krsmith17

What do you think it would realistically cost us to acquire him? Not that it would ever happen...

Big opportunity. Hopefully he can make good on it. Mrazek needs it and the organization needs it to figure out what they're going to do with him going forward.

For me, it's not about playing Mrazek because I believe he deserves it, it's because I believe it's what a team in our position should do for the team, not the goalie. If Holland wants to trade Mrazek, which I believe he does, he should be getting a few more starts to up his trade value. Maybe "a string of games" is a little too much to ask, but a few more starts is very doable. Players are showcased prior to the deadline all the time, goalies should be no different. We should be playing Mrazek, even if it's cherry picked games against weak teams to up his stats. We should also be putting players (Green, Ouellet, Nyquist, Tatar, Booth, etc) that we could potentially trade at the deadline in the best situation to up their value.

He sure did. I hope he realizes that was our first OT win, and it was because of speed and skill. Too often it feels like we're trying not to lose, or just make it to the shootout, rather than trying to win it in OT. Speed kills in 3on3.

My favorite part of that OT winner was Ken Daniels' call right after the goal was scored. "That's why you start speed in 3on3 in overtime". F***in right Ken! I hope you're paying attention Jeff...

You seen quite the game. Glad to hear another positive review on the LCA. I'll be there in a few weeks for a couple games. Can't f***ing wait!

I'd be okay with this, but I would think the more likely scenario is he plays those games in Grand Rapids, which should also be good for his development, as well as give us an idea where he's at in his development.

He's actually 5th on the team at even strength, so I guess that would make him the 5th best defenseman. He was 2nd on the team last season, so I guess he was the 2nd best defenseman last year... No I don't think that, just like I don't necessarily think he's the 5th or 6th based solely on TOI. I thought Smith was going to be a legit top 4 defenseman that could move the puck well and put up points. He's not. He's a tweener 4/5 defenseman that can move the puck well, play an aggressive style, makes too many boneheaded plays, and doesn't put up any points. You can agree or disagree with that. Quite frankly I don't care. That's my assessment of him.

If you believe this, that's fine. I don't buy it though. I don't think the team moral would go up or down, whether it was Howard, Mrazek or Coreau in net.

Still going with that ridiculous Green for a 4th scenario are you? I said I'd accept a 4th just to shut you up about it. Obviously that worked well... Green isn't going for anything less than a 2nd round pick. Why bother discuss scenarios that won't happen? Would I take a 2nd if that's all we could get? Absolutely. Do I want to not sell low or sell to the highest bidder? What kind of stupid ass question is that? I want to sell to the highest bidder, but I want to do whatever we can to up the trade value for the players we could potentiall sell. I think that would involve playing Mrazek more. You disagree. Cool. Thomas and Hasek together are the two that immediately popped into my head. There have been countless others. Hell, even our very own Jimmy Howard was an unknown until he was 25-26...

Smith was playing on the bottom pair at the time, so he was a bottom pair defenseman. Smith is playing on the 2nd pair now, so he is now a top 4 defenseman. In both instances, I meant that literally. You want my opinion? I think he's a 4/5 defenseman. Do you agree? Probably not. Do I care? Absolutely not. But it really bothers kickazz and number9 that I think Smith is a decent NHL defenseman, and not the dog s*** you make him out to be...

More stats to show that Howard is the better goalie? Thanks for that. I wasn't sure who was better. Now I am... Howard is the starter and Mrazek is the backup? Thanks for that. I wasn't aware of this. Now I am... It's seriously like you don't even read my posts. Why do you bother responding? Why do I bother responding to you? I have no idea...

Is he playing in the top 4? Yes or No? I was wrong about what I projected Smith to become, I've admitted that several times. Smith is still a borderline top 4 guy in my opinion though, and apparently there are other guys in the hockey world that believe so as well. Please, let's turn this into another Brendan Smith debate...

No, I wouldn't sell Green for a 4th and you know that. I said I'd trade him to the highest bidder, and you came up with this ridiculous scenario where the highest bidder offers a 4th-7th round pick. The lowest bid would be somewhere around a 2nd and 3rd, and the highest would be somewhere between a 1st to two 2nd's. Regardless, it's a completely different situation. We're not not playing Green, or not playing him enough, or not playing him on the power-play. He's playing more than any player on the team, so what we're going to get for him, is all we're going to get. We can't possibly put him in a situation to up his trade value. With Mrazek, I'd argue you can. Dominik Hasek and Tim Thomas are just two names that come to mind. And no, I'm not saying Mrazek is the next anything. Literally all I'm saying is that we should be trying to see what we have in him. If he continues to play like s***, oh well, we better our lottery odds. If he plays well, we either trade him for a better return, or decide to negotiate a new contract this summer. Brendan Smith IS a top 4 defenseman. He's paired with Shattenkirk on the 2nd pair in New York. He is a good puck mover, he just has a tendency to make a lot of boneheaded plays, which negatively effects his game. And by the way, I'm not saying Mrazek IS or WILL BE anything. All I'm saying is we should be playing him a little more to see what he can do. We're not going to get s*** for a goaltender that doesn't play at all. Might as well play him, to see if we can get something for him at the deadline. We have nothing to lose in playing Mrazek, and potentially something to gain. Worst case, we play him, he plays like s*** (improving our chance at Dahlin) and we let him walk in the offseason, which is exactly what will happen if he continues to sit every game...

Yeah, Vegas not taking Mrazek means very little, especially when we have no idea what sort of conversations went down behind closed doors. Mrazek being exposed and passed by Vegas just added fuel to the fire for those that were already down on him from the previous season. Sheahan went goalless through 79 games last season, but still some thought he might be taken by Vegas because he's a big bodied, shut down, bottom 6 center, that still has some offensive potential. He's the same age as Mrazek (a couple months older), goalies take longer to develop, but yet Sheahan had value, and Mrazek doesn't... Teams showcase players they want to trade all the time, but it's asinine to even think about showcasing Mrazek, because he's a "backup"... If we want to trade Ouellet, it would be wise to keep him in the lineup for an extended period here too, and maybe play him more than 4-6 minutes a night. I'm not a big fan of Ouellet, but there's no reason they can't play him 12 minutes a night and attempt to trade him for a mid round pick at the deadline.

With that logic, Howard let's in 4-6 goals a game, because he's let in 4 goals twice, 5 goals once, and 6 goals once. F*** averages, they're not reality. Max is a better indicator... I'm going to say this one more time... Mrazek has yet to be given a string of games, so we don't know what he would do if given another opportunity. I understand keeping him on a short leash at the beginning of the season, because the organization had to believe this team had some sort of shot at making the playoffs. However, playoffs should now be an afterthought, and we should be concentrating on the future. Mrazek could be a part of that future, so we should be doing what we can to figure that out. Or ya know, just say f*** it, and let him walk for nothing. That's always an option too... You're trying to come up with different conclusions? I should try it? LoL that's exactly what I did in my original post. I came up with 3 different scenarios, which you disagree with because Mrazek shouldn't be given another opportunity... You keep going on with all this s*** as if I'm bashing Howard, saying he "sucks" or "he's too" old or whatever. I'm not saying any of that. I'm a fan of Howard, and I'd be completely fine with keeping him and trading Mrazek. I just think that the best way to figure out what we're going to do, one way or the other, is to give Mrazek some starts. Extend that leash a little and let him get into a few games. You can't deny that over the past year or so, Howard has been given a MUCH longer leash than Mrazek. Whether that's the right or wrong way to handle them, is debatable, nonetheless, that's the way it's been. Howard is the starter, no one is disputing that. That doesn't mean you can't give Mrazek a few more starts. If you disagree that Mrazek should get more starts, that's fine. Say that. But don't try to paint this picture that I'm anti-Howard and all in on Mrazek. I'm not at all. I would say best case scenario, we play him, he dominates, we extend him and carries us to a Cup. A little more realistic scenario, which is also ideal, we play him, he plays well enough to up his trade value, we trade him at the deadline for a pick and / or prospect. Or, like I said, we can continue to sit him every game and let him walk for nothing in the offseason...

Looks like Bertuzzi is staying with the Wings, and deservedly so. He's been told to find a permanent residence in the metro Detroit area.

As soon as Mrazek loses, he gets benched. Howard loses, we keep riding him. Makes a ton of sense. This mentality is exactly why we don't know exactly what we have in Mrazek. He hasn't been given a string of games in forever. He loses and he gets benched. Hell, he's even won and gotten benched. I wasn't the one trying to exaggerate stats to make a goalie look better or worse, that was you. I was simply correcting you on it. And yes it is a s***ty GAA, but that shouldn't matter in the position we're currently in. That's my point. I get it, you've given up on Mrazek. Most have, but I still think if given an opportunity (likely with another team at this point) he can be a good goalie in this league. All I'm saying is, if that's even a remote possibility (which it is), we should be doing what we can to get him going, or at least figure out if we can get him going, rather than playing the better goalie in a season that doesn't matter. I think you're the one not understanding. I'm saying it's very clear who has been the better goalie, and you throw numbers at me. AGAIN, I'm not disputing who the better goalie is, I'm disputing what is better for the team, in the future. Like I said, maybe Mrazek continues to s*** the bed, and we let him walk this offseason. I'd be okay with that, but only if we give him one last long look this season. I'm "emotionally involved in my posts" because I say you don't like a player? Okay... Vegas didn't want Mrazek, not "no one" like you suggest. And really, we don't even know that for sure. There could have been a conversation between Holland and McPhee to not take Mrazek, or that McPhee really only wanted Nosek. Also, Howard was supposedly on the trade block before, and "no one" wanted him. He bounced back, so why can't Mrazek? When have they "kept playing Mrazek" this season? They haven't. They've played him sporadically, and not surprisingly, he's struggled. Anyway, I'm going to stop this here, and end by saying that I don't necessarily think Mrazek is or ever will be a better goaltender than Howard, I just think that in the situation we're currently in, I'd like to see Mrazek get a string of games to see what he can do. Obviously if he gets lit up, go back with Howard, but if he plays well, even if it's a loss, give him another game. Give him a string of 5 or so, assuming he's playing well, and go from there.

Care to explain why it "won't happen", or is that just your opinion? I never did say it "would happen", but I do believe it is one of the possible scenarios. Saying that playing Mrazek would "bring down the team morale" is saying the team WOULD feel a certain way. It's saying that the team feels more confident that they will win with Howard than they do with Mrazek. I don't believe that to be the case. It's not 4-5, and it's not 4. It's 3-4. Again, I'm not trying to debate who has been the better goaltender. Howard has, and it's not even close. But that doesn't necessarily mean that Howard should get virtually every start in an already lost season. I think Mrazek should for all the reasons I previously mentioned. You disagree, and that's fine. You have issues with people (I'm not one of them) talking down on Howard and talking up Mrazek (which is understandable). You take exception to that, and bash Mrazek any chance you get. Case in point right here. I said that selling low on Mrazek would be a mistake, and you said no one wants Mrazek and we should dump him. That would be terrible asset management. If we're trying to trade Mrazek (which I'd be okay with), we should be playing him to up his trade value. Larkin, Mantha, Athanasiou, Bertuzzi, etc. are not going to give up because Mrazek gets a few more starts. To say otherwise is ridiculous.

I don't care for Hornqvist either way, but I never really seen him as a dirty player. Is he? The bold I completely agree with though. I don't want to sign or trade for any mid-tier players. We should only be looking to sign or trade high-end players or prospects that have the potential to be high-end players. And yes, we definitely need to get younger over the next couple years.

What won't happen? So you're saying the team feels they have a chance with Howard in net, but not with Mrazek in net? I don't buy that at all. And Mrazek doesn't let in "4-5 goals a game". See GAA... I think you dislike Mrazek so much that you'd rather lose with Howard than lose with Mrazek. I'm not here to have a goalie debate, I'm just debating the best way to handle the goalie situation as it is right now. In my opinion, Mrazek should be getting more starts. Not because I think Mrazek is better, but because whether people want to admit it or not, he is still somewhat of an unknown at this point, and we should be trying to figure out exactly what Petr Mrazek is before this season ends. Unless of course, management have completely given up on him, and are fine with letting him walk for nothing in the offseason. That I disagree with, but whatever. Mrazek could prove to be a complete bust, or he could prove to be worth a higher return in a trade or worth a qualifying offer this summer.

I believe there are teams that would be interested in Mrazek, despite what happened with the expansion draft. To sell low on him (or any player for that matter) would be a mistake in my opinion. He's still relatively young and the potential is still there. I'd like to see him given a string of starts this season to see what he can do. We literally have nothing to lose in doing so, and potentially a lot to gain. The way I see it, giving him some more starts could play out any of three ways... 1. He continues to be inconsistent and is unable to return to form from a couple years ago, and we let him walk this summer. Great, we improve our lottery odds, and get rid of a bad contract. 2. He finds his game again, we re-sign him to a new deal this summer. Great, we have our goalie for the future. 3. He finds his game again, we still decide to move on and go with Howard. Great, we get a much better return for him at the deadline (or draft).

I agree that Nyquist's contract may be easier to move, but his NTC also kicked in this year, so he would have to okay any potential trade. Tatar's NTC doesn't kick in until next season, so that's just another reason I'd like to move him now. It doesn't matter because Holland isn't going to trade either. In fact, I'd be shocked if he trades anyone besides Green, and that's not even a guarantee... He may also sell low on Mrazek, which I think would be a mistake, but whatever.

As for timelines, I think Rasmussen will spend one more season in Tri-City, and hopefully crack the Wings lineup right out of camp the following season. I think Cholowski will spend one season in Grand Rapids, and hopefully make the Wings lineup at some point the following season. Bertuzzi should be up for the rest of this season, assuming he continues the same level of play. Hopefully Svechnikov has found his game after putting up 3 goals in the past 2 games, and makes the Wings out of camp next year. Hicketts should be our 6th/7th defenseman next season. Hronek and Saarijarvi are both likely a couple years away.

Yeah, his 31 points in 22 games, 1.41 Pts/G ranks 18th in the league, which is pretty good. But like I said, he was really starting to heat up. I think he had something like 10 or 11 points in his last 5 games. He was previously ranked outside of the top 50 in Pts/G, which tells you how great he was playing prior to the injury. Hopefully he has a full, speedy recover, and picks up right where he left off in a few weeks.