krsmith17

I agree. I want us to naturally get better over the next couple seasons, and hopefully we jump 15 spots to win the 2022 draft lottery... Again though, I'm not against adding a camp dump, but it has to be worth it in terms of future assets coming back.

Love the passive aggression... So now it's a 1st, 2nd and a goalie prospect, and you might make the deal? I agree. That certainly gets the conversation started. I still don't think I'd do it though. Give me one of Johnson or Killorn, and a 1st and 2nd or a high end prospect and I'd consider it.

I'm as excited as anyone with the additions Yzerman made this summer. But make no mistake, this is still a bottom 5 team. Do you really want to add two more players that might make us a bottom 10 team, hurt our lottery odds, and not benefit us much (if at all) in the future? So you think the difference between last year's Red Wings and Lightning is smaller than the difference between Blashill and Cooper? I know you love to hate on Blashill, but he's really not as bad as you and some others like to make him out to be. He's a good, maybe even really good coach with a historically bad roster. Literally no one is against trading for Johnson, Killorn or any other salary cap dump. What some of us are against is trading for any of these players without an adequate return.

I think it's a tad unrealistic to expect Johnson or Killorn to produce at the same clip with the worst team in the league as they did with the best team in the league. They would both likely see a significant dip in production going from the powerhouse Lightning to the bottom feeder Red Wings. I wouldn't expect anything more than 0.5 point per game players at best. With the flat cap, I don't see any top teams being able, let alone willing, to give up premium assets for middle six forwards at the trade deadline. They're also not likely to acquire these players with 2-3 years term remaining. If we were to trade for Killorn and Johnson, I think both would be Red Wings for the next 2-3 years respectively (unless one were picked up by Seattle). The Toffoli comparison kind of falls apart when you realize the contending team was acquiring, and the bottom feeder team was giving up the player. That's the opposite of this situation. If we had a Johnson and / or Killorn, and Tampa had cap space, I'm sure they'd be willing to give up similar pieces as Vancouver did. That's simply not the case though. I'd do a straight up hockey trade for Killorn as well, if we were in a position to do so (aka a contender). Making that sort of trade now would be counterproductive. Tampa need to shed salary cap space. Detroit do not need to add any more players. They do not need to add salary. If Tampa want to trade either of these players to Detroit, it should come at a premium. A late 1st round pick isn't that, for that much AAV and term. Don't do any team, let alone a divisional rival, and current Stanley Cup champion team, any favors. Yzerman has made it abundantly clear through his moves this offseason and in his press conferences, that he does not want to handcuff the team with long term contracts. He wants cap flexibility. It's a very smart way to navigate a rebuild. Adding both Johnson and Killorn would go against everything he's done and said up to this point. The only way he does it, is if it's a massive boost to the rebuild. Again, a late 1st round pick just isn't it in my opinion.

You think people are narrow minded because they shoot down a bad trade rumor? Step off your pedestal for a second. Maybe we've all thought about the trade, and the cons far outweigh the pros, which you've even admitted yourself. I get that there's not much to talk about right now, and it's fine to discuss trade rumors, but why try to justify the really bad ones? It's not going to happen. No Red Wings fan would want it to happen (including you), so just move on.

You're saying a lot actually. None of which is making a whole lot of sense... Yzerman won't make this trade. It's a bad rumor with no substance. You can try to rationalize it all you want. Taking on that much cap space for such a little return makes no sense for a team in the position the Red Wings are currently in. Yzerman would not want to make such a bad trade helping out a divisional rival. You would not make this trade. I would not make this trade. No Red Wings fan would make this trade. But Yzerman might? Johnson and Killorn are not "very good" forwards. They're average, past their prime forwards on bad contracts, that are only going to look worse over the next couple seasons. Yes, that's the question, and we've all answered it, including you. No one here is saying under no circumstance should Yzerman trade for Johnson and / or Killorn. In fact, pretty much everyone agrees that Yzerman should trade for one or both. However, most everyone agrees that a 1st round pick isn't near enough compensation. It's not even close.

So your justification for taking on two bad contracts is that some other bad contracts will be falling off next offseason? We're finally getting some cap flexibility. Don't f*** that up by taking on two more bad contracts that no team wants, for minimal compensation. The likelihood that pick (assuming it's 28-31) is a player (bottom six forward / bottom pair defenseman) is probably around 30-40%, an impact player (top six forward / top four defenseman), around 5-10%, and elite player, less than 1%... That's not worth taking on $9.5M in cap space for the next 3-4 years. Again, Tampa has zero leverage here. Don't help out a divisional rival, unless we're getting heavily compensated. A late 1st round pick doesn't come close to making it worthwhile. Exactly.

Wasn't much of a fight, just Seider manhandling an opposing player...

Yeah, pretty much. I think if Veleno completely flops, he's still a capable 3C. If everything goes right (there's no reason to think it won't), he's a high end 2C. This may be the likely outcome, but I still wouldn't rule out the possibility that in 3-5 years Veleno is regarded as one of the better second line centers in the league. But then again, unlike most, I still believe Larkin has the capability to be a top 10-15 center in the league. Larkin and Veleno are very similar style centers, but what makes me believe they will both reach / exceed their ceiling / expectations, is their work ethic and drive to be the best.

The AAV isn't that bad (still not good), but the term is pretty bad for two 30+ year old players signed for another 3+ seasons, about to hit an inevitable decline. Even without the age factor, you also have to consider their likely drop in production, going from the best team in the league to the worst team in the league... So yeah, unless there's a significant return, I have zero interest in helping Tampa get out of cap hell... Ask yourself, if Johnson were a UFA this offseason, would you be okay with signing him to a four year, $5M contract? Or Killorn for three years at $4.45M? Hell no! Fans would be pissed, and rightfully so, especially after signing two similarly productive players, for one year, $1M, and two years, $2M... Yes, a player can be buried in the minors. However, only a shade over a $1M of the contract can be buried, leaving around $3.5-4M on the books for the length of the contract. I'm not sure about cap limit in the AHL, but there is a veteran limit of, I think four players... We don't need any more average 30+ year old players on long term contracts. I stand by my 1st round pick, plus a sweetener (or similar package) for each one individually, and I wouldn't take both of them regardless.

Yeah, no way Yzerman pulls the trigger on this trade. It would cost a LOT more than a 1st round pick (likely in the 28-31 range) to take on $9.5M in salary cap space over the next 3-4 years for two average middle six forwards... I think Yzerman will be targeting one of Johnson or Killorn, but like Rusco mentioned, it would cost more than a 1st round pick to take on ONE of those players, let alone two... If BriseBois is able to get one of them to waive their NTC for Detroit, I'd want at least their 2021 1st round pick, plus a 2022 2nd round pick or prospect of similar value. Yzerman holds all the cards in this situation. BriseBois has zero leverage. He has to trade one of them to get under the cap, or risk losing Cirelli for next to nothing. Yzerman won't be doing his old buddy any favors here. I was really hoping we could somehow work out a deal involving Sergachev, but it doesn't look like that will happen now after just signing that three year contract...

Apparently we have a thread dedicated to pretty much every prospect (even Svechnikov's brother) except Svechnikov...

It totally makes sense why you've finally gotten off the comparison to Barre Boulet after I debunked your theory... But who exactly are you comparing him to now? And why does it matter that he's not the best player in his age group? If he were the best in his age group, the debate wouldn't be whether or not he's going to be a 2C, but rather, if he's going to be a 1C... "Unless he's some outlier"... Well he was granted exceptional status in junior. He dominated his final year, and advanced to pro hockey before most players his age. He's also ahead of most players in his draft class (outside of the top 10). "Doesn't score enough"... 42 goals, 104 points in 59 games in the Q in his draft plus one season. Top 3 in just about every offensive category, despite being a year or two younger than most players in that range (aside from Lafreniere). Most of those scouting reports were written before the draft. Since then, a lot of the pundits have come around on Veleno's offensive ability. Anyone that is paying attention to Veleno the past few seasons can see the tools are there. There is no "lack of offensive ability"...

You never said the words, but it was quite clear when you advocated trading him and switching him to wing. Also, Jordan Staal being his best case scenario is a f***ing joke. Veleno has all the tools and potential to develop into a Phillip Danault, 50ish point, all situations, two-way 2C. Of course you weren't trying to "gotcha" with Jurco. How could you when you once said that Athanasiou would be better than Larkin... I'm not saying that Veleno will be better than Barre Boulet because he will be in the NHL sooner. I'm saying that Veleno will likely be better than Barre Boulet because (you're really going to make me say it again) he's been better at a younger age at each point in their development thus far. Why would you assume that will all of a sudden change? Of course all players will improve, including Barre Boulet. The difference is, Veleno has more room to grow, being three years younger. If Veleno has a Mantha, or a Zadina, or a Raymond, or another elite winger on his line in a few years, he could definitely be more than capable of "holding down the 2C spot". He has all the tools to thrive in that sort of role.

You're confusing this entire argument (surprise, surprise)... My point was never that Barre Boulet isn't a top prospect. My point is that Veleno is a top prospect. You're a complete dumbass for thinking otherwise, and for giving up on him at the age of 20. Luckily for us, Yzerman isn't a complete dumbass and he isn't going to trade our top center prospect, and he certainly isn't going to try to convert our top center prospect to wing... LOL I can always tell when I have you or the other jackass backed into a corner, when you start bringing up Jurco or Smith... "Durr, I have nothing else to say, but remember that time you thought Jurco was going to be good?"... One last time, Veleno has been better at a younger age than Barre Boulet at every level. You can assume Veleno is what he is at 20 years old. I'm going to assume he still has a lot of development to go, and improvements to make.

Nope. This is false. Barre Boulet was draft eligible in 2015. He scored 51 points in 68 games in what would have been his draft year. Which is probably why he went undrafted, that year, and the next year, and the next year... Barre Boulet scored 89 points in 65 games in what would have been his draft plus one season. Veleno scored 104 points in 59 games in his draft plus one season. At the same age, Veleno has been a much better offensive producer than Barre Boulet at every level. You can't really compare them based on Veleno's first season in the AHL, when Barre Boulet spent that entire season in juniors... B...b...but Barre Boulet was a stud as a 22 year old in the AHL. Veleno won't play a single game in the AHL as a 22 year old. He will already be graduated to the NHL.

Barre Boulet is 3 years older than Veleno, and that much further along in his development. That doesn't mean he was a better player at the same age (he wasn't), or that he will be a better player in the future (doubtful he will). I don't think you realize that Veleno is still just 20 years old. At the same age, Barre Boulet was still playing junior hockey... You don't think Veleno would have dominated if he had not turned pro last season, and instead gone back for his final season of junior eligibility? He would have led the league in every offensive statistical category. Hell, he was damn near close the season prior, despite being younger and / or playing less games than the players ahead of him. Veleno won't lead the AHL in scoring as a 22 year old, because he will have already graduated to the NHL at that point. Veleno gets promoted to top line wing in one of the best hockey leagues in the world, as a 20 year old, and you surmise that to him not being able to stick at center... and suggest that he should be converted to the wing permanently... LOL what kind of brain dead logic is that?

Almost as retarded as writing off a 20 year old prospect, that has played up his age level, and still played well his entire career thus far. Almost as retarded as acknowledging that our biggest weakness is center, our biggest strength is wing, and then suggesting that we should convert one of our only legitimate center prospects to wing... Almost that retarded...

Or maybe you should consider revisiting it now, since like I said, Veleno has been more productive at every level at the same age or younger than Barre Boulet. Veleno is twice the calibre prospect now than Barre Boulet was at the same age, and there's no reason to believe that JV can't have a similar upward trajectory over the next couple seasons. I'd be all for targeting ABB in a cap dump trade, but he wouldn't be the main piece I'd be looking at. Not many undersized centers go undrafted and become stud NHLers...

Yeah, Veleno was promoted to the top line wing. That's not necessarily a bad thing. Ideally he gets back to playing center again soon, but he's getting big minutes in all situations, so I'm okay with it. It's great for his development, regardless whether or not he's out there taking faceoffs. Moving Veleno to wing permanently is not going to happen. He's a center, and he'll develop into a very good one. He's not a winger despite playing a few games at the position in the SHL. Here we go again with the iNaBiLiTy tO mAkE sKiLlEd oFfEnSiVe pLaYs... Try watching the games rather than just glancing at box scores. Veleno does not in any way lack skill. He's also not getting traded, because Yzerman isn't a complete moron. Veleno is our top center prospect. A team that is severely lacking center depth is not trading that. LOL Alex Barre Boulet could be a quality NHL 2C but Joe Veleno can't? "Really good offensive center prospect", but Veleno is not? despite JV outproducing ABB at the same age or younger at every level? They really do let any idiot with a keyboard comment here don't they?...

Tampa desperately need to shed cap space, but if they decide to trade Stamkos, he wouldn't strictly be a cap dump. They're not giving up assets to get rid of him. They would still get a pretty big return for him. Despite his injury history and age, he's still an elite, over a point per game player. He would instantly become our best player. You're not getting Stamkos (plus another asset) for a 3rd round pick or lower... Not even close. Remove the "other asset", bump the pick up to a 2nd, and include a top prospect, and it might be enough to get the conversation started... I like Stamkos a lot, but we're not in a position to be giving up premium assets for a 30+ player, regardless how much he would improve the team in the short term. Yes, these are the players (along with Gourde) that BriseBois will likely be looking to trade as camp dumps. The return would have to be pretty significant for me to want to take on 3-5 years at $4.5-5M of any of those middle six, past their prime forwards... I'd want at least a 1st round pick, plus for each of them.

You've already proven with your previous posts that you've been basing your opinion purely on stats, and not from watching the games. Now saying that he has "limited puck skills", makes me question whether or not you've ever watched Veleno play... Veleno's skill with the puck on his stick is one of his strengths, not at all a weakness. If you're going to point to a weakness, it would probably be his positioning in the defensive zone. Something that can be fixed. So you do think that all players develop at the same rate? Got it. Veleno's point totals have been a little disappointing. No disagreement there. However, he's still been playing well from what I've seen. Berggren has been unreal, and is massively surpassing everyone's expectations. That doesn't necessarily mean it will translate to the NHL though... I didn't bring Mantha up as a direct player comparison. I brought him up because so many people (including you) gave up on him before he ever had a chance to prove himself. The same thing you're now doing with Veleno. Mantha is a borderline elite, top line NHL winger (when healthy). I don't think Veleno will ever have that sort of impact at the NHL level. They're completely different players. The player I've compared Veleno to in the past, and I think it's a very good one, is Phillip Danault. They're exactly the same size, left-handed centers, from the same province, drafted in the same range, and play a very similar style of game. Both are very strong two-way centers, that can play in all situations. Their biggest strengths are skating, play-making ability, hockey IQ and work ethic. The biggest difference between the two is that Veleno has been much better at every single level up until this point in Veleno's young career. Veleno was much better in the QMAAA, QMJHL, AHL, and World tournaments. All of which he played at a younger age than Danault. Danault was always an average point producer, better known for his two-way game. Sound familiar? Now he's one of the better 2nd line centers in the NHL. But yet, according to you, that sort of ceiling just isn't in the cards for Veleno... We definitely don't agree. Surprise, surprise. But if you want to write Veleno off as a 3rd line center this early in his development, go right ahead. I'm going to assume he still has plenty of room to grow, and hope he hits his ultimate ceiling, which is an elite two-way 2C.

What is your point? None of this proves anything, except that Berggren has been more productive in the SHL. Do you think that means that Berggren will be a better NHLer? Do you think it means that Veleno tops out as a 3rd line center in the NHL? It doesn't... More developed? What does this even mean? Every single player develops at different rates, regardless of number of games played or number of injuries. The same people that doubted Mantha are now doing the same with Veleno. Veleno will be fine, and he will be a big part of this team going forward.

I'm not knocking anyone that doesn't watch games. I've only watched 5 of Veleno's 11 games, and even 2 or 3 of those was a lot of flicking back and forth between games. I'm knocking people that claim to watch that clearly haven't. Or maybe they have watched 6 of Veleno's 11 games, and it just so happens that he was s*** in those 6, and really good in the 5 that I watched... Veleno definitely has a high compete level. I still think Veleno will be 50-60 point 2nd line center through his prime years, which I agree would be great.

Imagine thinking all players develop at the same rate... Berggren is playing in his 4th SHL season, on a very good Skelleftea team. Veleno is playing his first season in a foreign country, on the league worst Malmo team. Yes, Berggren is torching the league, but Veleno hasn't been bad by any stretch. He still ranks top 10 in points per game for all U20 players (Berggren is #1, Raymond and Seider are also top 10). I have a feeling there's a lack of watching the games and more scoreboard watching, and assuming because the points haven't been there as much as a few other guys, that "so many plays just die on his stick", which couldn't be further from reality.