Polaris922

Still surprised they didn't keep Jokinen. He seemed to have an affinity with Malkin, of course a lot of guys can have career years playing with someone like him.

Jokinen isn't worth $4+ million a year. I liked the guy but that was a lot of cash for a streaky player.

That was my first thought as well. Wouldn't surprise me at all if they're in on Babcock.

There's a lot of talk that they hired Mike Johnston as a temporary fill in for Babcock's last contract year... But I dunno.

http://bit.ly/1kEzhH9

The Pittsburgh Penguins have re-signed forward Brandon Sutter to a two-year contract, it was announced today by executive vice president and general manager Jim Rutherford.

The deal runs through the 2015-16 campaign, and has an average annual value of $3.3 million.

Sutter, 25, is coming off his best playoff performance to date. He set new career highs in goals (5), assists (2), points (7), shorthanded goals (1) and plus/minus (+7), while his 2:57 average shorthanded time on ice per game ranked second among all Pittsburgh forwards. Sutter also recorded a new playoff career-high scoring streak of four games (2G-2A) from Apr. 21-28.

The 6-foot-3, 190-pound Sutter suited up for 81 of Pittsburgh's 82 games in 2013-14, tallying 13 goals and 13 assists for 26 points. Sutter played a vital role in the NHL's No. 5-ranked penalty kill unit (85%), placing second among all Pittsburgh forwards with 2:18 shorthanded minutes per game. He also scored three shorthanded goals, which was good for first on Pittsburgh and tied for fifth in the NHL.

Sutter spent four seasons with the Carolina Hurricanes before being traded to Pittsburgh with Brian Dumoulin and a 2012 first-round draft pick (Derrick Pouliot) for Jordan Staal on June 22, 2012.

In his six-year NHL career, Sutter has accumulated 77 goals and 75 assists totaling 152 points in 415 career games. The durable center has missed just one game over the past four seasons and has netted at least 10 goals in each of the last five years.

Drafted by the Carolina Hurricanes first round (11th overall) in the 2007 NHL Draft, Sutter played four seasons with Red Deer of the Western Hockey League (WHL) from 2004-08, where he was coached by his father, Brent. With Red Deer, Sutter scored 68 goals and tallied 86 assists for 154 points in 205 career regular-season games. He also took home a gold medal as a member of Team Canada at the 2008 World Junior Championship.

Don't sell the Pens short on this option...

Overpaid. Under thought. Owners are idiots. See you at the next lockout.

@sarsippius

I was thinking more Giroux's GOLF injury not that he was playing an away game of pocket pool. Lol

Nick Spaling signed a two year deal apparently worth $2.2M/year. Not much money left for Sutter, could he be gone at this point?

According to Cap Geek that leaves over $4 million with 20 signed. 2 goal, 7 D, and 11 forwards signed. I think we're sitting okay for Sutter.

Nick Spaling signed a two year deal apparently worth $2.2M/year. Not much money left for Sutter, could he be gone at this point?

I hope not. Sutter has a solid defensive presence on that third line.

Must be a Flyer thing.

I agree on retaining Weber. The reason being the signing saved their fan base, and in turn may have saved their franchise.

@hf101

@Polaris922

@jammer2

@B21

Doing some research here at work. There seems to me relatively new treatment fot VSD. If Letang's VSD is of the uncomplicated nature he might benefit from this:

http://www.uptodate.com/contents/ventricular-septal-defect-in-adults?source=machineLearning&search=adult+vsd&selectedTitle=1%7E148&sectionRank=1&anchor=H21905014#H21905014

Percutaneous repair — Transcatheter device VSD closure is a treatment option for isolated uncomplicated muscular VSDs, and for membranous VSDs, in selected patients with suitable anatomy. Appropriate anatomy for transcatheter closure includes a VSD location remote from the tricuspid and aortic valves with an adequate rim of tissue. Successful transcatheter closure has been accomplished in the presence of multiple muscular or membranous fenestrations [33,45].

The technical success rate of transcatheter closure of selected muscular and membranous VSDs is high and the mortality rate is low [46].

●In experienced hands, device closure of muscular VSDs using an Amplatzer device has a reported success rate of 93 to 100 percent and a mortality rate of 0 to 2.7 percent [47].

●Success rates for percutaneous closure of membranous VSDs with Amplatzer devices are also high. In a series of 104 patients with membranous VSDs, the defect was successfully closed in 96 percent and no deaths occurred [33]. Among those successfully closed, a trivial residual shunt was present in 47 percent at the completion of the procedure, but this decreased to 16 percent at discharge and 1 percent after a median follow-up of 38.5 months.

Similar complication rates have been reported for percutaneous closure of muscular VSDs (3 to 10 percent [47]) and membranous VSDs (0 to 12 percent) [33]. Procedural related complications could include rhythm disturbance, conduction abnormalities, and hypotension [23].

Development of complete atrioventricular block is the most significant of the procedural complications [33,47]. In a series of 104 patients who underwent transcatheter closure of membranous defects, 6 percent developed complete heart block necessitating pacemaker implantation [33]. Real-time three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography has been increasingly used to guide such procedures [48]. Given the lack of data on long-term outcomes following catheter closure of VSD in adults, patients should be followed every one to two years at an adult congenital heart disease center.

Anyway..thought I would pass it on.

Thanks! I think you should come visit the facility and pass this on to the doctors

because offersheets generally aren't a good situation. you have to offer something bigger than the owning team is likely to match, i.e., you need to pay more than they feel is worth it (and it's the offseason, the 10% cap overage allowance means it is almost impossible to offer something the other team CAN'T match), and/or have to give up draft picks enough to make the owning team feel losing the player is a good deal for them.

to boil it down, you have to offer a bad contract with distinctly unfavorable terms, enough to dissuade the team that owns the player's rights from matching.

and, it is a frequent complication that a team must own its own picks to use them as compensation for an offersheet. generally not the hugest deal on the biggest contracts, as first rounders don't get tossed around all that much or all that far in the future. the middle tiers, though, where it is seconds and thirds, many teams have long since shuffled those around.

in more specific terms, if you want to acquire pk subban via offersheet, you need to offer more than montreal feels he is worth, and you have to own your next 4 first round picks and be willing to move them for pk. so, you are looking at bringing subban on board at ~$7mil+/year for 4+ years, and functionally trading 4 first round draft picks for him. none of that is a good deal, imo. it isn't that people are afraid to offersheet him, it is that first refusal is a very powerful thing in an owning team's pocket, and it is rare that an offering team comes out with both a player and a good deal. and so it is rarely attempted.

I read that article too about doing away with them and Button's quotes. It's a good one. But I stand by my comments that when making an offer sheet you have to expect the targeted team may just hold that against you.

The Weber offer was embarrassing to the NHL in my eyes. I just don't see Poile making any deals with Philly unless it really helps Nashville. A lot.

Just curious...and I might have missed it, but can you give an example where a GM came out and flat out said offer sheets taint relationships with teams. I don't believe what journalists say anyway. They are just trying to make a living.

I know that there is a lot of assumptions and speculations that offer sheets taint team relationships (isn't this what the latter half of this thread is about). However, I have never seen a GM of team Y come out and flat out say I won't deal with team X because the gave an offer sheet to one of my top players.

Again, I don't keep up with every news conference or quote that any GM across the NHL says. I see the term "fact" and I am going to want hard proof documentation.

Anything else is pure conjecture.

The only player since the lockout to successfully sign an offer sheet and it not be matched by the team was Dustin Penner who moved from Anaheim to Edmonton. That wasn’t before Brian Burke challenged Kevin Lowe to a fight in a barn calling the move “gutless” and “an act of desperation for a general manager who is fighting to keep his job”.

None have been as outspoken as Burke and the attitude seems to be moving more towards acceptance of it as part of the business. But some have clearly not been thrilled in press releases and statements in the handling of such offers.

Way to go @Poulin20 !

@Polaris922

I'm not trying to win anything. I think a lot of people believe offersheets are some evil black magic voodoo that only the lowest of the low would even consider using...when in fact HALF the teams in the league have gone that route.

And teams that have been offersheeted have also continued to deal with the offersheetees. Or offersheeters. Oh shite!

The fact remains that offer sheets taint relationships between teams. General managers say it. Journalists say it. It's no great surprise. Does it mean they won't deal with one another? No. Does it mean you might have to sweeten it a little to get it done? Yes.

@Polaris922

 

 Well half the league has the "stigma" then. And teams still appear to be dealing with them.

 

 The Flames were the last team to sign a player to an offersheet. Colorado made one trade with them months later, and another since. That's a heck of a grudge.

Please show me where I said teams wouldn't deal with anybody that did it to them.  I seriously think half the posters in this thread are only reading the words they choose to read.  It's always easy to win a debate when you create both sides of it.  

can you expand on this? the numbers say there are more than one every summer. given that the only likely targets are outstanding talents who are not yet arbitration eligible and are not under contract by the end of june...how often does that happen? a couple every summer? and on average one of those gets an offersheet.... so...what, 20%?

most GM's get their cornerstone prospects signed before free agency. of those few that don't, a noticeable percentage see a sheet. vanek, penner, backes, bernier, hjalmarsson, o'reilly, weber. that's 7 over the last 7 years.

Well... Numbers wise... There are STILL 61 RFA's right now. How many before the signing frenzy? Double that? But let's stay conservative with @radoran 's earlier figure of 90 by the time you can throw offers. The argument that only a couple are worth pursuing is invalid. A lot of these guys are top six or good checking line scoring forwards, or promising defensemen.

Why hasn't anyone offer sheeted Subban? Kruger? Johanssen? Sutter? Niederreiter? Frolik? Schultz? Sobotka? Schwartz? Silfverberg? Smith? Smith-Pelly?

There are plenty if teams who would love those guys in one role or another. But let's stick with math instead of subjective evaluation. 28 years... 90 per year... 2520 opportunities for offer sheets. There have been 35. That's 14%. That's a pretty rare bird.

Now the idea that some are worth it some are not only holds so much water. If there is truly no backlash for throwing offer sheets, why haven't there been any thrown at Torey Krug? Or Subban? Ryan Johansen??! I'd love to have that guy and who cares if the Blue Jackets are mad right?

I just see too many RFA's out there every year worth going after, that would command mediocre draft picks, and yet nobody goes after them.

That tells me there's a lot more stigma on offer sheets than just "oh but it's allowed".

and again, if a general manager out there let his borderline generational talent get past july 1 without a contract, then that player receives an offersheet, and then that GM allows his ruffled feathers (to continue the analogy) influence negotiations...it's his own best deal he is tanking.

Gotta disagree about the rarity and impact of offer sheets... But this line absolutely blew me away. I honestly never thought I'd see a Flyers fan use the word "tanking" outside of a discussion about the Penguins... :ph43r:

It could also be that Polie isn't interested in replacing his temporary injury problem with a four year commitment to a 34-year-old declining center with a history of injury problems.

But I risk repeating myself

You forgot the outrageous cap hit part

@radoran

Thank you. I feel like every person that jumps into the conversation means we have to start all over. Lol.

I understand what you're saying but Holmgren is no longer the GM of the Flyers so whatever bitterness Poile has towards him should die and he can build a trading relationship with Hextall. If Poile is going to hold a grudge against the Flyers then that's his choice but it would be pretty childless.

Childish or standing on principles? Matter of perspective.

Once again the focus isn't on any one deal... It's on a relationship that was built by these transactions that helped BOTH clubs. But that relationship is a bit tarnished now I'd say. That's the point. I'm not debating the individual merits of any one exchange. I'm debating the impact the Weber offer sheet has had.

@JackStraw

I didn't say that he gave you gifts, it was that you had a good relationship with a successful trade partner.

@flyercanuck

Deals are frequently made with one side conceding a little to the other. Beneficial to both but maybe a little tilted and considerations down the road to return the favor.

The Lecavalier deal could be just such a deal. Would it benefit the Predators? It MIGHT if VLC rebounds a little. Would it benefit the Flyers? Absolutely. That's a risk Poile might be more inclined to take if he feels the Flyers might consider his taking the risk in the future.

And don't kid yourself into thinking that kind of stuff doesn't happen. There were a few deals between the Pens and Whalers that clearly benefitted the Pens more, and now look who's GM? Relationships matter. In business as well as most other facets in life.

It's an unwritten rule that has been done 35 times by about half the teams in the league. Not exactly the "taboo" thing it's made out to be.

And if a gm thinks there's a deal to be made from any team in the league that helps his team, he should make it or be fired. Fans always say there'll be hell to pay when someone offsheets a player on their team....and there never is. St. Louis has signed more players to offersheets than anyone else. They still make plenty of transactions with other teams, and they seem to be doing alright.

35 times out of thirty teams and literally thousands of opportunities. So all of the writers and GM's quoted as saying it's bad business are lying? And I never said Poile wouldn't improve his Club, but he's made bad trades with the Flyers in the past where you can almost hear the "remember I did this for you" with it. And you're not going to see that anymore. Package Vinny in a way that the Preds win the deal and he does it. But he won't be doing any favors for future considerations after that. Business is business, but GM's often do one another small favors for future consideration. I just don't think you'll see that from Poile again. A definite gaffe by Holmgren. To deny that is to view through blinders.

@jammer2

Was it? A team who'd traded with you regularly to benefit both sides, but bringing you Timonen, Hartnell, Upshall, and a first round pick through the years is the one Holmgren screws with? A team that took an aging ailing overpaid Forsberg and overpaid for him? A team that right now could absorb VLC's contract easily under their cap and again foster that relationship? But alienating that team that you would only see in the Stanley Cup finals was a win for Philly?

The only ones smirking are Penguins fans.

@Lindbergh31

I'd agree if he'd done it to the Pens or Rags... Or even a conference opponent. But honestly the team he did it to was a partner in trades. And what if he's just kept the trade talks open? Called Poile again asking what it would take? Or waited a year till Weber was a free agent. Expressed his interest in seriously acquiring him when that day came and willingness to spend big $? Perfectly legal negotiations. What if he hadn't tried forcing it and giving Poile the chance to call?

I seriously think Weber would be in black and orange. Thank you Paul Holmgren.

@doom88

Sorry bud! I just see this as a clear strike out by Holmgren. Swing for the fences though no doubt.