kipwinger

Neat stat.

Fair enough, it's hard to argue against some of that. I think they're too small to play against power teams, and during the physical play of the playoffs. Kronwall was -2 on the season and -2 in five playoff games, and Suter was plus 15 during the season but -3 in ten playoff games. There's really only one way to find out, but I'd worry about putting that defense on the ice in a physical game.

Doesn't the size of this defense concern you? For a guy who has been pretty consistent in his calls for becoming "grittier" and "harder to play against", I'd have thought you'd find the size and grittiness of this defense problematic. Ryan Suter, 6'1 198 lbs. Niklas Kronwall, , 6' 190 lbs. Ian White, 5'10 191 lbs. Jonathan Ericsson, 6'5 220 lbs. Brendan Smith, 6'2 195 lbs. Justin Schultz, 6'2 185 lbs. (http://www.uwbadgers...z_justin00.html) Danny Dekeyser, 6'3 186 lbs. (http://www.wmubronco...TCLID=204998252) Jakub Kindl, 6'3 210 lbs. All sizes taken from ESPN and verified through NHL.com unless otherwise indicated.

He's an RFA. Ken Holland doesn't go after other teams' RFAs.

I agree. As I said, Semin is like Flip with a better shot and a worse work ethic.

I lived and worked in D.C. for a couple years so I've seen him play quite often. My assessment of him is that he's a big, strong, fast, and extremely skilled forward with inconsistent work ethic, motivation, and on ice effort. In my opinion Semin's skill set makes him very much like Filppula, only bigger and with a better shot. Sure he's not tough in the way that Getzlaf or Perry or someone is, but he's very strong and very fast which makes it extremely difficult to play against him when he's giving 100 % effort. Which obviously begs the question...will he give the effort? My personal position is that the problem with Washington's inability to achieve their potential was largely Bruce Boudreau, who was a player friendly coach who didn't expect a disciplined or structured game from his players...and therefore never got it. Signing Semin would essentially be taking a gamble that in a more structured system his talents would be better utilized. I think it would pay off because I think Semin is a textbook example of a guy who needs a change of scenery...or at least a change of coaching. You're welcome to disagree if you want, but I think what I've said here is a fairly accurate description of what Semin brings to the table. So, as I've said all along, if we can't get Parise and Semin will take a modest pay cut and sign short term, then I think it's worth the gamble.

The flip side of this coin is that maybe a demanding coach with a proven track record would help Semin finally reach his full potential. You have to remember, it wasn't until Scotty came along that Yzerman became a full time, well rounded, player. Obviously Semin isn't Stevie Y, but there's no telling how a guy will react to a coach that holds him accountable. Like I said before, it wasn't long ago that people said that about Cleary, Bert, and Hossa. Semin only ever had one NHL coach to teach him the NHL game, and that was Boudreau, who obviously didn't demand that guys play a disciplined game, but that doesn't mean they can't...especially when they come on to a team full of guys who do go the extra mile. Again, it's a gamble...but it might be worth the risk if the asking price on Parise is too high and Semin can be had for a reasonable contract.

In that scenario there's no way I'd sign Semin. But I think that he's only going to get that kind of money in Russia. If he signs in the NHL it will be with a contender and at a (slight) discount. 1 year at 5.5 to 6 million, or two years at 5 million. Here's a link to a real good article about Semin and Detroit. http://www.wingingitinmotown.com/2012/6/15/3089256/red-wings-free-agent-targets-the-alex-semin-gamble

I agree. Plus, at 6'1 and 210 lbs. Semin is ALWAYS going to be harder to play against than Huds. Also, how much of Semin's under performance was himself, and how much of it was Washington's mismanagement. I've said before and I'll say again, Bruce Boudreau was a terrible coach for young players because he's not the type of guy that forces players to work within a system to achieve results. As a result Washington squandered one of the most talented rosters in hockey year after year after year. Get Semin onto a team where he's expected to do a particular job and is held accountable, and I believe he'll be just like the long list of players who have learned how to play a full game in Detroit. Not too long ago Dan Cleary was accused of taking shifts off and not playing defense, so was Bertuzzi, and Hossa. They all did a complete turn around once they came here. No reason to believe Semin couldn't do the same. I consider it a reclamation project, and one that could really pay off, if the reports are true and Semin would consider a pay cut to play here. Obviously there are question marks with the guy, and he's no guarantee, but he might well be worth the gamble if a more consistently proven scoring winger (Parise) can't be acquired. Edit: Sniper much?

Nyquist isn't really a finisher, and I certainly don't think that's he's more suited to the third lines roles of physicality, scoring, and good defense than Bertuzzi and Cleary are.

I agree, but Holland has said that Nyquist and Smith will be on the team this year and Nyquist's talent is wasted on either of the bottom two lines. Therefore, the only way to have him AND Hudler in the lineup at the same time while still utilizing their skill sets is to put them both in the top six...and I certainly don't want that. However, if we can land a top line winger to play with Datsyuk, then Hudler's 25 goals aren't as important as they were last year, and you can bring in Nyquist without putting too much pressure on him.

Resigning Hudler isn't necessarily a bad idea, but it does ensure that Nyquist will not see regular playing time this coming year as he's not suited for a third or fourth line role on this team. So that's essentially the trade off, unless someone wants to see both Hudler and Nyquist in our top six...but I certainly don't.

This article is awesome. I wish I could send it over to the guys at "PTI" or "Around the Horn" and then ask them why they get so worked up over such a garbage game.

This sums up exactly how I feel about the NFL and why I feel that the NHL is second to none (especially the NFL) in professional sports in terms of quality, competitiveness, and athleticism. Enjoy. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/paul_daugherty/10/06/nfl/index.html

ESPN did something similar and ran a story about the five teams most likely to win it all next year. They went with Boston, Vancouver, Pittsburgh, The Rangers, and the Kings. I assume that being a sports writer during the off season would have to be a boring hell.

What does everyone think it would take to get Douglas Murray from San Jose via trade? And would you want him if he could be had at the price you suggest is fair? ESPN is speculating that he will be the odd man out of San Jose's top four once they sign Brad Stuart. Your thoughts? http://insider.espn....features/rumors

Furious. You should see me.

With informative and well thought out posts like that it's no wonder that you've made it past 7,000 posts already. My hat's off to you, you truly are a Hall of Famer. Kip

Well whatever the reason, the presence of two MVP level talents didn't seem to make much of a difference for them. Every team is built around some elite talent and a lot of role players. The differences in skill levels between elite players is very slim, so it's fair to say that Chicago's superstars and Vancouver's superstars are not noticeably better or worse than one another. Often, what separates good teams from great ones are their role players and character guys, and I'd certainly never advocate gutting your team of four such guys just to add another star. Seriously, Cleary, Helm, Abby, and Miller for Karlsson or Malkin, why? Not that you were suggesting that we should...but some here have.

Of course I wouldn't. The Pittsburgh Penguins didn't make it past the first round with the presumed MVP of the league, Crosby, a #1 drafted goalie, and James Neal having a career year. Why would I want to gut 4 roster players off my team for just one of those pieces (the presumed MVP)? Picks and prospects along with a roster player or two and I'm happy to make a trade, but there's nobody in the world worth Cleary, Helm, Abby, and Miller...unless Evgeni Malkin can play 38 minutes a night, kill penalties, win faceoffs, and still maintain his offensive numbers.

agreed. Additionally, if your team is already very thin then the superstar wouldn't really help much. Look at Columbus. An average goalie and a few 2nd and 3rd liners would probably do them more good than Rick Nash is right now. Also, what does the OP mean by average? Is Cleary average, or Abby, or Miller, or Helm. You could argue that they are all average, and I certainly wouldn't trade the four of them for Steven Stamkos or Erik Karlsson.

The Quicken Loans Center...puke.

I don't want to see that line ever. Why put all your playmakers on one line? Who would be the other line, Franzen-Filppula-Clear/Bert...ugh.

Yeah, we really just need depth signings on the top end. Signing one top line player actually makes the first, third, and fourth lines better by itself. If that happens you don't NEED Hudler's points, though they are nothing to scoff at, and you can give Nyquist the shot. However, without a top liner you end up scrambling to find quality line combinations, like we did last year, and you end up playing guys in roles they aren't suited for (e.g. Abby as a third line forward capable of scoring ever). Without front end talent our depth is seriously questionable and you have to resign Hudler to field anything close to a competitive team. side note: We don't disagree on much. 4 out of 10 disagreement here at LGW involve people not completely reading and comprehending what someone else is trying to say. 3 out of 10 involve one party or the other being pissed off because they sincerely want the team to do well and think they have correctly identified the problem. 2 out of 10 disagreements involve one party or another intentionally trying to be dick on the internet because there's really no harm in it, so why not? Only, 1 out of 10 disagreements on LGW is truly substantive.

To me, the main thing to consider when it comes to offering Hudler a contract is whether or not we expect Nyquist to be on the team full time next season. If management doesn't expect Nyquist to play everyday then resigning Hudler makes sense because he fills the second line winger position and allows you to field a real good Bert-Helm-Cleary third line, and a dynamite Miller-Abby-Eaves fourth line. However, if they are expecting them both to play full time then that really puts the bottom six in disarray because Nyquist has too much skill to be on the fourth line, and is mismatched in terms of style on a third line with Helm, Bert, or Cleary. I think someone here mentioned something recently about the bottom two lines needing identity. They have it so long as Gustav Nyquist doesn't play on those two lines. A highly skilled player on either of those lines as they are conceived above doesn't make any sense. So the question to me is, does Nyquist play every day? The answer seems to depend on getting a real scoring threat to play with Datsyuk. You get a Parise or a Semin to play with Datsyuk and Franzen, then you can afford to lose Hudler's production on the second line because the third line and fourth lines will be MUCH better than last year's incarnations. If they don't get the top liner to go with D and Franzen, then you might as well resign Hudler because you'll need the offense any way you can get it, especially considering one of either Bert or Cleary will have to be back in the top six which will ultimately limit the production you'll get out of the bottom two lines.