum and 23 player maximum. This is a full NHL roster. Nobody else needs to be signed. Nobody said add older and expensive players. What a terrible generalization. And again - we're back to you not giving any alternatives. You can't just field a team of 20 year olds making league minimum - you'll get destroyed. We're trying to win games here. It's about signing the best players and fielding the best team. Adding Zucker and Bunting to the roster you listed doesn't hinder it lol. That's just factually incorrect haha. Bunting also isn't old - and neither of them are expensive. 5mil isn't expensive - it's an average contract for a good player. And most importantly - they have the cap space to do so. You're intentionally making the team worse just to sit on free/open cap space. Why would you ever do that?

I'm trying to extend the olive branch here man. I have no issues with playing some young guys. Doc, Poehling, one of Puustinen/Nylander - maybe even both. But the whole point of playing those young cheap guys is to use the cap savings to surround them with good players. Not just sit on it.