kipwinger

I am.

Antoine Roussell is a menace. Hence, he's my favorite Dallas Star. Loved that guy every since he crosschecked Boston's McQuaid in the neck for taking a run at him.

Nyquist with zetterberg and mantha Tatar with Larkin and AA Frk with Neilsen and svechikov Abby with helm and bertuzzi

Two things, we aren't even icing our best possible lineup (which would have AA, Svechnikov, and Bertuzzi), and so as a result we have two lines which have no realistic shot of contributing offensively. As a result is say our forward lines are trash in their totality. Ice our best lineup and they're probably 12-18 in the league.

Could be worse, you could be like the Wings organization and beat writers who are still "joking" about luring Lidstrom out of retirement. A joke which was funny the year after he retired, but sad when made 5 years later. I think Ken Holland and co. would burn an orphanage to the ground if it meant they could go back in time to 1997.

Like, 15-20 years ago you mean lol. Seem like it was only yesterday...

I feel like the Avs and the Wings are basically the exact same team right now. Hard to believe a player would find New Jersey a more desirable destination than Colorado.

I remember reading that he was probably already a top four offensive defenseman, but that he likely wouldn't be a top pairing guy. But I've never seen him play so I have no insight. He definitely got dragged quite a bit around here though. Then again, they are playing the Avs. So maybe it's that.

Good for him, he definitely had a lot of doubters. But it's only one game.

I read an Athletic article about some new drills that the Wings were doing in practice. Apparently they require you to skate with the puck and make anticipatory decisions. They asked Ericsson how he liked it and he said something like "It's really fun for guys like me who don't really ever have the puck during games". Not a hint of irony. I wanted to cry. Edit: Correction, it was the Free Press and his quote was as follows: “We don’t really do a lot of these things but we do need them in the games,” Ericsson said. “We don’t touch the puck that much in games - we basically get it and pass it, so it’s good to get familiar with the puck a little bit more in different situations, a little bit awkward situations.”

I'm looking back through the game log now, and so far it looks like AA assisted on Vanek's goals just as often as Vanek assisted on AA's. So at best it's a wash. Admittedly, this is only a cursory glance.

His goals per game average was just as high the year before, without Vanek, as it was last year. But what you're saying is a truism anyway. Of course most of your goals are set up by your linemates. The only other options are that you score all of your goals by yourself, or your goals are set up by guys who aren't on the ice with you.

AA's points per game average is better than Bennett, despite being on a worse team. So yeah, I'd pay extra for the guy who scores more despite being on a worse team. I'd be wary of guys who score less on better teams. But that's just me. Are you saying that you'd rather pay more for a guy who is on a better team but produces less? Also, you said AA's production was hardly worth "big money". But nobody, including AA, is suggesting he's worth big money.

AA is asking for 2.5 million per year. Hardly "big money". Also Sam Bennett, your "comparable", scored fewer points last season than AA, despite playing a minute more per game, and playing 17 more games. So yeah, he SHOULD accept 1.9...he's not as good as AA is.

In every other contract negotiation I've ever seen, you pay more for a shorter term, and less for a longer one. Isn't that how we kept Abby's cap hit down, and why Green's is probably higher than he's worth. I think AA is worth 2.5 million over 3 years. A little less for more term, and little more for less term. I certainly think he's worth more than the comparables people have been throwing around considering all the guys mentioned as comparables (Brown, Anderson, Baertschi, Bennett) score roughly the same number of points with more TOI, more games, or both.

Except you're not posting with any kind of logical or intellectual rigor. You're the king of the strawman. See the bolded above. Never said any of that. That's you just being argumentative. I said that AA is worth more than 1.9 million per year. And that Holland should offer him the 2.5 million he's asking. I never, ever, said offering him a lower AAV was "fine". I said that Holland should counter with a longer term, since it's a negotiation, but that he should absolutely offer the 2.5 because AA is worth that to this team. You've somehow morphed that into "Kip wants him signed no matter what even if that means lowballing him", which is pretty far from the truth. And you do this stuff all the time. If you were being "rational" you'd discuss hockey with people rather than trying to win debate points by distorting what other people say. If you want to scrutinize my posts, have at it. But you tend to scrutinize arguments you've made up. And then you run with it. Not really all that different that what millions of other commenters do when they try to "win" the internet. And then hide behind, "I'm just being rational". You're not. Your schtick is pretty obvious. Here, I'll clarify. I think 2.5 million over three years is a fair deal. To get there Holland will have to accept 2.5 million (which is fair) and counter offer with 4 years. Considering this is too long a term, we might reasonable expect AA's camp to counter with 3 years at 2.5 million. And then we'd have a fair deal. All clear? Since this falls within your parameter of a "fair deal" you shouldn't have anything to argue about right?

How's it disingenuous? You're super eager to paint me as a "Holland is a bad guy" slappy when that's never been the case. As I've already said, AA's agent has repeatedly said that the salary is the sticking point. He's never mentioned the term. Holland won't budge on the salary, and so I said he was lowballing him (because I agree that AA should get 2.5 million...over 3 years, which I said elsewhere). I wouldn't fault Holland a bit for offering 2.5 over 3, or 4, or whatever. Because I think the value would be right. I only said Holland was lowballing him because he won't move off 1.9 million. What's your deal man? You're always playing this "gotcha" game around here as if you're exposing some nefarious doubletalk from everyone else. I'd suggest you read back over all my posts and see if it's not abundantly clear that I have issue with the aav, and not the term, before making more of your "comments section" accusations toward me. Also, lighten up. Roughly 100% of your posts are aimed at finding some perceived ***** in the other members' posts and then attacking them. Why don't you talk about hockey once in a while? I mean, what do you think is a fair contract for AA? 2.5 million for 3 years? Yeah, me too. He's already proved he's worth more than 1.9 million over two years. All of the comparable guys people keep mentioning, including Brown, Anderson, Baertschi, scored roughly as much as AA with more minutes, more games, or both. It's not unreasonable to think he's worth slightly more than those guys.

Done. Check your messages for confirmation.

Not at all. It's Ken Holland's job to get AA signed to as team friendly a deal as possible. It's AA's agent's job to get the player the best deal possible. To date, the agent has been more concerned with the salary than the term. Seems fair that if Holland caved on the salary he could counter offer with a longer term and both get what they want. That is, if the salary is the actual sticking point like the agent has suggested. I think 2.5 is fair for AA. But given that it's a negotiation why wouldn't I, if I were Holland, try to get another year or two out of him? Edit: Holland's initial offer was 1.25 million for 1 year, and then bumped it to 1.9 for 2 years. Just for context's sake.

Name your charity. I'll make good on it. Though I'm standing by my original statement, "comparables" mean dick in terms of setting a player's value. If that were a primary factor in setting value Sidney Crosby would be the highest paid player in the league. Yet worse players make more money because of economics.

That's precisely my point. If he's hung up on the AAV, and wants more, then make him pay for it by signing for additional years. If he rejects the offer then it's clear that the AAV isn't the problem, which is what his agent has said was the sticking point.

He's not "making demands". He's choosing not to play for less money than he believes he's worth it. Something which is entirely allowed by the collective bargaining agreement. He's not REQUIRED to play in the NHL nor for the Red Wings. And it's not like he's under contract and is just refusing to report to the team. For comparison's sake, Jacob Trouba and Jonathan Drouin "demanded" trades. AA did not.

If I were Holland I would offer him 4 years at 2.5 million. Would put AA in a tough spot. If he turns it down, it looks like he's being greedy, and if he accepts he'll likely out perform his contract in 3 of the 4 years.

I'm not suggesting that Holland hand the kid a blank check or anything. But we're talking about 500K here. 500k for a kid who was your second leading goal scorer, a fan favorite (at least up until this), and who is young enough to be a key part of your rebuild. I'm not sure what IS worth 500k at this point in the Wings' developmental arch if that isn't. I mean jeez, if Xavier Ouellet is worth 1.3 million then AA is worth 2.3-2.5 easily.

No such clause exists in his either. He's not under contract. He's absolutely allowed to go play in another league. Literally NOTHING prohibits him from that. So again, would you take less money than you think you're worth just because your boss says you should? Or would you go get another job where you get paid accordingly?