kliq

That was not the intended implication. If you interpreted my OP that way either you misinterpreted what I said, or its a reflection of the way I wrote it, which is on me. Mostly likely, it's a combination of the two. The reason why I wrote what I wrote, is as of late the majority of your posts are just pointing out minor flaws in everyone's arguments. You may very well be correct a lot of the times, but when you don't post solutions or opinions, it comes across like you are taking on the role of message board "proof reader" and to be honest it can be annoying. We all do this to a degree, especially with the ridiculous level of hyperbole on this board so I guess I do get it, but this is why I wrote what I did. With that being said, you have every right to post however you want so I'll leave it at that.

No

Do want them based on soley their careers in Detroit? Or their careers in general?

NEVER once did I say or imply that JT would be a "magic cure". As a GM, you need to assess you your team and make the necessary adjustments to make your team a contender. IMO we have 3 major needs right now. The first is we need an elite Center, by getting one we have the ability of moving Z to the 2C spot where he should be one of the best in the NHL, and by doing this it should make players like Nyquist, Tatar, AA etc. into very very good wingers. As we saw last year, they all excelled playing with Z, then struggled playing with whomever was our 2C. Second is our D. Again, we have good depth, but no true #1 or #2. If we can make a trade, I think this helps a lot. I think Chowolski has potential, but that is a ways away. Lastly i our coaching. We need Blashill to improve as a coach (it is possible) OR we need to replace him. It's clear as day that Blashill is not getting the most out of our players. IF all 3 of these things can happen, I believe we go from being a fringe playoff team to a very good team. I get its easier said then done, but as a GM you have to try, and look at it piece by piece. There is no magic cure, extreme optimists like to think there is, extreme pessimists like to act as if nothing will work. The realistic approach is somewhere in between. You need to sit down, evaluate your team, and make the necessary moves in order to make this happen. Acquiring JT IMO is just 1 piece to solving this puzzle of making us contenders again.

Here is the issue with debating with you Dickie, if I make a good point of what I would like to see, your fallback will always be "Well Holland won't do it, so it's a pipe-dream". However, this is a discussion board, and I am not going to stop giving opinions or idea's. You asked a question, I answered it. If anything I say simply leads to a Holland bashing, then why even ask the question in the first place?

Well for one I would do it if nobody goes on IR to make room for AA. Secondly, I have been very vocal about making a trade for a player like a Trouba (doesn't have to be him) and having more cap space gives you the flexibility to pull off a trade like that because you are able to absorb cap if the other team is looking at dumping cap with an asset. (I realize Holland is unlikely to do this, but I am saying what I would do). Now if things work themselves out for this year, I would hold off until next year as that is when I want Holland to make a move. Thirdly, I would like to take a run a JT because I believe we have very good secondary scoring, but lack elite talent. JT is elite talent. I know your counter will be "Why would JT want to come here?" Well, if you are a GM in the NHL and you think that way, you are in the wrong business.You can't not try because you are scared of failing. Think of a 1-2-3-4 of JT-Z-Larkin-whoever......that changes things big time especially if Larkin really breaks out. Speaking of Larkin, he and Mantha's contracts are due next year. My worry is IF they truly break out, we may be in trouble cap wise if we make other moves. Draisaitl just signed for 8.5mil, not that I see either of the kids getting that, but if they put up say 60 (my personal ceiling for them for this year) they could demand anything between 4-6, add in JT likely wanting 10+, and a d-man likely costing something, I want cap space. Even if you argument is "Holland wont do any of this" none of us even have a clue if he will be here in 1 year. More the reason why I want cap space. So no opinion, I guess you can't ever be wrong that way. Much easier to just point out flaws in other's.

So are you disputing my point of dumping some contracts? Or are you just ranting against Holland?

I will say this, when I first posted, I was thinking of all the trades we did in the 90's (ie. Shanny trade, Larionov trade etc.) forgetting they weren't actually made by Holland. My bad there. As far as the bold goes, I am not saying either. What I am saying is I would like to see Holland a bit more active. With that being said, can you answer what I asked you? My question was "What would you like to see from Holland moving forward?" How do you think he should approach things in regards to bringing us back to being contenders? Its easy to point out flaws in the opinions of others, can you come up with a solution?

Bottom line is that he was willing to make moves. Now that you can't really make major moves in free agency, it would be nice to see him pull off a major trade. Are you against my point? Or are you just trying to find flaws in my argument? What would you like to see from Holland moving forward? I would like to see a trade for a top pairing D-man and a couple contracts being dumped. Sure, easier said then done. But as a GM you have to be creative and that is what I want to see from Holland. I am not a poster who bashes Holland for everything he does, I think Holland takes a lot of s*** for things that really arent his fault, but I also think that sometimes he doesn't do himself any favors. I think if he could pull off a trade for a legit top D-man, it would be huge and would change the minds of a lot of posters/fans in regards to his abilities to lead this team moving forward.

Agreed with the bold, which was essentially my point. I get that it is a lot harder to trade now then it used to be because of the cap and the mind set of teams. I also get that back then it made more sense for us to trade then it does now, but @Buppy there is no denying that Holland trades less then he used as he doesnt make ANY trades with roster players now a days. In all honesty, when is the last time a roster player has been dealt? Was it Kozlov in 2001?

I like Helm, and I've said before that his contract is not that bad in a bubble, but with Z-Larkin-Nielsen-Glendenning AND Sheahan, we have no NEED for Helm and I would be completely ok with trading him even if its for peanuts.

If I had to guess, I would say it's due to the cap and how crappy free agency is. Back in the early 2000's, if he let someone walk or traded away a player that was good, he could always fall back on free agency, or make a trade where they just absorb salary. Not that he can't do that, I think he is scared to make a move.

It sounds to me that you are saying winning = good GM, losing = bad GM. What moves in 2010, 2011, and 2012 were you upset with? The reason why I ask, is because there are plenty of things to criticize Holland over, but having your team go on a down slide after being contenders for 20 years is not one of them. EVERY team goes on a down swing, the fact it took us so long is an example of our FO doing a good job, not a bad one. IMO there are only two major mistakes that Holland makes. 1) He is way to tentative to make a trade, sometimes you have to take a risk. 2) He puts too much value on vets. I agree that vets are crucial as with no vets you become a joke like Edmonton this past decade. But Holland needs to sometimes let vets walk (ie. A Helm situation) and give a kid a shot instead. I am just using Helm as an example, I actually really like Helm, but Holland just keeps signing vets when he should be allowing kids to play. Plus, having all vets keeps you at the cap, and keeping you at the cap can restrict your ability to pull off certain trades. The second part is just untrue. A GM's job is to acquire and retain high end talent, and place them with good secondary talent. Holland did that for a very very long time. To say that the talent he acquired and retained masked him being a poor GM goes against the fundamentals of what his job is. The fact that he was able to acquire Datsyuk and Zetterberg, and then get them to stay along with Lidstrom their entire career's is part of what made him a great GM. There is no denying that Holland has dug himself into a hole, if he is still a good GM he will climb out, if he's not he won't. Simple. Unless of course the players he acquires moving forward do really well and mask his abilities again

What are you basing this on?

I m pretty sure I read that Sproul will not be ready for the start of the season.