Jim Rutherford has no wish to trade Evgeni Malkin.
Nor has he initiated the first move toward trying to trade Malkin.
And if he had his way, according to an extended conversation I had with the Penguins' general manager Tuesday afternoon, he'd much prefer if Malkin merely reported for work this fall as a more mature player, on and off the ice.
OK, we clear on that much?
Cool, because here's the stated stance most likely to make a lasting impression, regardless of all of the above, right from Rutherford: He's not ruling out trading Malkin. Or Kris Letang. Or any number of other players not named Sidney Crosby.
"I'm not at the point of identifying any one player or a handful of players," Rutherford replied when I asked specifically about Malkin and Letang, two players I've forever felt to be untouchable. "But it's only natural to look at everything. We don't want to be that team that stays with a group too long. The most successful franchise around -- and people in Pittsburgh won't want to hear this -- is the New England Patriots, and it's partly because they're so good at recognizing when to change and how. Do you run out the string with everybody? Or do you consider looking at the value of your assets where they are vs. two to three years from now? That kind of sums up where we are."
Yeah. That.
He wasn't done, either. He referred back to his remarks at the season-ending press conference in Cranberry that caught the attention of the whole hockey world, the first indication of any kind that Malkin and Letang could be considered for a trade.
"Who are the guys that really want to do it? Who are the guys that really want to win another championship? I mean, look, at the end of this -- and I'm certainly the guy who planted the seed, and I realize that -- maybe nobody gets traded. Maybe it's one or two. But there are a lot of things to look at, a lot of things to discuss."
That's happening. Rutherford's conferred with everyone from ownership on down, and he isn't done. Mario Lemieux and Ron Burkle are, as ever, available and involved. David Morehouse, too. Bill Guerin and his immediate staff. Mike Sullivan and the coaches. Key players on the team. Even people on the inside whose responsibilities extend beyond actual hockey.
"I've got a few more days of that, and then I'll be taking some time off," Rutherford said. "Probably a couple weeks."
This is great to hear, above all else. It was the primary point of my column the night the Penguins were wiped away by the Islanders. Rutherford's fortunate to be surrounded by people with experience but also with the personalities to speak their minds. He needs to process what they've got. And from there, he and all concerned would do best to take a similar 'couple weeks' and think with clearer minds.
As Rutherford acknowledged, "You need to take the emotion out of it, what we all felt after those playoffs."
This man's always fascinated me in this regard: He's both passionate and patient. He'll want something so visibly, so badly, and yet he'll wait months until it turns up just the way he'd hoped.
That's got to happen now. On all fronts. Maybe more than at any point in his tenure here.
Want to know how I think this will wind up, based on this conversation and several others?
1. Malkin will stay.
2. Letang will stay.
3. Phil Kessel and two others will go.
But that little list obviously deserves extensive elaboration, so let's take them one at a time:
Evgeni Malkin -- MATT SUNDAY / DKPSEVGENI MALKIN
Geno's a mess. Mostly a self-induced mess. But he'll have a chance, in all likelihood, to clean that mess.
According to one team source this week, Malkin was assigned by the Penguins a personal trainer to accompany him to Russia last summer. That was a first, and it went extremely well, per the source, and it contributed to Malkin being one of the NHL's premier performers through the season's opening quarter, with nine goals and 21 assists through 22 games. Those two events, as the team sees it, were connected. He embraced one new approach, and it led to success.
Then, as the team sees it, he began to slack defensively. He'd lazily drag back. He'd toss the puck to no one in particular. Everyone knows the gig. And, as a result, he and his linemates had the puck less. And, naturally, since he had the puck less, he put up fewer points. Then, perpetually sensitive to his goal count, he lost a little confidence and stopped shooting. Which is when pretty much everything stopped working.
Why?
Did he not maintain that same approach, on and off the ice, that he started last summer?
That's one possibility the Penguins are discussing.
Did he pout because, after years of being comfortable as the No. 2 behind Crosby, he suddenly was a clear No. 3 behind Crosby and 40-goal child Jake Guentzel?
Believe it or not -- and this really threw me a curve -- that's also one possibility the Penguins are discussing.
Nothing's being ruled out. Everything's on the table. And as best I can gauge, everyone's open-minded.
Remember after the playoffs how I wrote that Malkin needs to begin morphing into a more age-appropriate version of himself?
If not, these were three examples I cited just from Game 4 of plays he tried that probably should now be relegated to second options, if that:
Malkin's going to turn 33 on July 31.
As I wrote that night: Sit down with Mario. Or Sid. Talk about it. Truly great players who've already experienced it are right under his roof. Mario came back as a Brett Hull-level gunner. Sid's become a bona fide Selke candidate. His Russian countrymen, coincidentally or not, offer some of the most compelling examples, notably Sergei Fedorov and Pavel Datsyuk. They took on more responsible roles, trading individual dynamics for team dynamics.
I brought this up with Rutherford, citing a couple of those precedents.
"Geno's a terrific player," he replied. "Some players only can do one thing and can't adjust as they get older. He can. He's very capable of playing a more responsible style. And if he does, I think he'll find that his points will come even more easily because he and our whole team will have the puck more. He's definitely got what it takes to do that and continue to be a great player in this league for a lot of years."
One thing Rutherford told me the Penguins will do is ask Sergei Gonchar, who handles much of the staff's direct communication with Malkin, to continue speaking with him about this and other issues.
Kris Letang -- MATT SUNDAY / DKPSKRIS LETANG
There isn't all that much to say here, which might surprise some.
Here's the condensed version: Letang's mistakes against the Islanders weren't appreciated anymore on the inside than on the outside, but it's my sense that they're being seen in a complete context: He plays a ton, and there's a reason he plays a ton. It's because he does infinitely more good than bad.
And, if we're talking about a trade, giving up a No. 1 defenseman who just logged three-quarters of a season as a bona fide Norris Trophy candidate -- five-on-five, power play, penalty-killing, 24 minutes a night -- tends to mean that such a player would be needed in return. With all due respect to Justin Schultz and particularly his showing in the 2017 playoffs, he isn't that player. All concerned grasp that.
As with Malkin, Rutherford has no wish to trade Letang.
Nor has he initiated the first move toward trying to trade Letang.
However, he pointedly didn't rule it out, maybe most strikingly with this general assessment of the Penguins' season: "A lot of things that we were concerned about in the regular season came out in the playoffs. Maybe we were a little complacent. Maybe players that have won two Cups, three Cups, being in the same place for a long time ... do you still want to do it?"
Eleven players on the current roster were part of the two most recent Cups, but only three were here in 2009, as well: Crosby, Malkin and Letang.
Phil Kessel -- MATT SUNDAY / DKPSPHIL KESSEL
He's out of here. I really believe that.
It won't be simple and, because of his contract, it won't bring much of a hockey return unless it's more of a contract-for-contract exchange. He's 31, and he'll count as $6.8 million against the cap to any team that employs him. But there are 30 other teams out there, several of whom are desperate for scoring and/or wanting to move a contract of their own. It's possible.
And it's coming.
Rutherford didn't talk about Kessel, but he didn't need to. While there remains immense respect for his contributions to both Cups -- he might have been the Penguins' finest player in the 2016 playoffs -- there's also increasing irritation with his inconsistency on the ice and some richly unprofessional conduct away from it. Those elements away from the ice have been there all along but, because he was productive and the team was winning, it'd always get shrugged off as cute or funny or Phil-being-Phil. That's no longer the case.
What stood out for some inside the front office was how Kessel emerged as a voracious competitor in Game 1 on Long Island. On one hand, that's welcome, as one person told me. But it'd be wonderful if it weren't so flagrantly 10 notches above the norm.
Let's just leave it at this: He's no longer worth the gamble.
These Penguins, as constituted, weren't in a position to flip a switch into playoff mode. Not when the Islanders had been in that mode since early October, having carved an identity and carried themselves with hunger throughout. That's how they withstood an above-and-beyond effort from the Penguins in Games 1 and 2 -- and the Penguins played hard out there -- then benefited from the same erratic behavior once the series came to Pittsburgh, and the home team basically caved.
Kessel will go. I believe Olli Maatta will go, partly for cap purposes, partly because he can bring a real return. I'm positive Tristan Jarry will go, as he'll have to clear waivers to be sent down next season.
But the biggest change, from the sound of it, will have to come from a complete appreciation of the humbling at hand.
"Whatever happens, we need to become more of a team. And a hungrier team. And people playing their roles with 100 percent consistency," Rutherford said. "We didn't have that. We did have good players, but we didn't have that. We can't lose sight of the fact that we still got 100 points and could easily have had more if we'd played the right way near the end of a few losses. But it ended up the way it did, and maybe it's because we got a little complacent."
Sure doesn't sound like he is. And if that ruffles up some people ...
"Well, some of what I'm saying here might really tee it up for you," he came back with a laugh, referring to this column. "But there's a job to do. It's underway."
