PavelValerievichDatsyuk

Bowie - Life on Mars

Doubt that Helm will be on the 4th line. If it does happen in a few years it's because Svech, Mantha, Bertuzzi, have grabbed a higher spot - In that case we'll have an inexpensive 2nd/3rd line or whatever. I don't see why that would be an issue except some sense of propriety that you might have. Helm and Glendening would be a killer 4th line - if it happens, it's because we'll have some very good depth. I think both of Kronwall and Z have at least 3 years left playing - Maybe with Kronwall's last year being largely on the bench a la Todd Bertuzzi. That would finish K's contract and leave only 1 year with Z and Franzen on LTIR relief. It would limit us to a certain extent. This article breaks it down but I can't say I fully understand it: http://www.wingingitinmotown.com/2016/4/27/11505136/red-wings-cap-recapture-strategy-ltir-loophole-has-its-limits From what I think I understand, It seems it could just limit UFA buying power and force us to put Svech, Saarijarvi or whatever cheap prospects on the team. If that would be the case, that wouldn't be the worst thing. Or if their careers are shorter than that and 14 mill on LTIR does prove to be a problem - As we've seen with Pronger, Datsyuk, etc. - dead contracts can be traded.

First of all, 3 years is not long term. Howard, Nyquist, and Kronwall are the ones with 3 years left. Included in your 10 is Franzen who will almost definitely never play another game so including him makes no sense. ...so we're back to the 6 that e_prime mentioned. I don't even think Glendening's 4 year extension should be considered long term.

"Most of the team" is not signed to long-term deals. We have some big contracts coming off in the next while and I don't foresee any problems. As prospects and young players we have most of them on cheaper RFA deals or entry level for a while. first "biggish" player to get UFA status is Nyquist in 3 years from now. -Next year without Ott, Miller, Vanek, Kindl's penalty there's 3,905 - some goes Tatar,+Smith?(RFAs) then free agents, -Green's 6 mill is gone in 2 years - some goes to Larkin's+Mrazek's RFA deals, maybe small chance that we don't fit Sheahan in (but cap will go up so I"m sure we'll have space) -Howard's 5.2 and Kronwall's 4.7 is gone in 3 years - re-sign Nyquist, roll in the extra cash. -Ericsson's 4.25 is gone in 4 years

Still not sure why you're using Vancouver and Toronto as examples. Also not sure what learning "it" the hard way means. If you mean you have to tank to success - your examples work against you. Both those teams were bad for extended periods Van (96-00), Leafs (06-) and weren't been able to put together championship teams from time in the tank. Vancouver ruined an elite team with the goalie debacle of losing 2 elite goalies in Schneider and Luongo - 2 assets they should have got more for. Then they alienated Kesler with this debacle and by hiring Tortorella. If you want to learn from this example, keep your future goalie (Mrazek is Schneider in this parallel) and treat your Stars well and show them you're a competent GM. I think our strategy is to keep our picks and try to draft well. I think we've gotten our future #1 center that way, and a goalie I think I think will be great and some other very good players. Looking at our recent 1st round picks (Larkin, Mantha, Svech) I don't think it out of the question that we pull a top defender in the next few years. Next year there seems to be a number of good Dmen in the draft that I've been checking out that we might get a chance at: Timothy Liljegren, Callan Foote (Adam foote's son), Nicolas Hagues (6'6") In a few years, I really think we could put together a contender with our prospects and young players except for the big hole of #1D, so I don't get the sour outlook and desire to tear it down. There was some head-scratching moves this offseason, though, so makes a little more sense why people are frustrated.

I agree with the Vanek part to a certain extent, but we could trade him at the deadline and get something for him and then he would be a good move long term. Anyway, when you add a potential 50 pt. guy for a 1 year deal without giving anything up, I think you have to do it - you either gain a tradeable asset or he doesn't perform and nothing lost. Or you extend him a year or 2 (not long term) so that Larkin or AA have high level linemates to develop with and let Mantha, and other propects work their way up from the 3rd line competition. The idea that Helm, Glendening are blocking youth is false, though, when you have Miller, Ott taking roster spots and you don't even say which prospects you want on the team. Frank, I think you hit an important point, when you mentioned semantics. I think you guys are talking about a Tanking rebuild. And, no, we're not doing that. It's the often mentioned rebuild on the fly. For those uninterested when we're just making the playoffs, I doubt you would be more interested in 5 years at the bottom of the league.

Not sure what you mean by this. If anything, Burke's Leafs would be an example that would warn against making trades that get rid of large amount of your future for 1 player (i.e. some of the trade suggestions some have made). I'm excited about Mrazek as much as Larkin. AA is up there to - I want to see what level he can really play to. Also, the resurgence of Tatar and Nyquist will be something I'm looking forward to watching.

20: Larkin 22: Athanasiou 23: Jurco, Ouellet, Sproul? 24: Mrazek, Sheahan, Pulkinnen, Marchenko 25: Tatar 26: Dekeyser 27: Glendening, Nyquist, Smith 29: Abby, Helm 30: Green NHL average age is 27.5. Look how many of our key players are on the young side. And 15-16 of the 23 man roster 30 and under. Hasn't been that way in a while. It's a rebuild. I think Mantha will be on the team by the end of the year as well. Not sure who else we'd want on the team from the prospects.

There is an official anthem for Europe, it's the Ode to Joy. I hope they go with this version:

I don't know about the McDavid effect and I didn't watch any All-Star stuff, but his early performance definitely drew the spotlight. I think his late season dip was due to the grind of the 82 game schedule that he'd never done before. There are definitely players who never produce consistently for the full season, though, (Franzen, Z most years) and have that low each season so we'll see which category he falls into. Due to his consistent effort, speed, and creativity I think he'll be more of a consistent producers, though.

We simply don't know what we'll have with Larkin yet, but last year was very encouraging - especially for a first year pro. I don't think that one year tells us much of the player he'll become, though. We'll have to see where his trajectory goes from there. I really haven't seen anyone call Larkin elite yet. I think he has the skillset to get there. As well as being close to Eichel's 1st year, he also measures up pretty well against some elite players for a first year in the league. Before people jump on me, I'm not saying that he'll be on the level of these players. I'm saying he did fine for his first year. We can only hope that he gets near the level of some of these guys. 1st year Pro/in the NHL: Larkin: 80gp, 23g, 45pts Toews: 64gp, 24g, 54pts (of course less games and more points, but similar goals) Seguin: 74gp, 11g, 22pts Stamkos: 79gp, 23g, 46pts Benn: 82gp, 22g, 41pts Bergeron: 71gp,16g, 39pts D Sedin: 75gp, 20g, 35pts The unfair part about looking at this, of course, is usage since Larkin played 1st line while some of these players started on lower lines - just thought they were interesting to look at for comparison. This year, Datsyuk's TOI will be up for grabs and he'll be more adjusted to the league and the tough schedule - I think for sure he'll take a big step forward.

It's not just with GR prospects. You talk down the potential of Mrazek (24), Larkin (20), Tatar (25) (in other posts) in arguments for trading them. And, yet, for some reason you seem to think Fowler potential to be a high level player is more credible. I think there's a chance Fowler gets a bit better, but I don't think he's the top pairing guy we're looking for. Especially for what think it would cost to get him.

While it's true that D take longer to mature and 24 is fairly young, Fowler's actually been in the league for six years. I think it's pretty rare someone that's been in the league that long making that significant a step up in their game. Dubnyk maybe, but changing goaltending techniques is a different matter. I guess you could count Kronwall as an example since he expanded his game when he became a 1st pair after 6 years of being a second pair guy, though I think that was more of a change than getting better. I think it's a little ironic that you're the one making this argument since you often write how others shouldn't count the potential of certain players.

I think a big consideration for Datsyuk not being captain is language. His English just wasn't good enough to talk to referees, let alone doing all the extra press coverage that is expected out of a captain. Anyway, Pav seemed to like being left alone and fly under the radar while he was here.

So...Fowler at 24 will improve and is worth the gamble, while Tatar at 25 and Nyquist at 26 will always be stuck at the same level? ...or familiarity breed contempt and lets check out the grass on the other side.

SKA Saint Petersburg. You're probably thinking CSKA Moscow which is Fedorov's team that Pav did play for during the lockout.

Yeah. That fact that he's now playing with Kovalchuck kind of slipped by me - They'll be tearing it up. Kovy had 6 pts. in the 2 games they've played, Pav had 3. Plus the team has Voynov, the wife-beater, and Dadonov, who has been top 20 in that league for the past couple years.

True. The tweet says expect him to be ready, but who knows.

Part of me is hoping we have a Dman injured so we can keep XO, Sproul, and Jensen at least at the beginning of the year. Sucks for Jurco. He was already starting behind the eight ball and now the path looks harder for him.

A.K.A. since the salary cap. It's clear that has been our policy since the cap - go with homegrown draft picks and prospects for the majority of our players. In this time, I think every other team, at some point, has either traded a lot of their future in a big push to win (Pens, FLA, KIngs, etc) or traded away aging stars in order to tank and get picks (Flames, Buffalo, etc.) We haven't been in either of these extreme situations so it makes sense that we have tallied much less trades - that was what I was saying. Now, you can argue that we should go through the cycle of boom and bust, but that's another conversation, i think.

We're in a much different situation so he should run the team differently. We're rebuilding from the draft - essential to that strategy is drafting well and keeping your good draft picks. Not sure why anyone is surprised that we haven't made many trades. When someone brought up that we had us significantly less trades then everyone else for the past 5 years - I think that's because we're really the only team in the situation of doing a rebuild without tanking at some point. So we're more dependent on hoping prospects work out and so - as any gambler should - we keep many chances for the opportunity for success. And as someone who has claimed that others are overvaluing prospects, I think you do the same when you claim that trading them can significantly improve the team. Other teams also know that proven talent is more valuable than potential. For instance, you mentioned trading Sproul as an OHLer and Nyquist as a AHLer - any trade that doesn't involve a 1st round pick, a high drafted prospect, or a roster player really isn't going to bring you in much from what I've seen. We have plenty of mid-level Dmen and forwards and I think that would be generous for what that trade suggestion would get you. And now, that's about the level Nyquist's at and Sproul could still surprise.

Most head coaches come from the AHL, but I don't think it's really that uncommon for guys to come from the CHL. Therrien and Vigneault both came from QMHL like Roy and Dale Hunter was chosen by the Caps from the OHL a few years ago. Roy was GM and owner for the Ramparts on top of doing quite well as a coach for them for 8 years. That seems like a pretty good resume to me. Anyway, Avs did great that first year with him. I think he's the type of personality that would only work for a while as a NHL coach (rather than junior leagues where new players filter in and out each year) - kinda like Tortarella(sp?). Then again, I have no idea what he's really like in the dressing room.

I don't know if that was the case with Roy. His 8 years coaching in the QMHL he did pretty well. He won a Memorial cup there and that's the top achievement at that level. He was also the GM, owner, and vice president there as well. Maybe you meant Sakic? I wouldn't say that was the case either. He work his way up a la Yzerman.

And that a pre-season game too. Because of that it makes even less sense for him attack like that. I think it explains a little why others don't engaged with him, though. In the NHL pre-season, there's not much rough stuff and I wouldn't see much to fight for when you're just getting your game up to speed and trying not to get injured. ...But, with that said, when a guy's injuring people and going crazy, you have to step in. The refs just standing there is so weird.

Alright, truce. I'm not going to try to convince you. I wasn't even arguing that Glendening is the better producer than Draper - Just that he's in line with the production of our Grind Lind, other than their few outlier years. Just take another look at Draper, Maltby, Kocur's McCarty's stats and you'll see each only has a few years when they each contributed significant offence. I didn't even need to bring Glendening into it. Usually those players were 20 pts or lower.