Archive

ShareThis Page
Tim Benz: Penguins win trade … with themselves | TribLIVE.com
Penguins/NHL

Tim Benz: Penguins win trade … with themselves

Tim Benz

When a deal is made in sports, the question often is asked: “Who won the trade?”

However, when you essentially trade your own guys for more of your own guys, that’s a tough question to answer.

This is basically what the Penguins did over the past two days, and it appears to have worked out well.

In essence, the Penguins traded Conor Sheary and Matt Hunwick for Bryan Rust, Riley Sheahan, a conditional draft pick and probably Columbus free-agent defenseman Jack Johnson.

It sure sounds like the Penguins won that trade with the Penguins.

Wait, what?

For general manager Jim Rutherford, that’s more or less what he did.

First, the decision was made to avoid arbitration and pay Rust $3.5 million against the salary cap for this season (and the next three seasons). That meant the Penguins weren’t going to be able to keep all of their restricted free agents they coveted while also acquiring some much-needed outside help to bolster their blue line.

Rutherford didn’t really trade Sheary and Hunwick. He traded their income statements.

Those statements were going to cost a collective $5.25 million next season. Dealing that expenditure meant Rutherford could keep Sheahan at a slight raise on a new one-year contract ($2.1 million) on top of Rust’s new money for a total of $5.6 million.

So, almost a wash financially.

On top of that, the Penguins acquired the pick and enough remaining cap room to likely retain defenseman Jamie Oleksiak. Plus, they should be able to buy Johnson on the free-agent market for somewhere around a reported $3 million per year .

I’m not sure how that can be viewed as anything but a victory.

Despite his struggles in Columbus last season, Johnson has more potential for a career rebound than Hunwick. The ceiling is higher on Johnson for only slightly more money. That risk is worthwhile even if his contract stretches to potentially 2023. With inflation, $3.5 million won’t seem like much cash by then.

While Johnson (11 points) only had one more point than Hunwick last year, he’s two years younger and has a pair of 40-point seasons under his belt. Johnson’s demise and frequent benchings in 2017-18 suggest he’s well on the downside of his career.

But we thought the same things about fellow defensemen Trevor Daley, Ron Hainsey, Justin Schultz and Oleksiak. Each enjoyed a career renaissance of varying degrees with the Penguins.

The hope was Hunwick would have the same experience coming from Toronto last season. It didn’t happen. There were no signs it would next season, either. So why not try for the much greater reward at only a slightly greater risk in Johnson?

Hunwick is valued so little that one of the conditions on the pick acquired from Buffalo is if the Sabres manage to trade him to someone else, the pick jumps from the fourth to the third round.

Imagine that. Hunwick’s new team is willing to increase the currency going out the door if they can rid him off their books fast as possible.

Yikes! As troubled as Johnson’s recent seasons have been in Columbus, he carries far more value than that.

Sheary is a different story. He was an important contributor on two Stanley Cup championship squads. He has 37 even-strength goals the past two seasons. He’s only 26. He can play with Sidney Crosby. His $3 million price tag wasn’t exactly onerous, but it was too much for his inconsistency and one-dimensional role.

Sheary scoring 20 goals a season for that kind of cost against the Penguins’ tight cap ceiling wasn’t enough. For a team such as Buffalo with more cost flexibility and lower expectations, Sheary scoring 20 goals seem like good value at that price.

That’s why another condition on that pick is if Sheary gets 20 goals or 40 points, the pick goes from the fourth to the third round.

In the end, former Penguins assistant GM Jason Botterill proved to be the perfect dance partner for Rutherford: a guy who was willing to take on salary without the demand of shoving some back in return.

Rutherford was dying to give away two guys for as close to free as possible, and Buffalo was willing to make that happen.

Trading in a salary-capped sport makes for strange bedfellows and divergent goals. In this case for the Penguins, they looked to win a trade — with themselves — by getting nothing in return.

That’s sounds like a complicated road to what should’ve been an easy task. I bet it was hard all around, though. And Rutherford has made the Penguins better for the effort.

Tim Benz is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at [email protected] or via Twitter @TimBenzPGH.


gtrjj062818
Getty Images
Jack Johnson of the Blue Jackets checks Conor Sheary of the Penguins in Game 4 of the Eastern Conference First Round during the 2017 Stanley Cup Playoffs on April 18, 2017,
gtrpens08042917
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
Penguins forward Conor Sheary practices Friday, April 28, 2017, at Verizon Center in Washington, D.C.
gtrHunwick050118
Pittsburgh Penguins' Matt Hunwick (22) sends the puck past Boston Bruins' Matt Grzelcyk (48) during the first period of an NHL hockey game in Boston, Friday, Nov. 24, 2017. (AP Photo/Michael Dwyer)
gtrhunwick030518
Bruins left wing Jake DeBrusk fights for the puck with Penguins defenseman Matt Hunwick during the second period Thursday, March 1, 2018, in Boston.
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.