kipwinger

Except that time and time again evidence disproves the "eye test". Seeing IS believing, but believing isn't always reality.

I don't "like" players because I'm not a fanboy. I would GLADLY replace every single player in the Red Wings organization with other players if it made the team better. I think "liking" people I don't know is childish tbh. But you do you.

I did think AA would be better, but I never said he'd be "elite" to make that point. Because that would be silly. I'm also not the one whining that "kip and co." take me at face value when I say silly things. You are. Why not just own up to the fact that you were being hyperbolic about Veleno because you A) like him, and B) don't like being wrong? You definitely said that about Hronek, in the EXACT same post you called Coreau a future starter. Do I really need to go find the post?

Yeah his scoring really took off once they moved him to the wing. Definitely evidence that he's going to be a good NHL center one day. Totally. If you're going to throw out his first 10 games in an effort to make the case that he's actually playing well, then you should probably include the fact most of his scoring has come after he was moved to an easier position. Whatever man, Drew Miller had "elite" penalty killing ability and it's about time his "eliteness" was recognized for what it was. And don't you DARE question it. He's clearly more elite than a college player bro.

You make TONS of outrageous claims about prospects. You once said that Jared Coreau had NHL starting goalie upside. You said Hronek would never be more than 3rd pairing dman. So it's not my job to intuit which of your takes is hyperbole and which is just bad judgement. And stop acting like a victim, you said it, and you're currently doubling down on it (to some degree) by claiming that ALL NHLers are elite compared to other players. So own it.

Every single team in the NHL has one or two bad contracts on the books. There is NO risk in that, especially for the Red Wings. In some cases having bad contracts is actually an advantage. There are no free agents who are going to get Yzerman additional prospects and picks in the acquisition. None. You've compared this Killorn/Johnson situation to Nielsen about 3 times in the last two days. Do I really need to prove it or will you just admit you've made that (silly) comparison a number of times? Neither I nor @Wait&Sneed ever said the return for Killorn and Johnson WOULD be a 2nd. We both said that IF that were the only return we'd still do the deal because in addition to the pick (which is pretty) valuable you'd be getting solid, Cup winning, productive, veteran players to replace the sh*tbags we'll be losing to attrition over the next two years without ANY negative impact on our ability to sign players or fit under the cap.

Heaven forbid I allow my point of view to be influenced by empirical evidence. I should just pass on stats like you do...except you don't. You use stats to make points all the time. Like you've repeatedly done with Killorn and Johnson. It's funny, stats are bad when I use them to point out that Veleno is really mediocre, but they're great when you use them to suggest that Killorn and Johnson aren't going to be any good in a few years. Got it. There is no standard timeline to get to the NHL. The league you're drafted out of has as much impact on that as how "developed" you are. Veleno went to the AHL early relative to other players in the CHL, not other players in general. TONS of players go to the AHL at the same age, or earlier, than Veleno and perform MUCH better. Larkin did. So did Zadina. So did Seider. So did Svechnikov. ALL of them performed better at that level than Veleno did. He was not doing something that many many many many other players haven't done, more successfully, than he did. The only year Veleno has been at the top of ANY team (nevermind league) he played in was as a 19 year old, draft +1, player in the CHL.

Joe Veleno will never be "elite" in the NHL. Regardless of how many times you say so. And him being the 6th most productive player on a s***ty SHL team is hardly evidence that he will. If you think Veleno will be an "elite 2C" or even a "solid 2C" in the NHL because of his play in the SHL then I can't even imagine how good you think Berggren will be. The only time that Veleno has excelled as a center was as an overager in the CHL. You've already compared him to a completely pedestrian player in Danault. The funny thing is, I agree with that assessment. I think Veleno will be a two-way, mid-40s point, center. And if a guy like that is your 2nd line center you're totally f*cked because there are a whole bunch of teams with WAY better center depth than that.

You said it was risky. It isn't. Glad you're acknowledging as much. But now you're saying you don't like it, which is apparent and also completely irrelevant. The fact is that Tampa is going to have to trade two players to get cap compliant. Given the fiscal landscape they're going to sweaten the pot to do so. Turning up your nose at free (good player) and picks, when those players have ZERO risk, is short sighted. I'm not sure why you'd assume Killorn, who just had a career year, would fall off a cliff in the next three years given standard aging curves. You keep comparing them to Nielsen which is funny because even he was scoring in the mid-30 pts range when he was 33-34 years old (the age Killorn and Johnson will be at the end of their contracts). So even your "worst case scenario" isn't actually that bad. Tampa got demolished two years ago in the first round and came within one game of getting bounced in the first round again by the same team. Then they struggled to beat a Dallas team that nobody thought was a legitimate contender. They're not some dominant dynasty team. Feel free to have all the opinions you want about 2nd round picks. Its a fact that NHL GMs want those picks badly and that those picks are routinely used to A) trade up to get better players, B) turn into very good players themselves (Bertuzzi, Hronek).

Wait, now you think Yzerman is going to GIVE UP assets for Johnson and Killorn and only get the 60th pick in return? Lol. That's absurd. Nobody, including KRsmith (who also hates the idea), has stated anything of the sort. It's absurd. You're literally making up things that nobody has said and then arguing against your own made up premise.

I don't disagree with you, but you're coming late to the debate. The only reason we're even discussing "elite" 2C players is because KRsmith said Veleno has elite upside. Which is absurd. If he'd said that Veleno would be an "ideal" 2C (he's compared him to Danault) I would still disagree because Danault isn't even a very good 2C when compared to the guys you mentioned, but at least it wouldn't be as patently absurd as saying Veleno has "elite" upside. The fact of that matter is that we don't have many players with higher end upside, and almost none at center and that's a huge problem. If Joe Veleno is a Danault-like player in a few years, and is playing on our 2nd line, we're f*cked because good teams don't have 45 pt 2nd line centers. That would be a disaster, which is why I've said many times that a player like that is best slotted on a 3rd line like Jordan Staal. Something KRsmtih disagreed with until he realized that Staal is actually better than Danault lol.

Okay, so there's no risk then? You just wouldn't like it. Got it. Who says it's the 62nd overall pick? There's no guarantee. It's really hard to repeat. Could be a much lower pick. You're presuming (for the sake of argument) the worse case scenario, which is odd because when you talk about things like player development you always presume the best case scenario for the guys you like and the worst case for guys you don't (like you did above with Johnson and Killorn). It's almost like you pick and choose when to be optimistic/pessimistic based on how convenient it is for your argument. Something tells me you'd bend over backward defending the value of 2nd round picks if it was for a player you wanted.

Yzerman has taken on a number of 30 year old players during this rebuild to almost universal acclaim.

A 2nd round pick is a very valuable asset. It's only "nothing" when saying it's "nothing" supports an argument you're making.

Literally nobody has EVER said we'd take them on for nothing.

You keep saying there's "risk" in this. I don't see it. Having two good albeit overpaid players on your team in 3 years when you've got LOADS of cap space zero risk. You have still failed to adequately explain what having these two guys on the roster instead of Helm, Filppula, Nielsen, Erne, or Glendening is going to hurt. In what way does it negatively impact the roster?

You have to fill out your roster with actual NHL players who don't suck. Buffalo has shown time and again how filling your team with losers and young guys isn't going to get you anywhere. We can't afford to be abysmal every single year of the rebuild. It kills an organization. Replacing the likes of Helm, Filppula, Nielsen, Ryan, with Namestnikov, Johnson, and Killorn will still mean Detroit's a lottery team, but at least they won't be getting BLOWN OUT every single night. And that's a good thing.

Why does the contract matter? It's not going to negatively impact the team in any conceivable way. Are you that concerned about Chris Ilitch's bank account? Bad contracts only matter if they stop you from re-signing good players or landing free agents. That's why Tampa is in this mess, for instance. Detroit will have MORE than enough money to do any and everything they want to do in free agency or to re-sign players.

Scoring 45 points a season (on average) is not "solid" for a top six center on a good team. You realize that almost no teams win the Stanley Cup with a 2C who only score about 45 pts. The worst 2C in recent memory is Schenn and his .65 ppg is significantly better than Danault's .52 ppg. So if Veleno ends up like Danault, as you've consistently projected, he will play on the 3rd line for any playoff caliber team.

1. As you've pointed out many times there is a pandemic and flat cap. That means that prices are depressed because teams are not generating revenue and are more reluctant to spend. In a few years, when things are more normal, teams may be willing to acquire bigger contracts for their Cup runs. 2. Again, I've said they're probably marginally overpaid but I don't think by much. You've gone on and on over the years about how a good contract awards players a million dollars for every ten points they score. By your own standard Killorn is basically not overpaid at all, and Johnson is slightly overpaid now but wasn't when his contract was signed. Assuming more minutes for Johnson means he'd score another 15-20 pts. a season he wouldn't be over paid either. 3. The value of dealing with Tampa is that you're getting picks/prospects AND useful players. Any other "cap dump" is probably not going to end with the Wings getting good players and certainly not players of Killorn or Johnson's caliber. If Yzerman made three separate trades and got a 2nd round pick, a depth center capable of bouncing around the middle six, and a 2nd line winger that would have led our team in goals last year, all while giving up NOTHING, people would have licked his balls.

So you think Danault is "one of the best 2C in the league"?

1. 30+ year old players get traded all the time. Dont see why this would be different. 2. Their contracts aren't "huge". I agree they may be marginally overpaid, but you're being hyperbolic. 3. The contracts won't hurt the team in the slightest. We will have MORE salary cap space at the ends of their deals than we do now because we'll be replacing big money contracts (Dekeyser, Helm, Glendening, Filppula, Nemeth, Staal, etc. etc. etc.) with ELCs (Veleno, Ras, Seider). To answer your question, I think Yzerman WILL get more in a trade for these two because Tampa is in a tight spot. But in a hypothetical sense, if it was either take a late first for Killorn and Johnson or else take nothing I'd take the 1st. You'd be getting a valuable draft pick that might help you move up at the 2021 draft, you'd be getting two good players to help guide the lockroom and hold young players accountable, and both of those guys will be tradeable later.

I agree with all of this. Players are "elite" or not. And those "elite" players who center the second line are "elite 2C". That's exactly what I've been saying for two days. NONE of the players you mentioned are "elite". None of the players KRsmith mentioned are "elite". And certainly we wouldn't determine a player's position based on where he MIGHT play on a different team. If Luke Glendenging comes out this year and plays on the Wing's 2nd line all year, then he's a (bad) 2C until he isn't. Doesn't matter that he wouldn't do that on another team. Also of note, Malkin's career TOI is that close to Crosby's because Crosby missed significant portions of his career with injuries. During those periods Malkin moved up the depth chart, became the 1C and got the associated minutes. The law of averages being what it is, their TOI seems seems pretty close. Crosby has averaged more TOI in 9 of the last 10 seasons. The only season he didn't was an injury plagued year in which he only suited up or 22 games.

Both of those players are well regarded around the league I'd assume, and both will fetch the initial return the Wings get for them, but another return in a few years when they're traded. In the mean time their value will be A) that they both played big parts on a dominant, Cup winning team, and B) are better than any depth player currently playing for the Wings (most of whom will be leaving in the next two years). Finally, neither of those two guys played much with Stamkos, Kucherov, or Point. So their numbers aren't inflated by playing with a star the way Artemi Panarin blew up Ryan Strome's numbers this past season in NY. Killorn and Johnson's most frequent linemates were each other and Cirelli and that line actually played MORE in the playoffs than the elite guys did, suggesting maybe they're better than people are giving them credit for.

Of course they're not the norm. That's why they're elite. Because there aren't many of them. Elite players of any variety are "not the norm". That's what elite means. I'm having a hard time understanding how a player who isn't amongst the very best at this position (Schenn for example) can be "elite". Are there "elite" 4th line wingers too? "Elite" third pair defensemen? "Elite" backup goalies? I presume all or most of the people on this board played hockey at some point in their lives. So they all remember the lineup that was usually written on a whiteboard somewhere in the lockroom, and which in in NHL is submitted to the league, timekeepers, and media before the game right? That's an official lineup card for the game telling everyone who's starting in what positions. That lineup has 4 forward lines on it. Whoever is centering the second line, is the 2nd line center. This isn't some big riddle to solve. Occasionally the 2nd line center is so good that they'd be a 1st line center on another team, but that's irrelevant. They play 2C. I doubt you guys would rush to call Veleno a 4th line center just because there are a handful of teams in the league for which that's where he'd play.