Leaderboard

I mean I like Sproul but I just don't see what the big deal is. Your whole premise is he "may be a top 4" with time. But if there is no guarantee then is it really worth it to sit here and invest in him and not make this team better with Daley? We obviously have bigger fish to fry. We need a long term 1D, two well developed Centers, we need our scoring wingers to put out more consistently. We need to be better on special teams and we need consistent goaltending. I don't see how Daley coming and and somehow taking some minutes away from Sproul (a guy who might not even be a top 4 or might be) is a bad thing. Sproul is such a small part of our issues; of this team. Daley is here to be an actual top 4 may be a top 2. Maybe we get into playoffs with his help, with Mike Greens help, with Dekeyser actually playing what his contract is worth, with Mantha, Larkin, AA having one more year under their belt, with Nyquist and Tatar being the 30 goals/60 point scorers they're supposed to be, with Blashill having more experience and actually getting more out of his players. Most of the pieces of our puzzle are there. The problem is we haven't been able to execute and put it all together. Our players aren't very good because they don't play at their ceiling. But if they did, we COULD be a good team. That's probably what Holland is thinking and the reason why he's not giving up on playoffs, on making a run. Maybe he thinks this team has the pieces and needs to execute fully. I'm not sure what the right answer is, I'm trying to think this through Hollands eyes.

Probably here : Not sounding like any of the two will get traded.

Fixed it for you.

Well, management seems to think he is more than a #7. They protected him over Sproul and XO.

I'd love to revisit this post in 5+ years from now. Not saying you're doing be wrong, but I think Mantha has the potential to be borderline elite. I can't say the same for Athanasiou. I think Mantha could become a 70+ point player. I think Athanasiou tops out at 50-60.

I'd rather give up Glendening and Nastasiuk for Trouba. Unfortunately though, that's not the way trades work.

Anyone know if we have any interest in bringing back Thomas Vanek? I really haven't heard much about him since free agency began. Even tho he was basically just a powerplay specialist for us, I'd like to have him back at the right price. It's pretty clear that he liked and fit in well with our system. He was putting the puck in the net with much more regularity here, than he did for the Wild or the Panthers. If his asking price isn't too crazy, I'd really like to see him back in the Winged Wheel on a 1-2 year deal.

HOLLAND: "No. There's no hockey store." "But he's from Michigan." HOLLAND: "Really?" "Yep. And he's a right-handed shot." HOLLAND: "Is his name Luke???" "'Ilya' is Russian for 'Luke.'" HOLLAND: "OMFG! HOLD ME BACK, SALARY CAP BRO! HOLD ME BACK!!!!!!!!"

Yes I do think it is worth it to invest in your younger players with potential. And no, I don't think Daley in the lineup over Sproul makes this team THAT much better. What is realistic expectations for Daley at this point in his career? 60 games, 20 points? I don't think that would be out of the question for Sproul. I agree that we have bigger fish to fry, and Sproul likely wouldn't move the needle that much, but neither will Daley. For a team that should be rebuilding, we should be trying to figure out what we have in our younger players, not signing stop-gap vets that will not be part of the future. We should be making small improvements now to help the team in 3-5 years from now. If Sproul were able to produce in a top 4 role (I believe he could), his value would sky rocket. At some point you need to push them in the deep end to see if they sink or swim. Again, having Daley in over Sproul is not the difference between the basement and making the playoffs. All of your other what if scenarios happen regardless whether or not we signed Daley. Look, I'm not Sproul's number one fan or anything, I'd be okay if we traded him or literally any defenseman on the roster or in the organization. But in order to trade any of them, they need to raise their stock, and to raise their stock, they need to be given an opportunity. An opportunity is all I'm suggesting he should get. It might be sounding like I'm bashing Daley, but I'm not at all. I think he's a good defenseman, and this would be a GREAT signing for a playoff team. That we are not. However, I'd like to reiterate that I'm completely okay with this signing IF it's to replace one of Kronwall or Ericsson. If it's to keep one of the kids as a healthy scratch or to waive one of them, I think it's terrible asset management. Yup, not a single top 4 (potential top 4) defenseman was left unprotected in this expansion draft...

Even straight males can cyberfun with straight males. No one would know

I mean, I'm not arguing in favor of trading Sproul or keeping him stapled to the bench. I just find the "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!" hand-wringing and teeth-gnashing to be a bit much. Our young roster defensemen are mostly expendable, IMO. I'm glad to have them around, but I won't lose any sleep if they're traded or even claimed on waivers. Honestly, I'd like for the whole logjam to be blown up (figuratively, of course). No more Kronwall, no more Ericsson, no more DeKeyser, no more 500 young defensemen that don't appear to be anything more than unremarkable bottom-four NHL defensemen. I might take an expansion draft group over what we have.

I think that they grossly overpaid for Marleau, who at this point in his career is only declining and putting up less and less point-wise. Having said that, he'll be a great veteran to help along some of those kids and be a mentor for the next 3 years. It's just a really bad contract for a 38 year old declining forward. Of course, he had 27 goals last season, and I think he'll be playing on Matthews left wing so.... yeah. Haha, he may clean up.

Sproul is never going to be a top 4, he will be a fringe 3rd pair/AHL'er. If they thought he had any top 4 potential they would've protected him. Daley isn't taking " minutes" from Sproul. Daley is good enough to play his own minutes. Sproul will have to play better and earn his 3rd pair minutes.

I hope that too. I don't see him going anywhere else but GR.

I think Ouellet is better than Jensen, but that's not saying much. Neither are that good, and unlikely to ever be that good. Filler, more or less. Sproul most likely will never be anything. Wasn't all that good in GR and didn't really show any improvement from his first year to his last. In his limited time with the Wings, he has been pretty awful in every measurable way. Much like Smith in being a supposed offensive guy but not providing any offense. Unlike Smith, he has terrible possession metrics despite a heavily sheltered role. I don't mind giving him further opportunities because you never know, but if he ends up a healthy scratch more often than not I won't lose any sleep about it. Ironically enough, I think Daley could be a good partner for Sproul. I would guess there will be enough injuries that everyone (and probably Russo again too) will get an opportunity.

Yes this is it. Thank you!!

I still don't see anything special about him

Only they aren't ready to win now. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He ain't no Hasek, that's for sure. Can't wait to see Bobvrosky's next deal.

You can disagree with the #9 pick, but let's not set these other teams as a pinnacle of intelligent drafting. I'm sure all have made picks that would earn your ire: For example I'll just look at some of Chicago's picks near the #9 position that would get similar or harsher criticisms: Chicago picked Kyle Beach with #11 in 08 - he's never played a game in the NHL. He had known injury and concussion issues and on-ice discipline issues when drafted. In 2000, they picked Yukubov and Yurobyev with the #10 and #11 picks both only played about 50 NHL games. In doing so, they passed on Orpik who was higher ranked and fell to 18. P.S. before someone cries foul for hindsight being 20/20, I made sure to judge choices on the basis of the criticisms/problems these picks would have had at the time. As for the Daley pickup, I'm warming to it. Hadn't seen a whole lot of him except this playoffs and in a few Wing games. The highlight video that Kickazz posted was pretty impressive. I'll wait to hear our injury situation before I'm really sure about it.

Defensemen age is not equivalent to forwards. Meaning it takes longer for defensemen to develop. Correct? But Ouellet and Sproul aren't good and never will be at the age of 24? Virtually every single person on here was ready to give up on Jensen until he got a legit shot with the Wings this past season, and proved the naysayers wrong. Myself, LeftWinger and one other person (I think it was Jesusberg), felt that Jensen could become a legit NHLer if given the opportunity. Almost everyone else thought we were crazy because he was already 25 years old. Now Sproul is 24 and you've already determined that he is a plug. We should give up on him too right? But yet Sproul has been better than Jensen at every level prior to the NHL, and has a measly 0.02 points per game less in their small sample sizes with the Wings. Jensen - legit top 4. Sproul, Ouellet - plugs... Got it.

Nyquist - Zetterberg - Mantha Tatar - Larkin - Athanasiou Abdelkader - Nielsen - Frk Helm - Sheahan - Glendening / Witkowski Daley - Green DeKeyser - Jensen Ouellet - Sproul / Kronwall / Ericsson Mrazek / Howard

Might be one of your best posts I've seen. Solid points here. 1. People don't know Daley, are looking at his age (forgetting defenseman age is not equivalent to offense players) and judging. 2. Daley is easily our second best defenseman after Green. 3. He can play on all ends of the ice, and can play big minutes, including PK, PP (has a hell of a shot). 4. Great puck moving defenseman 5. He's better than all of our young defenseman 6. Our "young" defenseman aren't that good, nor will they be. Sproul, XO are plugs (sorry guys I know some of ya'll are in denial but they aren't that good). Jensen is the only one with true potential without having major shortcomings on defense (which is the recipe for being an NHL defender). 7. The young defenseman that COULD be good are still 2 years (probably more) away (Saarijarvi, Cholowski, Hronek). Hicketts maybe 1-2 years. And the best point of all. 8. NHL is NOT a development league. If you're not already developed into an NHL ready player, then spend some more time in the minors.

I see a lot of people making this argument. Frankly, I don't think it's much of an argument. Hicketts, 21, could use another year in the AHL. Saarijarvi, 20, is at least two years away. Cholowski, 19, is at least two years away. Hronek, 19, is at least two years away. Sambrook, 19, is at least two years away. Mcllrath, 25, is not a high-end defenseman. Sulak, 23, was a no-risk signing who may or may not have what it takes to play in the NHL. Ouellet and Jensen haven't been hugely impressive; at this point, they're serviceable middle-pairing defensemen, and that's probably all they'll ever be. Russo didn't really impress me in his stint with the Wings; I don't think he fits into our long-term plans. If we're being honest about Sproul, he's not likely to become much more than what he appears to be at this stage, which is a bottom-pairing power play specialist whose natural gifts don't outweigh his shortcomings. At this point, we could lose Sproul and Russo and Ouellet/Jensen for free and replace them with veterans and I honestly wouldn't care all that much. I don't see any of these players as true building blocks. And, to me, that's what this comes down to. Basically, our D group is bad. Daley makes it a little more competent (at least until Green's gone) -- and a slightly deeper, slightly more capable D group is a good thing for everyone. People say we need to develop our youth. Well, the NHL isn't really a development league -- but even if that weren't the case, "development" means more than just having a player on the roster and giving him ice time "because we have no one else to give these minutes to." Daley will be eating some minutes that could otherwise be going to Ouellet or Jensen, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The benefits of Daley's presence will outweigh it. A top three of Green, Daley, DeKeyser is better than a top three of Green, DeKeyser, Ouellet/Jensen/Ericsson. Having Daley run our first/second power play unit is better than having Kronwall run it. Having someone who can move the puck like Daley is a good thing. I think a lot of people are unfamiliar with Daley and are looking at his age and assuming the worst. But he's actually a perfectly competent top-four defenseman who can 1) play big minutes without getting caved-the-f***-in (see: DeKeyser), 2) outskate all of our defensemen not named Jensen (and possibly even Jensen), and 3) manufacture offense more expertly and reliably than all of our defensemen not named Green. He's our second-best defenseman. He's a solid stopgap for a team that otherwise has exactly one proven high-end NHL defenseman on its organizational depth chart (Green) and is years away from being a contender. Personally, I'm happy to have him on board. I don't think adding him hurts our youth. If anything, I think it'll help our youth.

That youtube user Awood40 is a fricking godsend to Wings fans. I have many of beers and watched many of videos late into the night bc of that guy and his channel. I owe him a drink for all the cool stuff he uploads.