Editor's note: The Q&A is going on hiatus. It will return Sept. 1.

Q: Every time I hear discussions about the Penguins signing their free agents, or soon-to-be free agents, Jordan Staal's name always comes up. Did I miss something that makes him worth more than $3 or $4 million a year? I understand that he is very young and has a lot of potential, and that he has been outstanding defensively, but as a whole, I don't see anything that (merits) a big-money contract.

Scott Davidek, Bethesda, Md.

MOLINARI: Whether Staal is worthy of one depends mostly on how one interprets the term "big-money contract." If that applies strictly to deals rivaling the $8.7 million per year packages Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin negotiated, no, Staal probably doesn't deserve one, and isn't likely to get one. However, if that seems like a reasonable description of a deal worth $4 million or so per season, he likely is in line for one, based not only on his performance, but his potential.

While Staal never is going to put up the kind of offensive numbers Crosby and Malkin can, he has an outstanding two-way game for a player who hasn't turned 20 yet. He isn't going to crack the top two lines here unless he shifts from center to left wing -- a move general manager Ray Shero has said could be considered this fall -- but he has the size, skill and hockey sense to develop into a shutdown center who also turns up on the scoresheet regularly.

It's conceivable that, at some point, Staal will tire of being stuck behind Crosby and Malkin on the Penguins' depth chart, but there's no evidence that has happened yet. And even if he becomes unhappy with his role, the Penguins can hold onto his rights for five more seasons, even if it means matching an offer he would receive from another club. (And if Staal ever does reach restricted free agency, which isn't scheduled to happen until July 1, it's easy to imagine that he'd receive an attractive contract proposal from elsewhere.)

Q: With Ray Shero locking up most of the core of the team, where does a guy who isn't part of 'the core,' like Max Talbot, fit into the team's long-term plans? I am a big fan of what he brings, on and off the ice, and would hate to see him go elsewhere, ever. However, it seems more often than not it is the Talbot-like role players who are the easiest to replace. Could a guy like Talbot, assuming he would if given the chance, stay a Penguin for the majority of his career?

Jason Travis, Baldwin

MOLINARI: The Penguins are extremely fortunate to have the NHL's best collection of young talent (if only because they were flat-out awful during a stretch when there were real difference-makers available in the draft pool every year), but it takes more than a handful of elite players to succeed in this league. Having a solid supporting cast is imperative, and Talbot is part of that for the Penguins.

He provides energy and solid two-way play, as well as quality penalty-killing, when filling his usual spot on the third or fourth line, and is skilled enough to be plugged in on the wing on one of the top two lines if a short-term fill-in is needed. Players who do Talbot's job are not irreplaceable, as you noted, and it certainly is possible that Talbot eventually will improve to a point where his value rises to a level that makes it impractical for the Penguins to retain him.

For now, however, Talbot is comfortable in his niche and has strong ties to this team and his teammates. And because it's hard to believe that his bosses wouldn't recognize what he contributes to the Penguins' success, it seems reasonable to think that he'll have a place here for the foreseeable future -- and quite possibly a lot longer than that.

Q: Does a change in the exchange rate on the dollar affect the financial health of the Canadian teams or their ability to spend?

Doug, Dallas

MOLINARI: NHL economics, including the payroll floors and ceilings laid out in the collective bargaining agreement, are based on U.S. dollars, so while a stronger Canadian dollar (it began this week basically even with its U.S. counterpart) doesn't allow franchises based in that country to spend more on personnel than those located here, it does enhance their financial standing. That might make it possible for some to elevate their payrolls to levels that might not have been practical from a bottom-line standpoint when the Canadian dollar is weaker, and obviously adds to the overall financial strength (and value) of the operation.