Sutter + 3rd to VAN for Nick Bonino, A.Clendening, 2nd.

Post by **mikey** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:37 pm

VanCity is going to waste no time going long-term with Sutter...

Post by **Jim** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:48 pm

Gaucho wrote:
Jim wrote:Like possibly when Clendening's name came up they never even really considered the possibility of him playing in Pittsburgh?
Why would they do that? I'm not sure I'm following you.

I am just saying that with both signings and traders, they can be done with basically just WBS in mind.

Post by **columbia** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:49 pm

Jim wrote:
Gaucho wrote:
Jim wrote:Like possibly when Clendening's name came up they never even really considered the possibility of him playing in Pittsburgh?
Why would they do that? I'm not sure I'm following you.
I am just saying that with both signings and traders, they can be done with basically just WBS in mind.

Also, teams occasionally like to lose contracts (although I have no idea where VAN is in relation to the max).

Post by **MR25** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:54 pm

They are currently sitting at 46 contracts.

The Pens, for purposes of comparison/gits and shiggles, are at 45 contracts.

Post by **DigitalGypsy66** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 1:15 pm

mikey wrote:VanCity is going to waste no time going long-term with Sutter...

https://twitter.com/FriedgeHNIC/status/ ... 8811895812

I don't think the Pens would've touched that number or term next year.

Post by **MalkinIsMyHomeboy** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 1:22 pm

that's a lot of dimp

no idea why they're so in love with Sutter. I mean, I love him too, but his ceiling is a really good third line center.

Post by **cadams** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:21 pm

In this league right now with slightly above average players getting north of $6 million, Sutter is easily worth close to $5 million a year to most teams based on scoring stats alone. But not this team right now.

Post by **Hugo Stiglitz** » Sun Aug 02, 2015 6:52 pm

Love this move! Does anyone think Clendening has a realistic shot of honing the game in his back end enough to make the squad? I've read a lot of conflicting reports.

Post by **mikey** » Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:46 pm

I never much cared for Clendening, he looks like a very good AHL d-man to me. Stranger things have happened, but between his lackluster skating and defensive awareness, it seems like a long shot that he has enough skills to compensate for that. Moreover, we have about 50 third pairing defensemen.

Maybe another year in the AHL, with yet another coaching staff and situation will help him realize some of that potential, but my guess is that he becomes a career AHL All-Star (not that there's anything wrong with that), but I would not be counting on him for anything but an occasional injury fill-in if a player like Pouliot goes down...

Post by **beachboy76** » Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:27 am

mikey wrote:I never much cared for Clendening, he looks like a very good AHL d-man to me. Stranger things have happened, but between his lackluster skating and defensive awareness, it seems like a long shot that he has enough skills to compensate for that. Moreover, we have about 50 third pairing defensemen.

Maybe another year in the AHL, with yet another coaching staff and situation will help him realize some of that potential, but my guess is that he becomes a career AHL All-Star (not that there's anything wrong with that), but I would not be counting on him for anything but an occasional injury fill-in if a player like Pouliot goes down...

It seems every scouting report I read on the guy refers to his excellent skating? It also alludes to his lack of defensive awareness but definitely mentions his skating ability every time it seems. They also rave about his transition game and the ability to be a PP QB.

Post by **mikey** » Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:37 am

That's strange to me. He was never a good skater. Maybe you could say his straight line speed is pretty decent, but top speed in a straight line doesn't come up too much for our defense or any defense really...the place where I give him the poorest marks are probably the most important for a defenseman at any level and that's his first step quickness and his lateral mobility. Both are well below average for Clendening...from a technical point of view, in terms of his mechanics, he's an ugly skater. He can't even cross-over really, or is very uncomfortable and sloppy in doing so.

And that may not sound like much, but it's one of those things that will keep a player in the minors for the better part of forever...that's not to say that every defenseman in the NHL is Kris Russell, Nick Leddy or Jay Bouwmeester...but it's tough to bring that little defense, that little "recovery" ability (see: Kris Letang), that little ability to walk the line with the puck and change shooting angles and those little things that are necessary to be effective given his player type and still be a success...

PP QB and transition skills are good, NHL caliber in a vacuum...it's the attributes around it that drown that part of it out...I'd be highly suspect of a scouting report that lists his skating as excellent though for sure...I've seen him, in fact, I watched him play last night (though it wasn't for him specifically), there's nothing "excellent" about his footwork, I can assure you...

Post by **beachboy76** » Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:59 am

Re Clendening:

He is an excellent skater and hard to pin down when forechecking.

He is an excellent skater with good speed that can keep up with many of the faster opposing forwards. He also transitions quite well too

Adam Clendening is ready for the NHL. Let’s just say it. In the AHL he’s scored 105 points in only 147 games while playing with an edge defensively. Were he on any other team Clendening would be in the league. (was on Chicago at the time of this)

Its the other parts of his game that need some work. Clendening is a very upright skater. He needs to get more bend in his knees and hips, this would improve his speed and acceleration, as well as give him a more powerful base and better balance. He needs to be quickier, as he is vulnerable to fast forwards taking him wide and going to the net.

These are all quotes from different scouting reports and such. The italicized quote agrees with your assessment while the others say the opposite. Either way, let's hope he pans out and gives us some depth.

Post by **large garlic** » Mon Aug 03, 2015 1:57 pm

I've never seen Clendening play, but I think it sure looks like a bad sign that two different organizations thought he was expendable just several months apart. Are there any obvious of examples of prospects traded twice in quick succession like this who actually panned out? I know this happened to Joe Morrow, and while it might be too early to say definitively, he doesn't seem to be on the path to being an impact player in the NHL.

Post by **mikey** » Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:02 pm

How short of succession...? Jean-Sebastien Giguere was given away by Hartford and Calgary before being beached in Anaheim...but it took years for them to realize he had no athletic ability at all and it could not help their porous defenses...

Keith Ballard? Michael Grabner? Chris Kunitz kind of...

It is not common, certainly...

Post by **Kicksave** » Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:05 pm

I thought Chicago traded him because he lost his waiver eligibility and had no room on their pro roster.

I think it's too early to give up on him. I think, at worst, he's a Chorney replacement. Could be better though.

Post by **MalkinIsMyHomeboy** » Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:07 pm

large garlic wrote:I've never seen Clendening play, but I think it sure looks like a bad sign that two different organizations thought he was expendable just several months apart. Are there any obvious of examples of prospects traded twice in quick succession like this who actually panned out? I know this happened to Joe Morrow, and while it might be too early to say definitively, he doesn't seem to be on the path to being an impact player in the NHL.

I hate to be "that guy" but I take a lot of the prospect talk with a grain of salt. And by "that guy" I mean: there is a long list of undrafted players who have become impact players. Doesn't mean they always work out, but my point is that we won't know how a guy turns out until he, well, turns out.

The great thing about Clendening is that we essentially got him for free. Most people would've done Sutter for Boner straight up, 99% of the human population would've done Sutter + 3rd rounder for Boner + 2nd rounder and the entire human species and some amphibians would've done Sutter + 3rd for Boner, Clendening and a 2nd.

He might be a bum, he might be an impact player. But I don't really care because he was given to us for free.

Post by **mikey** » Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:25 pm

And by that token - and it's a fair point - let's not spaz out about "poor asset management" and all this if he should be claimed off waivers in two months...and I don't say that to be overly pessimistic, but this is effectively a free asset and one that ultimately might not be needed at least for the NHL roster...so if he is lost somehow, well, that's no sweat either...

Post by **Avyran** » Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:35 pm

If worse comes to worst, he's a great AHL defender that can help players like Wilson, Rust, Sheary, etc get good feeds & better opportunities.

Post by **mikey** » Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:50 pm

Yes, it's important for forward skills development to have a #1 PMD to get the puck to them so they can play...

Post by **Hugo Stiglitz** » Mon Aug 03, 2015 4:26 pm

Rutherford spoke about wanting to replenish the defense prospect pool. While Clendening may not see any time with the Pens this season, including him in the deal may have been more to replenish what they're losing in WBS.

Post by **mikey** » Mon Aug 03, 2015 4:48 pm

To that end, I wouldn't mind if we invited '95 born Matt Murphy to regular camp and maybe give him an AHL deal...or even an ELC if warranted...not a bad player, caught my eye during QMJHL Final, I feel like he develop into a quality offensive defenseman in the AHL...

Post by **FLPensFan** » Tue Aug 04, 2015 6:05 pm

Sutter deal is in. 5 years, 4.375M a year

Post by **Hugo Stiglitz** » Tue Aug 04, 2015 6:56 pm

FLPensFan wrote:Sutter deal is in. 5 years, 4.375M a year

Well, IMO that's an overpayment. Vancouver's problem now.

Post by **Tico Rick** » Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:01 pm

That's a good deal for a second-line center. But I don't think he's good enough to be a second-line center on a good team.

Post by **count2infinity** » Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:06 pm

Good for Sutter... we'll see what sort of market there would have been for him at the end of the year to determine whetehr it was a good deal or not. Probably not.