kipwinger
-
Content Count
13,929 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
347
Posts posted by kipwinger
-
-
I hear you, but if you have been a Wings fan for any amount of time, you know then that Holland doesn't sign players with toughness and physical play up front. Hopefully he addresses that on the D with JOvo and or Wizzer, but (and I begged and begged for Ladd last off season) Holland is not gonna sign that type of forward. To Holland, a top six forawrd IS a 190lb. European. I hate it, but thats how it is... Holland wants scoring from his top 6 and even though he is not a Euro, Tanguay and/or Jokinen would provide that...SOFT, yes, but history dictates that we just aren't gonna see Laich, Cole or Ladd.... Of course that would be Crow I would gladly and happily eat if Holland did sign someone of that nature! But by all means, Holland, PLEASE prove me otherwise! PLEASE!!!!
I wish I could disagree with anything you've said here, but sadly, you're probably right. I do still think Wiz or Bieksa are the best options on the back end. But Laich or Ladd are mostly just wishful thinking. I'm still knocking on wood until mid july though.
Uhhh, Bert? The guy's built like a mac truck and while he's not "Old Bert" he still throws his weight around a bit. Canadian boy.
Cleary? Only 6'0, but 210 lbs of bulk in that 6'0, another Canadian boy who throws his weight around.
Abdelkader? 6'2, 215, throws his weight around. Michigan kid, that's pretty much south Ontario amirite?
Franzen.. okay, big, not gritty. Swede. Plays like a big Swede.
Anyhow, wingers are where Holland DOES add his size, often via FA. On the other hand, our centers are tiny. And our D are shrimps, too.. most are either small or not gritty by any stretch of the imagination. But if there is any one place I do expect Holland to add size via FA (whether it's aggressive size like Bert, or passive size like Hossa), it's on the wing.
However, you bring up a good point with Bert and Hossa. We drafted Franzen and Abdelkader though. And Cleary was sort of a reclaimation thing, nobody knew he'd turn out like he did. But still, very valid point.
-
This is the last time that I'm going to attempt to explain reason to you...because it's looking more and more like an exercise in futility.
#1) I never at any point said that Jovanovski was a better player than Ehrhoff, Bieksa or Wiz. Please post the quote in full if you think I did. I did suggest that Jovanovski would be a better signing than those three because he would come cheaper, and on a one year deal - which would give us more money to pursue someone like Suter next off-season. I still stand by that ---> that him and his short contract would be our best option.
#2) Like I said before, I'm not getting into the money issue with you. It's obvious. It's simple. You don't get it. I don't care that you don't get it. And I don't feel like wasting half an hour explaining it to you.
Wow, your short term memory is a real doozie. Look, the posts are numbered so this should be easy. In the post numbered 21, you responded to a comment I made about why it was dumb to sign Jovanovski or Selanne because they were too old, by saying that we could either sign a "good" player, presumably Jovanovski or Selanne, or a "mediocre" player, presumably Bieksa, Erhoff, or Wizniewski considering I mentioned those players (by name, in the post that you were responding to) as being better options than Jovanovski. AGAIN, THE POSTS ARE NUMBERED. IT WAS YOUR POST. #21.
Also, in post #19 I asked the forum "if I was missing something" because I thought it was a dumb idea to sign Selanne and Jovanovski. You responded by saying that there were no better UFAs in this year's class to sign, and according to you, that's what I was missing. Now, you're saying that Erhoff, Bieksa, and Wiz are better. But in POST #19, when I said it was dumb to sign Jovanovski, you said it was smart to sign him because there were a lack of better FAs available this year. #19.
I was starting to get really irritated by this constant back and forth until I realized, while looking at other forums, that you're the same guy who was in favor of signing Joni Pitkanen about three days ago. You believed it was a good idea to sign him, long term, in spite of his "consistancy issue". After everybody on this sight told you what a terrible idea that was, you've moved on to Jovanovski (and very stubbornly, I might add). After reading this I realized, you have no idea what you're talking about. It is likely that as soon as someone (obviously not me) convinces you that Jovanovski is also very inconsistant, overpriced (he's not taking much of a cut, if any), fairly old, and dogged by injuries, you'll probably be on to the next guy. May I suggest Roman Hamerlik? Eventually, through a process of excruciating elimination, you'll finally realize that Wizniewski, Bieksa, or Erhoff are the best options, and all will be right with the world.
Sad as it is to say, the real loser here is me. I'm the dumb one. I can't believe I just spent this much time debating with someone who suggested signing Ed Jovanovski and Teemu Selanne. It should have been obvious you didn't have a clue the second you proposed that humdinger of an idea.
-
Your last post makes zero sense. The beginning of this post makes zero sense. Please get better at explaining things.
Suter and Burns will probably go for about 7mil next year too. Suter is worth it IMO. Burns, probably not. Ehrhoff and Bieksa, definitely not. And yes...we could probably afford to sign both next season if Lids retired. I won't even bother trying to explain the math to you.
Explain how we're going to afford to sign a premier defenseman when most of Lidstrom's contract is going to make up the raises that Kronwall and Stuart are going to get? C'mon Yoda, help me see where that extra seven million is going to come from?
You said that you never suggested that Jovanovski was better than Erhoff, Bieksa, or Wiz. Except that you did say that (and I just highlighted where you said it).
You also said that there were no better UFA options than Jovanovski. Except that there are better options (and I told you ten posts ago who they were).
Now you're saying that Jovanovski isn't better than Wiz, Bieksa, Erhoff; which is what I've been saying all along. And considering he already makes six million dollars and isn't likely to sign for too much less, if any at all, why wouldn't they just sign one of those three guys.
-
How do ppl not understand this!?
Signing a good veteran to a one year contract vs. signing a mediocre young player to a long-term contract.
...In both cases, you get a good player for next year. In one case, you get a shot to replace him with a long-term addition from next season's better FA class. In the other case, you're stuck with the mediocre player and his overpriced salary for the next 5 years.
You tell me, bud. You tell me.
And you implied it here.
Unless good is not better than mediocre in your ordering of things. Or unless you blatantly refuse to acknowledge that we were talking about Jovanovski this entire time, and unless you blatantly refuse to acknowledge that about ten posts ago I mentioned Bieksa, Efhoff, and Wisniewski as UFA options in this year's class. Also, by your rationale if Erhoff and Bieksa are going to go for 7 million this year, then how much is Suter or Burns going to go for next year? A zillion? How do you suppose we'll afford that, when we have to re-sign Kronwall and Stuart next year to raises, plus likely having to fill in the holes left by Lidstrom, Holmstrom, and Bertuzzi.
Best case scenario we'll have about the same amount of free money after re-signing Kronwall and Staurt and filling those holes, as we have right now. Only the best free agents in that class (who are better than Erhoff, Bieksa, and Wiz) will cost more and we won't sign them either.
-
Stealing Selanne from ANA wouldn't be cheap.
Yes, you are, smart arse.
You're missing the complete lack of better options we're going to have in the FA market this off-season.
Well you said it here.
-
Did the OP actually put Hudler on the top line, or am I seeing things?
Don't even get started on that one. Plenty of people on this site think he should be given more ice time. Shoot over to the Hudler's future forum and prepare to be amazed.
-
How do ppl not understand this!?
Signing a good veteran to a one year contract vs. signing a mediocre young player to a long-term contract.
...In both cases, you get a good player for next year. In one case, you get a shot to replace him with a long-term addition from next season's better FA class. In the other case, you're stuck with the mediocre player and his overpriced salary for the next 5 years.
You tell me, bud. You tell me.
I'm having a hard time figuring out how you came to the conclusion that Ed Jovanovski is a better defenseman (particularly a puck moving defenseman, and PP specialist, which is what we're replacing) than any of Bieksa, Erhoff, or Wisniewski. He's been a minus 12 of his 15 seasons in the league and doesn't average many (or any) more points than those guys do. Plus, they are all much younger and are only going to improve on a defensive squad that includes Kronwall, Stuart, and Lidstrom. Plus he's more expensive, making it harder if the Wings do want to pursue a forward or another defenseman. But apparently they are mediocre and he's a star? Weird.
Either way you cut it there is still plenty of cap space. Jovo isn't worth more than 3 million.
You honestly think Ed Jovanovski is going to take a 3 million dollar pay cut to play anywhere at 34 years old? Especially when pretty much every team is looking to upgrade defense all the time. I agree he's not worth it, but he'll get it, or very close to it.
-
There were 49 games before all star break and 33 afterwards. Clearly the all star break is not the half way point. Huds put up 31 pts in his last 43 regular season games, which is only 2 games off of the actual 41 game half way point. He had a nice second half, even if his numbers were inflated by playing with Datsyuk, so at least give him some credit for a good stretch where he was earning his $2.9 mil.
Which is why I showed you his playoff totals, which were over the coarse of the ten games he played in the post season. I figure that once you combine the pre All-Star totals with the second half, and include the playoffs, you'll notice he still only had 4 more pts. in roughly the same amount of games, give or a take a couple. It's still a long way off from being an "AMAZING" second half that us peons at LGW "refuse to acknowledge".
-
Haha, fair enough man. Like I said, he's a mediocre player with a mediocre season. He hasn't earned, nor does he deserve more of anything, FOR THOSE WHO KEEP SAYING HE SHOULD BE ON ONE OF OUR TOP TWO LINES. Also, I saw that "eva unit zero" (if that is your real name) commented on Hudler's "amazing" second half performance which "was, on the whole, second-line worthy" but which "LGW simply refuses to acknowledge". Below is a link to Hudler's season splits, a statistical analysis which is easy to find for anyone who wants to know what they are talking about.
http://espn.go.com/n...120/jiri-hudler
Before the All-Star break: 4 goals, 14 assists, -5.
After the All-Star break: 6 goals, 13 assists, -2
Playoffs: 1 goal, 2 assists, -1.
Simply AMAZING second half. He totally caught fire.
NOTE to Eva: Acknowledged. Jiri was by the slimmest margin better in the second half than he was in the first. Also, his first half performance was one of the worst one the team. P.P.S. You can learn to verify the accuracy of your claims by using the internet, a thing which provides you with all sorts of proof that your wild conjectures are true, and sometimes helps to prove that other people's wild conjectures are false.
-
Yeah, I don't know what's up with all the Selanne and Jovanovski love. I understand that they are both talented players, but both are in the twilight of their careers - I really don't think that's the direction the Wings should be going in. They've got a real opportunity to add some youth to the roster. I understand the free agent class is thin, but I'd really hate to see them get older.
Not to mention the fact that both of those guys cost a lot, and because they are old you can't count on any kind of production over the long run. Jovanovski makes six million dollars and put up 14 pts. in 50 games last year. Why in the hell would you pay him six for that when you could pay Wisniewski, Bieksa, or Erhoff 4.5-5 for 70-82 games and 50 pts. And those guys are all 27-30 years old. Same for Selanne, admittedly he had an awesome season last year, no doubt about it, but the dude is 40 years old. Anybody really want to take a chance that he'll do anything like that again. No to mention the fact that we've already got Holmstrom (38), Bertuzzi (36), Draper (39), Lidstrom (41), Osgood (36), all potentially playing huge roles for next year's team. Or in the case of Lidstrom and Bertuzzi and Holmstom DEFINITELY playing huge roles on next year's team. Now we want to count on Selanne and Jovanovski to be healthy and play a championship level too? Not this guy.
-
Babcock already said what we need...a top pairing defenseman and a top six forward.
More realistic than the OP - Fill in the big blanks with Selanne and Jovanovski. Fill in the 13th forward spot with Eaves, Miller, or Draper. Fill in the backup goalie spot with Osgood, MacDonald, Larsson or Nabakov.
2012 Stanley Cup Champions.
*Selanne*-Datsyuk-Holmstrom
Franzen-Zetterberg-Bertuzzi
Hudler-Filppula-Cleary
Mursak-Helm-Abdelkader
*Eaves/Miller/Draper*
Lidstrom-*Jovanovski*
Kronwall-Stuart
*Ericsson/Smith*-Kindl
Janik
Howard
*Osgood/MacDonald/Larsson/Nabakov*
replace the much aged and often broken Rafalski, and get stronger and deeper up front by adding the much aged and often broken Selanne and Jovanovski? Am I missing something?
Travis reacted to this -
Well, technically speaking that's probably true, though not really to the unrealistic expectations of this forum.
Hudler was around rank 150 at .51 PPG. This is definitely 2nd line territory in the NHL, though the lower chunk of 2nd liners that consists at least partly of 2nd/3rd tweeners.
While Hudler doesn't put on a defensive clinic by any stretch of the imagination, he probably (sadly) has more defensive commitment/skill than a fair number of people in that scoring range.
So yes, he was probably in 2nd line territory. That doesn't mean he's an ideal 2nd liner on a contender... just means that he meets the criteria. Wings fans should be looking for more depth in the top 9 so Hudler can operate on a 3rd scoring line sort of role, or for Hudler's play to improve significantly next year so he can fully hold down a 2nd line spot... he's not suited to a 3rd line checking role at all. Ideally, both happen.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, second line worthy? He's a WINGER with ten goals, -7 defensively (against third liners), and about 13 min. TOI. Boy what a clinic he put on. He's not even close to as good as our own second line wingers who weren't even as close to as good, as every other quality second line (on competitive teams. What good does is it to compare them to terrible teams). The worst of our top line wingers is probably Holmstrom with 18 goals, 19 assists, -6 (largely against first and second liners) and 14 min. TOI. Tomas Holmstrom is also 11 years older than Jiri Hudler. As a matter of fact Hudler hardly as better offensive numbers than Eaves or Miller, and Hudler plays on the Power Play and had more games played. But let's keep telling ourselves he's quality because he's got better offensive numbers than whoever plays on Edmonton, or Florida, or the Islanders' third lines.
I honestly cannot figure this forum out. It baffles me. You take a guy, who had a not very impressive year, against not very impressive players (relative to first and second line players), and with essentially no responsibilities, and he turns in a pretty mediocre year. Which is fine, Jiri Hudler is a mediocre player, so I'm ok with it up to this point. Here comes the part that gets me. You people want to give him MORE ice time, MORE responsibilities defensively, and a LARGER portion of the ice time in critical situations (something skewed in favor of top six forwards and top four defensemen). And why, I might ask? Because two years ago he scored 20 more points. HAHAHAHA. Apparently, I've lost my mind for thinking this is a terrible idea.
-
1. It is not a very good long term strategy for you to have over half your cap space tied up in five players.
2. It is a TERRIBLE strategy to have two rookies for a third defensive pairing, something that you've suggested here, and would probably be unavoidable if you had half your cap space invested in five players.
3. You suggest promoting Jiri Hudler to the first line (which includes 5 or 6 more minutes of ice time) when he was incapable of playing quality defense last year with 5 less minutes of ice time, against third liners instead of first. Tell me how effective he's going to be against Getzlaf, Perry, Ryan or Sedin, Sedin, Burrows or Thornton, Marleau, heatly/setoguchi/clowe. I realize that on the first line Hudler will score more, so will every team we play against.
4. Filpula does play defense, you want to trade him?
5. Your third line of Bertuzzi and Holmstrom is essentially made of two wingers who do the exact same thing on the ice with Helm thrown in the middle for some reason. They are also probably the oldest, slowest, and lowest scoring third line in hockey even with helm (because you've hamstrung him by putting him on the ice with REALLY old, slow, guys).
Conclusion: In the post cap world, you can't just throw a six or seven million dollar all-star into as many positions as you can and expect to be a better team overall. You can't afford it in the long run and still develop talent. You also can't afford it in the short run and have a third or fourth line capable of playing against teams who do develop talent. Ken Holland likes to say that in the post cap world it's about getting more out of the guys that you aren't paying much, rather than paying a bunch for really good guys (obviously not verbatim).
-
I'm changing this post because when I wrote the old one I was being a total dick. I don't agree with your projected team, I would go so far as to say that I STRONGLY disagree with your ideas about the building of this team. That said, you're probably still a pretty cool dude, and there's probably no reason for me to have replied earlier in the manner I did. See below for the reasons that I disagree with your projected lineup, and have a good one Berry.
stevkrause reacted to this -
Franzen's cap hit is ~$4m, not $5m. Still, I agree mostly with your post. Franzen's cap hit is lowered by his contract being super long term + hometown discount, even Cleary's is a bit of a deal at this point. Laich being paid $4-5m will be worth the money... on the right team. I don't think we're that team, though. We need a different type of offense/play than what he brings (even though I have great respect for both his style of play and his off-ice personality. I certainly wouldn't be unhappy with him).
I didn't say his Franzen's cap hit was 5 million, I said his SALARY was 5 million. They had these awesome things called graduated contracts, now largely invalidated by the Kovalchuk deal, which allowed players to make more money up front than they did at the end of their very long contracts. Cap hit is only half the battle. Of course, it matters a lot when you're putting your team on the ice, but when you're trying to lure good players to your city, salary is the most important number. How much of a cap hit we take is all in how the contract is structured. Here's a list of all the Wings contracts from 2010-2011. Notice how most of the cap hits are lower than the amount the player actually goes home with at the end of the year?...Hmmmmm.
You'll also notice that Draper, Abdelkader, and Osgood's cap hits are higher than their salaries. Structured contracts dude, it's all about the structure.
-
Honestly,I don't know too much about him, alot of folks here get excited about him and alot don't. I've mentioned him before just based on stats and some of the positive stuff I have read on here, but I am reading more and more negative things and I am not liking it.... Honestly, I believe the Wings should sign Wiz, Jovo and Lids, then decide whether or not to pay Ericsson or let Kindl be our #6 guy and have someone else be #7...
I hear things negative and positive about everyone, nobody is 100% positive, there are always negatives about someone, but when the negatives start piling up and passing up the positives, then there may be a problem. The negs I hear about Wiz and Jovo are a little concerning, but I believe the positive things about them outweigh the negatives I have heard. If Holland can convince Ericsson to take 1 year at around $1.5M, Jovo 1 year around $2.5-$3M and Wiz $4-$4.5M, I think the D would be great: Lids, Stuart, Kronwall, Wisniewski, Jovo, Ericsson, Kindl...Add to that whomever they hire as new Asst. Coach, the Wings should have a much better defense than last season. That's about $15M of the possible $21.5M on D, leaving enough to re-sign Miller/Eaves/Goalie & bring up Mursak. (possibly Tanguay or Jokinen as well...)
So, to the topic at hand, after reading positive and negative things about him, I think the Wings should pass on Pitkanen. Especially if he is worse defensively than Rafalski was AND would cost over $5M...
You had me right up until you didn't. I"m going to be very disappointed if the Wings sign Tanguay or Jokinen. What better way to spend money and add absolutely no toughness or physical play up front. Remember that Sharks series? Do you realistically think that Alex Tanguay or Jussi Jokinen would have made one bit of difference in that one? I know they score (so please don't list off a bunch of numbers to me), but we scored last year, and the year before, we always have plenty of scoring up front. We don't have size, toughness, or depth in the top six. Please, please, please, sign Brooks Laich, Erik Cole, or make an offer sheet for Andrew Ladd. Anything other than another 190 lb. European forward.
LeftWinger reacted to this -
Hating on Datsyuk is like(ly) to get you killed!
Hating on Datsyuk is like asking to line up against Kronwall...REAL DUMB!
-
Hating on Datsyuk is like fantasizing about your mother...DON'T DO IT!
Hating on Datsyuk is like drinking skim milk...AVOID IT!
(I can keep this up all day)
-
It seems like the meaning of the phrase "playing physical" is changing. I couldn't find it but I remember reading an article where Jim Nill said that when they tell their players/prospects to play physical, they really mean playing tough on the puck first. Therefore, if a player wins a lot of his battles for the puck or just seems to have the puck a lot, then these days they play physical according to some.
By this rationale Lidstrom and Kronwall are just as physical as one another, or Filpula and Stuart, considering they all battle hard for loose pucks and more often than not, come up with them. Staying on the puck and working hard on your assignments is not the same thing as a defenseman being physical. Shea Weber is physical, Kronwall and Stuart are both pretty physical, Ed Jovanovski is physical. Shane Doan is a very physical forward. Joni Pitkanen is not a physical hockey player, unless of course you change the meaning of "physical hockey player" to "hard working" hockey player. In which case you'd still have to convince me that Pitkanen meets the qualifications, but at least then I'd be able to walk around talking about how Henrik Zetterberg is the most physical player in hockey.
-
Given all of our pressing needs on defense and how much we're going to have to pay for those, if the Wings sign Brad Richards to the (ungoldly) contract he's going to sign somewhere, I'll probably throw up. Also, I'll probably start assuming that Ken Holland and Jimmy D have been replaced by some sort of pod people genetically engineered in a laboratory by Glen Sather.
Uncle Danny reacted to this -
I voted 2-3million. Do I think he was worth that last year? No. Would I re-sign him to something like that if he keeps up his s***? No. Was it unreasonable to give him that contract after his last full season with the Wings and before his fiasco in Russia? No. Do I love asking myself questions and then answering my questions with one word answers or other question? Does the pope s*** in the woods?
-
So basically you are saying sign whoever you can so Kindl doesn't have a spot.
Also he is saying "sign whoever because Brad Stuart is clearly not good enough to play in our top four"...even thought Mike Babcock has consistently said he's our best stay at home defenseman, and one of the steadiest in the league.
Is it possible that Lidstrem'll agree to reduce his salary for 1M in terms to make the team stronger with some changes in weak areas?? Sorry for my english
I doubt he'd take a million dollar pay cut. He's taken pay cuts in the past but considering this is his last year (probably) and considering what he means to the organization, I doubt they'd ask him to take anything less than 6 million dollars for one year.
-
If the Wings don't go after two higher-end defensemen, I think Meech is a good fit to take on a lot of Rafalski's duties in the Wings' top six. He's a solid all-around defenseman with good offensive skill and great speed. He'd be a good complement to Lidstrom with other pairings of Kronwall/Stuart and Kindl/Pitkanen. Janik would be the 7th. As for Salei... I would rather have Janik. And as for Janik "earning" it... Meech has "earned" it more than Janik has. Meech has put his time in, played the role of #7, and Kindl being the hot prospect who couldn't get sent down this past year is the only reason Meech wasn't still on the NHL roster.
The whole reason the Wings signed Salei last year was because neither Meech nor Janik were good enough to play day in and day out consistently. Up until last year Kindl had never played in any NHL games and did quite well (for a sixth or seventh defenseman) when he had the opportunity. If Meech or Janik were capable of doing that then they wouldn't have signed Salei, and Mike Babcock wouldn't be talking about signing a top six forward and TWO defenseman if they don't re-sign Ericsson. Anybody who thinks Meech or Janik can take over Salei or Ericsson's spot, let alone Rafalski's role need only ask themselves why that didn't happen last year, before the Salei signing. Unless you think that either Meech or Janik vastly improved their game last year with Grand Rapids, in which case I'd have to wonder which games you were watching because I'm fairly sure Janik played only seven games with the Wings and Meech played less than that (maybe none at all, I can't exactly remember).
-
I'm fine with the roster I posted, but I would like to see an extra $3m appear somehow from the contracts of Pitkanen, Lidstrom, and Laich. In that situation, the Wings can pick up an Ehrhoff, Bieksa, or Wisniewski, or even a Greene if the $3m doesn't show up, instead of going with Meech.
I'm not sure why you're married to this Pitkanan idea. He already makes a million dollars more than Wiz, Erhoff, or Bieksa (and will cost more to sign) but with similar numbers, he shoots left and we need a right handed shot to replace Rafalski on the powerplay, and like Ericsson, he's real big but doesn't play physical or impose on anyone with his size. I'd pass.
Let's summarize...
in General
Posted · Edited by kipwinger · Report reply
Wait, it gets better. After they sign with other teams for seven million each, Selanne will leave the team he wants to retire with, and Jovanovski will take a massive pay cut to leave a team and city that he's happy with, and then the Wings will sign them both and be back in the hunt. This is only logical after all. Thank god he's the smart one here (and clearly not prone to whimsically imagining outrageous salaries and FA destinations and acquisitions without any sort of historical precedent).