kliq

100% agree.....he's our best shot though.

Mantha!!!!

Why can't you just admit mrazek was awful last year? We aren't talking Howard had a GAA of 2.30 while Mrazek was 2.40......it wasn't even close. I guess that depends on what you think of Chowolski.

Well what do you expect, he ranked almost dead last in SP and GAA last year while Howard ranked right at the top with the same D. Of course it's not all his fault, but he's not helping.

Ughhhh come on guys! Nice pass by Kronwall

I think it all depends on our position in the standings. If we exceed expectations and our young kids are playing great while we are sitting in a playoff spot, then there is no way we trade him. If we are not in a playoff spot, then without question B IMO.

My point to you is not that Blashill is an awful coach, my point is that Babs did have a roster worse then this at one point and he did get more out of it. I am only saying this because you stated that Babs never had a roster like what we have now. I think Blashill has an average roster, with very good secondary scoring, but has zero elite talent in their prime. When you are a third year coach taking over for one of the best coaches in the world who also struggled with a similar roster, his results have been pretty much exactly what I expected. It's no different then a guy like Pulkkinen dominating the AHL and then being bad in the NHL. The NHL is a much more talented league and what works in the AHL doesn't necessarily work in the NHL. You can be the best coach in the AHL, and at the same time be the worst in the NHL. Blashill may one day be a very good NHL coach, but right now he is not at the level of the games best, and unfortunately he doesn't have a roster that will hide his weaknesses.

Not sure about that, look what Babs did in 2014 (I believe) when Zetterberg and Datsyuk were hurt for an extended period of time and he go Hart level production out of Nyquist to get us in the playoffs.

I dont know much about him, but does if he have 1C potential? If not, I say no as we dont need another 2nd/3rd line C.

Buyout is a different story, buyout and waivers are not the same thing. If you really want to get rid of E, my opinion is that the best method would be to trade him with an asset and/or retain some salary.

Sorry man, but two thirds of your post is wrong. 1) If we waive E, we still are on the hook for his caphit. Not "easy" like you claim. All waiving him does is free up a roster spot, which sure can be done, but would have nothing to do with cap like you are saying. 2) Booth has a 2-way contract, and is not blocking anybody. If he gets sent down, his contract has no effect on the cap. He is a guy who is paid to sit in the press box or play 4th line when we have injuries to other's. When Bertuzzi gets healthy I would imagine he takes Booth's spot on the 4th with Witkowski in the press box. Speaking of, Witkowski does count against the cap, and to be honest I really didnt love that signing. Wont argue you on this one.

They can get exposed when going up against opponents top lines/d pairings. Against lesser level talent that would not be the case (as much).

But they're not. They are top 6 forwards playing in a top 3 role.

Agreed, we aren't talking a Thornton/Cheechoo situation here.

It's so true lol. Every time I read his posts I just cringe.

That third line is totally Blashill trolling @DickieDunn

I see where you are coming from, but I think Eichel is being paid for his perceived potential because if not Buffalo just gave a kid 10mi/year for 113 Points in 142 Games with a plus/minus of -29.

If you divide their caphit by number of players then that is the answer. We are second in the league in caphit goes, so considering our roster size is the same as everyone elses, we would be second in that as well. Today's caphit is $79,417,472 and we have 25 players under contract so the answer is $3,176,698 per player. Though that number could be slightly effected by bonus's from last year and buyouts (ie. Weiss).

Ya same here. On one hand it's a good thing, on the other it makes me wonder that if not a single GM thought he was worth it for essentially free, are they seeing something in him that a lot of us posters are missing in terms of him being a bust already. Or, maybe the injury is scaring teams off.

Why Sproul got waived according to Khan: http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2017/10/red_wings_waive_ryan_sproul_ni.html DETROIT -- The Detroit Red Wings placed defenseman Ryan Sproul in waivers Monday, after he was cleared medically, following off-season ACL surgery. If Sproul clears at noon Tuesday he can be assigned to the AHL Grand Rapids Griffins. Sproul appeared in 27 games for Detroit last season (one goal, six assists, minus-7). He couldn't secure a regular spot in the lineup due to a lack of assertiveness, according to coach Jeff Blashill, and defensive issues. The team liked his size (6-4, 205), big right-handed shot and offensive potential.

No doubt that it lies somewhere in the middle. Comparables are not the be all end all, but they do mean something for RFA's. UFA's are just different because it becomes more of an "auction" where players either go to the highest bidder, the best team (ie. want to win a cup), or somewhere they have a connection (ie. hometown/team that drafted them). RFA's have to go to sign with their team since offer sheets really don't exist, so that is the situation where comparables are often brought up.

Booth doesn't really bother me at all, dont like Sproul getting waived. Maybe the kid is a bust and they figure why not just cut their losses, but I'm not sold on that and I don't think the kid got a fair shot.

To be fair, as I was the one talking about comparables, comparables are used in RFA negotiations, UFA's/expiring RFA's/elite players are a totally different story.

For the record, I dont think your overall logic is wrong, what I'm saying is that in the NHL for good or for worse, comparables are what GM's use when negotiating with RFA's. Maybe Holland has never said this before, but it is a thing and arbitration is the perfect example of this. Personally I think Holland should offer AA around 2.3 as 1.9 does seem a bit low for him.

Your argument is very logical, I can't fault your thinking, however it's just not the way GM's do business when it comes to RFA's. Comparables matter, that is how they determine what a player makes when it does go to arbitration. UFA's, different story. If the only job I could take was in Russia or a European country, then again....yes.