PavelValerievichDatsyuk

It does seem that without Vanek our offence has disappeared. I also think Blashill's lines have something to do with that. Last game Z and AA did some good work together, but now I don't think they've been together at all tonight. (Actually has AA even played - haven't noticed him. Then Helm Nyquist were good with Vanek. Why not keep that line and put Larkin in Vanek's spot.

What a horrible goal. Jimmy's been really good too.

Not a lot of good chances for either team, but Bruin had most of the play. We can't win faceoffs, may have set a record for icings in a period. Lots of scrums. bunch of turnovers on both sides. Miller got nailed. Wasn't the most exciting period.

Well, last game the had a horrible first period too, so maybe that's gives some hope that they'll get in gear.

Looks like you have some competition from people with merch for The Pizzarena and The Oven : Good luck with your website, but I agree with kliq that online polls don't mean much. We, on this forum, highjacked that POY poll a couple years ago when Nyquist sailed through every round. And as long as you're making election comparisons, you should look at the instances where Trump said he won certain debates because he found some online polls that voted his way even though every scientific poll said otherwise. (not to go into politics - just an example of skewed online polls)

That's not the way I understood it. In your link it says: "If any of the 30 teams loses a free agent to Vegas during this 48-hour window, it no longer can lose anyone in the expansion draft. In other words, that free agent lost counts as the one player lost in the expansion draft." That doesn't specify UFA so I think it would apply to RFAs too. So I think each team can only lose 1 player. This new information could work in our favour since they could take some free agent like Ott or Miller and that could count as our player lost. And if we decide we're not going to re-sign either Smith or Vanek than they could be taken and it would be no different than losing them to free agency and no additional player taken away.

Those idiots in the WIld organization: losing him for nothing!

As important as I think it is to keep Sproul in, I think another consideration is keeping Ericsson on the left side. I think that has really helped his game this year rather than past years when he's been on the right with Kronwall etc. Of course, being on the 3rd pair also seems to have put him in a better position. Because of this, I think Smith comes out over Marchenko despite Marchenko being the weakest link so far. Otherwise, maybe Smith can play on the right side. When Jurco's back, I hope we still keep 8 D and AA up. This past game Z and AA found some good chemistry and that could be a good combo as we're still finding the ideal lines. Miller would be my choice to be pushed out, though he's been his usual self and has produced better than usual. At the beginning of the season I would have said Ott, but I'll eat a little crow and say he's been better than I expected and provides some good drive to that 4th line. These 2 are still non-essential as we build for the future of this team and Sheahan, Jurco, AA all should have places in the lineup over them.

Those 2 points are Mrazek's

ZZZZZZZZZZ!!!

Nice!!!

Showing some signs of life. Got to take advantage of this PP.

Hmm, This hasn't been good except Mrazek. Shattenkirk is trying to impress his future team (wishfully thinking, of course)

Go Wings! Just noticed that Smith is the only guy on the team without any points, so I'm predicting a goal for him. Hopefully Tatar gets 1 and matches Miller's 2 goals so I can be sure this isn't the bizarro world

Besides the harsh winters, Edmonton and Winnipeg just have the reputations of being very boring cities. Also, Winnipeg is known as Canada's murder capital and kind of a dangerous place, though I think the reputation is less warranted than it was a few years ago.

Regardless if anyone wants McIlrath or Paajarvi, we really don't have roster space, so I don't think that's a possibility. I'll bet some team will see 6'5", righty Dman and take a chance on McIlrath if they have space/need for a tough guy. Paarjarvi's has already passed through waivers without getting picked up. There is a Mantha watch thread, you could put that post there Lefty.

There's definitely a lot of luck involved, but I think our late round pick ups were often due to being ahead of the curve in scouting Russia and Sweden etc. as much as luck. I agree that that advantage is largely gone and I think it has shown since we didn't get too many late round studs 2000-10. I think we do have a slight advantage in drafting due to the quality of staff. For instance, Hakan has a better eye for talent and more experience than most scouts and Kenny's own scouting experience gives him an edge over most GMs on in this area. I also agree that we need more than Larkin and Mrazek to be top guys. AA, Mantha, Svech, Bertuzzi, Cholowski, etc. - we'll need to get lucky with some of these guys to be top guys as well. Or in future picks. I don't think anyone is arguing the contrary. What I was responding to was the complaint about no trades in the past while. Building up a stockpile of picks, and young players is what you do to increase the chances of having some turn out as top guys. So, Jimmy Howard...he's been pretty good.

Clearly the inference being that you don't think Mrazek, Larkin or anyone else have any chance to be top end talent. It's not really worth arguing since no one know yet and we'll just see. As for the strategy in general, I'm not saying it's doable, but I'd rather try than tank. I do think it's made even harder if you were to trade away a lot of your high picks or prospects. I think there is room for a trade now, but anyone expecting recent history with many traded picks/young players isn't considering the Wings situation for the last while. And for argument's sake, there are teams that have won without a top 3 pick: 1996+2001 Avalanche (though they had the spoils of trading a #1 Lindros) 1989 Calgary Flames (McDonald was #4) Also, won without a top 3 pick that they drafted: 2007 Ducks: Pronger was a trade, Neidermayer was a UFA http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/can-win-stanley-cup-without-top-3-draft-pick/

We are building from the draft. 19 of our 23 guys are homegrown (I include DK and Glendening). That entails keeping prospects and picks - a,k,a, few trades. To you it's a failure to act, but I'm sure to them it's an essential part of the strategy to rebuild. If we are able to get that elusive high end Dmen by trade, great, but I think we're really just looking for a top D man and think the required assets mean that we could only make one big trade and I don't think there's been too many viable targets/right fits. We do now have some pieces we could sacrifice. We probably could have made a Nyquist+Mantha trade in the past couple years, but has there really been the right trading partner? There were talks about Mantha as part of a trade for Myers, but I remember you specifically being vehemently against that. I think a Trouba trade makes sense for us, but not sure it does from the Jets perspective. 2 to tango. There are other options than a trade anyway. Maybe we pick up Shattenkirk as a UFA (we can also dream about Burns). We also have Cholowski, Hicketts, Saarjarvi, Russo, Sproul, etc (as well as future picks) and we don't know where their ceilings will be. Maybe within them we could fill the holes in the top 4 and we get to keep our very deep looking future forward group. Also, neither AA or Sproul would not have brought too much return in the past 5 years. Sproul - though - like him a lot - was a scratch from time to time in the AHL and was never a plus player despite playing for some very good GR teams (-6 in his 3+ years, defensive concerns have always been part of his scouting report). AA never tore up the AHL - said himself that he struggled in his 1st and only full year. Both could have got some interest, but I think you're overestimating the demand if you think either's getting a really high return.

On FSD they specifically pointed out that they thought Sheahan had a great game. They even featured clips of him at one point. I didn't notice him all that much, though, and I think he's one of our multiple 3rd line centers who's searching for a role/way to fit into the lineup. He doesn't hit that much, but I think he's good at board battles. I agree he needs to find his stride, but I think that can be said of almost everyone in the top 6 right now. Goaliies, Helm's line, and PP (8th in the league), are compensating pretty well right now, though.

One of the Swedish mafia's top hitman got it done tonight!

Yeah, I'm feeling very good about things. We look good and that's without Larkin, Z, Neilson locked in. And Kronwall - even injured - will help the D (though it will lead to the problem of gets taken out).

Only saw the end of the second and the 3rd, but that looked liked their best performance.

Burns must be going for that homeless chic look.

I think it's important for Mantha to get more top minutes in the AHL because he really hasn't been a dominant/high impact guy since he was in the QMHL. He had a tough first year pro with the broken leg, then he was pretty good last year, but we need him to be an elite scorer here, so let him get to that point in the AHL first. I hope he keeps ripping it up, gets his confidence up and then come up with guns blazing.