kliq

Wow....that's harsh, but I can't say I feel bad for him. Even in a sport like hockey, you cant just attack people. This is exactly the kind of crap we need out of the game.

Do you mean 3 points? Even 2 goals per game over a 25 game period is 50 goals which he has never came close to hitting in a 25 game period.

Considering he was given a personal tryout (PTO) I dont think he had any trade value. If a team isnt willing to give him an actual contract I cant see them giving up assets from him. I don't know too much about McCollum, but based on where he was drafted he is either a bust, or he wasn't developed properly. For the record, I'm not against trading prospects. In retrospect I wish we traded him. What I dont want it to trade prospects with high upside for middle of the road players or impending UFA's.

Every star player in the NHL today was a prospect at one time. If you trade every prospect you have you will end up with an old team with nothing in the minors and and no top top end talent. Teams aren't lining up to trade elite players for prospects unless they are close to being UFA's or unless the prospects are sure things. Also I'd love to see your magic statistics that show how you win 80-90% of the time. You make it sound like you never see players get traded to a new team and flop. With that being said, I am not saying I am against trading prospects, but I would only trade an AA or Mantha if the return was worth it. For example, a player like Trouba sounds like he's worth it. A player like Shattenkirk IMO is not worth it (due to being a UFA and the end of the season).

Agreed....I dont think many people would be complaining if we traded AA or Mantha for someone like PK Subban. Using Miggy is an awful example as he was an elite MVP caliber talent.

If Holland refused to trade Mantha or AA under any circumstances, that would be poor managing. You have to always look at how to make your team better. With that being said, I dont want to trade them for a d-man who is at the same level of a Quincey, Smith etc. I would want to trade one of them for a guy who can be a impact player and a top pairing guy for years to come.

So if a guy like Rafi Torres did that to Dylan Larkin and knocked him out indefinitely with a concussion, you wouldn't care and would be against a suspension?

Completely redundant due to the context of the argument. The debate is whether or not Larkin made the team on the opening day roster due to injuries or due to impressing in training camp. Franzen likely not lasting the entire season had zero to do with this.

Well said. I am not going to sit here and say that every move Holland makes is perfect as its not. But with that being said, I believe because of Chicago and Pittsburgh, some fans think that the only way to build a winner is to completely clear house. But what people forget, is that for every Chicago or Pittsburgh out there, there is is an Atlanta/Winnipeg, Arizona, Calgary, Columbus etc. to match.

100% agree. Not to mention, if Holland can with another Stanley Cup with this crop of kids coming up, in 20 years from now people will look at Holland as legendary GM. That would be 3 generations of cup winning teams, however many years the streak ends up being, AND over a roughly 30 year period, their "low point" would be a few first round exits.

Logically speaking, why would they "stop caring" once they get in the playoffs? Do you really believe that after battling for 82 games, the players/coaches/management etc. say "meh, lets just get these games over with". The streak does matter as a whole regardless of whether certain fans like it or not. It matters in terms of revenue, in matters in terms of history, and some fans legit care about it and take pride in it. Do Holland and co. sometimes make decisions that probably dont help long term due to the streak.....ya probably. But the streak is not the reason why we are not contenders. We are not contenders because of the cyclical nature of hockey. No team came be a contender for 20 plus seasons in a row.

Agreed. His wrist show was one of the best I have ever seen. The guy deserves every bit of praise he gets.

Ya he played 40 games in 2010.

There you go. Even more the reason to ignore that list.

Kind of, but not necessarily. I remember back in 2002 when I was playing fantasy hockey, Red Wings were never really that valuable fantasy wise due to how balanced they were. For fantasy purposes, teams that are top heavy are always the best bets. Though I see what you are saying, it does suck having nobody in the top 200 if that is in fact true (I didn't read the entire list).

When over half the people on this board wanted us to trade Larkin for Myers a year and a half ago, he is the one who was telling everyone that Larkin was the real deal. I am guessing that you are making this statement based on Jurco, who was mismanaged as he was rushed to the roster.

For fantasy purposes.

Totally cool if you disagree, but if you think he is wrong can you elaborate on what your counter point is?

Sorry but I call BS. Knowing what we know now, mocking him by saying "If it wasn't for a head ache, he'd a been the next Shanahan!" is simply ignorant.

Seriously? That's just ignorant.

When its wildly reported by credible sources, it's a bit more then basic speculation. We are not talking a few posters saying this as a theory. I don't think anyone was super happy with the contract, so I'm not sure who you are trying to prove your point to. Pretty much everyone thought it was an over-payment. I don't think Holland doesn't care, I believe Hollands perception of what Helm is worth simply differs from the fans. I agree with Kickazz though....the money isnt as much an issue, its more so the term I worry about. If Helm signed for 2 years at the same caphit, I dont think anyone would even care.

I cant believe I am saying this to you lol! But, why not move Helm down to the 4th line, take out Miller or Ott, and then bring in Mantha?

If this is in response to me, read my post carefully. I never implied it was a "smart deal", I simply said it was market value. Again, market value and a good contract are NOT the same things.

Normally you're right, and it would not be derailing. But when the topic has been talked about to death in many threads and keeps being brought up without any new info or points being added, that's when it becomes "derailing" Nobody wants to read in every single thread "Helm sucks" "Helm does not suck" etc. etc. etc. I have to say though, while I agree Helm was overpaid given our teams roster/payroll, saying Holland should have paid market value is just wrong as he was paid exactly that. Many reports out there state Helm could have been paid more from other teams. Remember, market value is simply that market value. Market value doesn't mean good contract.

I thought we were done derailing every thread into this? Can we please just move on from Helm's contract? Despite being paid market value, nobody is disputing that Helm is a bit overpaid. I know you get annoyed when the "pro Helm" crowd speak up, but what do you expect when you says things like "even if he got drew miller money, he'd still be overpaid". There is no way that you don't realize that a comment like this is going to re-start the already exhausted debate. Please just move on. This is turning into "You/Franzen", "Bill/Miller", "Dickie/Abby 7 years" territory.