CanucksJay Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 With their injuries to Malkin and Bjugstad, Pitts looks a little thin down the middle. Maybe a good opp to send him back? What did they think of Sutter when he was there? Traded him for Bonino and Clendening and Bonino went on to win a couple of cups. Do they still like Sutter? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 Funny..had the same idea, soon as I heard about them two. They kinda' owe us, eh? They don't have a 2020..but I'd take a 2021 2nd at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonMexico Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 While we're drunk, Sutter and Boeser for Malkin! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted October 7, 2019 Author Share Posted October 7, 2019 1 minute ago, RonMexico said: While we're drunk, Sutter and Boeser for Malkin! I was drunk on the weekend. Its Monday midday.... Jeez... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 Pittsburgh plays 3 offensive lines so it's doubtful they'd want Sutter to replace offensive players. McCann moved from wing to C2 and Blueger to C3. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 Sutter with his boat anchor of a contract is untradeble...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 8 minutes ago, mll said: Pittsburgh plays 3 offensive lines so it's doubtful they'd want Sutter to replace offensive players. McCann moved from wing to C2 and Blueger to C3. Sutter could really help on the defensive draws tho to make McCann's life easier. Sutter did also drive some offence in his time there too, 21 goals that one year. I see an emergency fit with Pits, which might be a go if Sutter only had 1 year left on his deal. I think its that 2nd year on Sutters deal that would be the major sticking point. The deal I'd love to see is Sutter and our 2020 2nd for Pit's 2020 1st. Pipe dream I know but still, thats the one I want Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post goalie13 Posted October 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 7, 2019 There's got to be something ironic about trading Sutter to be a replacement for injured players. 2 1 8 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milk and honey Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: Sutter could really help on the defensive draws tho to make McCann's life easier. Sutter did also drive some offence in his time there too, 21 goals that one year. I see an emergency fit with Pits, which might be a go if Sutter only had 1 year left on his deal. I think its that 2nd year on Sutters deal that would be the major sticking point. The deal I'd love to see is Sutter and our 2020 2nd for Pit's 2020 1st. Pipe dream I know but still, thats the one I want what about sutter for Tanev as a frame deal hahahaha a new set of bros 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 5 minutes ago, milk and honey said: what about sutter for Tanev as a frame deal hahahaha a new set of bros baby Tanev does have some bite to his game.... but the in crowd wants picks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milk and honey Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 7 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: baby Tanev does have some bite to his game.... but the in crowd wants picks. Tanev + 3rd for Sutter and Goldy hahahahahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 You have to take back salary in-order for Pittsburgh to do it. They were thinking of trading Bjugstad to get cap compliant so I'd imagine now he's injured long term he would be on the available again. Sutter for Bjugstad is a pretty fair deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 Malkin will be out long term, so Pitts will be looking for an offensive C, so I doubt they would look at Sutter. They will have cap relief with Rust going on ltir. Pitts SC window is closing, so I think they get a player that can put up points. McCann's having an great start this year. Opportunity for him to take on the 2nd C role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 Pittsburgh's GM, Rutherford, has traded away Brandon Sutter twice. First with Carolina, in the package for Jordan Staal. Then when he took control of Pittsburgh, he traded him again for Bonino. He obviously doesn't hold the player in particularly high regard. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borvat Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 They would likely do Gudbranson for Sutter. Wait what....... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tre Mac Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 Nobody wants our trash, you could waive Sutter and he'd go down like a fat kid on a smartie.....that's on the ground. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 29 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: Sutter could really help on the defensive draws tho to make McCann's life easier. Sutter did also drive some offence in his time there too, 21 goals that one year. I see an emergency fit with Pits, which might be a go if Sutter only had 1 year left on his deal. I think its that 2nd year on Sutters deal that would be the major sticking point. The deal I'd love to see is Sutter and our 2020 2nd for Pit's 2020 1st. Pipe dream I know but still, thats the one I want Rutherford acquired McCann because he can defend while also producing - he was acquired as a matchup C. Kessel/ Sullivan clashed because Sullivan wanted 3 scoring lines and had Kessel on the 3rd. Sutter is a 4th liner in their system and they already have those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 10 minutes ago, mll said: Rutherford acquired McCann because he can defend while also producing - he was acquired as a matchup C. Kessel/ Sullivan clashed because Sullivan wanted 3 scoring lines and had Kessel on the 3rd. Sutter is a 4th liner in their system and they already have those. McCann isn't close to a matchup C compared to Sutter's experience. If thats who their running with for the next few months they are in big trouble. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RakuRaku Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 Watching Gaudette play last game was such a breath of fresh air! He showed so much jump and was so aware of where he needs to be... He truly makes Sutter redundant now!! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RakuRaku Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 35 minutes ago, Borvat said: They would likely do Gudbranson for Sutter. Wait what....... OK how about this realistically... we'll take Rust & 2nd pick for Sutter (retain some % of salary) + Virtanen?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now