kliq

We are stacked at Wing, we needed a Center. Sure I would have taken Vilardi, but I wouldnt have chosen Tippet and I dont think many else other then you would have either.

Sorry but I call BS. Holland didnt give Tatar what he did out of "loyalty". They went to arbitration and gave him that because if he didnt Tatar was going to walk after a year. Tatar could have easily gotten paid the same from another team. Abby and Helm were UFA's, Sheary is an RFA. It is common knowledge that UFA's are paid more then RFA's with all things being equal. Plus, players that play for contenders are more likely to take a discount. Helm was paid what he was because the market dictated it, and Holland didnt want to lose him. Abby was paid what he was because Holland thought he was worth it, and again didnt want to lose him. Given Abby's production at the time, the cap is not horrible, the term is. The term was just a bad part of that contract. Blaming "loyalty" for bad contracts is just BS, as like I said earlier just look at the Nielsen contract, its just as bad if not worse then Abby's. No loyalty there, just bad cap management.

I feel this is a major misconception of moving in a different direction. You don't HAVE to get rid of every big contract in order to re-build. Look at the Leafs, they got rid of Kessel (retained 1.2mil), Pheneuf, and Clarkson plus some no name guys, kept guys like JVR, Bozak, Komarov, Lupol, Kadri etc. bottomed out got Matthews, signed a new coach and are now considered one of the best up and coming teams in the league. If we were to bottom out this year and get a franchise player like Matthews, get a new coach, trade just a couple contracts (say Nielsen/Helm), trade E and retain salary, trade Green at deadline, and put Kronwall on LTIR (if his knees call for it) and not re-sign him then in 1 to 2 years from now we look like a completely different team. Not saying this will happen, but its not like we are the Tigers stuck with massive ridiculous contracts.

Can we please stop it with the BS "loyalty" is a bad thing narrative? Loyalty is not our issue, it is a strength, players do appreciate this and do take this into consideration when deciding where to sign. Holland did not sign Abby to a 7 year deal because he is too "loyal". The only player I can think of that was signed purely due to "loyalty" is probably Cleary a few years back. Holland signed Abby because he legitimately believes he is worth that contract or because he was scared to lose him (same for Helm, Glendenning etc.). Was the Nieslen contract due to "loyalty"? Of course not, but its still just as bad if not worse then the one's above. If you want to criticize Holland for some of the contacts he has given out, "loyalty" is not the problem, if anything the problem is his inability to let vets walk and rely on the kids. For the most part, this has always been Holland's mentality, the difference now is that our vets can't carry us like they used to and the cap. If pre-cap Holland overpaid a vet, it really didn't matter as he could just sign a better player later, or make a trade and increase payroll (ie. Lang). Though I do believe that Larkin making this team 2 years ago does represent a changing of the thought process here. Hopefully it continues, because relying on vets when you are a team near the bottom just doesn't make sense, its not 2002 anymore.

no

I feel like you took my comments out of context. I'll explain myself. First off, I'm referring to their team this year, not their team last year. If I stated that Nashville has always used their cap like this, then you may have a valid point. (quite frankly I have no clue as I haven't look at anything previous to this season) Secondly, but in the same realm, I was looking at their team in a bubble with the context being where they are right now, not 5+ year from now. I never said or implied that in 5 years their cap would look great. The reason for my post, was NOT because I believe that Nashville is run perfectly and we suck, @Never_Retire_Steve said: "I really hope that management is looking what Nashville is doing and figures out how to build a solid core for many years. Amazing to me that the Predators have Johnasen, Arvidsson, Forsberg, Subban, and Ekholm for the terms they do for as cheap as they do. Amazing job by Poile IMO." My main point was to point out that this is untrue and that they DO NOT have all their players for cheap, I assumed that this poster was saying this due to their cap management, and my point was that the reason why it looked so good was because of the amount of players they have in the 600K to 1.5mil range (again right now), specifically Watson, Hartnell, Fiala, McLeod, Gaudreau, Aberg, Sissons, Salomaki, Weber, Irwin, Bitetto & Mazanek which is 12 of their roster players compared to us who have 6 roster players in that range. Now, if we are talking 5+ years from now, you're right, they likely will be a team that is looked at having bad contacts, all contracts look good when the player is outperforming their cap hit. Hindsight is of course always 20/20. Every team is always going to have an inevitable down turn, this is why I am not as hard on Holland for the state of our team as some, but most fans look only in the here and now which is why some people think Nashville is amazing, and Detroit is awful. Small picture thinking. Holland has made his share of mistakes, no denying that, but you cannot keep a team elite forever, literally not possible.

They do have great core, but where are you getting this from? Johansen just signed for 8mil x 8, Subban is signed for 9mil x 5, Forsberg 6Mil x 6, Arvidsson 4.25mil x 7, and Ekholm 3.75mil x 5. I dont think any of these are bad deals, but they are not "cheap" either". What Nashville does well, is it pays it's stars well, then pays the guys on their lower lines pretty much all at 1mil or under. That's what differs them from us, we are paying guys on our 3rd/4th lines anywhere from 600K to 4.25mil.

But he was the best of the bottom 3 d-men....that's the same thing lol.

My point is who is better now means nothing, its who would you rather have in 2 years from now. Everything we talk about on this board is either specification or analysis.

But who will be better in 2 years? That's what matters.

I feel like my predictions landed right in the middle. Though #1 was always wishful thinking. #1 was wrong, 2 was close, 3 was right on.

What are your thoughts on us not drafting Hauge and Tippet?

I think what he is getting at which I agree with, is that most owners give their GM a direction....that direction is typically (win now, tank/win later, re-tool, shed salary, stay competitive etc.). I believe that the direction given to Holland by ownership is stay competitive/re-tool, implying that if the direction was say "tank" Holland's moves would be different. I dont think CI and JD oversee every literal move KH does, and I think the Abby, Helm, Glendening contracts etc. are Holland's doing. BUT I think that given his direction (ie. stay competitive/re-tool, these are the moves he see's fit doing. If his direction was to tank/complete rebuild, I dont see any of those 3 being re-signed. I think putting all blame on Holland is wishful thinking by the fans. Fans love to create narratives that sound like "Get rid of blank, and everything will get better". Its alot harder to accept as a fan that ownership is behind something because that is harder to change.

Yes, I'm talking if we want to trade for a young elite level d-man.

This I agree with, there are always outliers and Larkin from everything I have read of him appears to be one.

I tend to agree with this, unless it littered with 1st rounders.

I tend to agree with this when it comes to the individual moves, but when it comes to the overall direction ie: "rebuild on the fly", I cant help but feel that is a directive from ownership. If Illitch wanted a tear down, there would be a tear down.

He suffered a concussion, took meds, then he had an adverse reaction to the meds that really messed him up.

Damn, pretty serious stuff http://www.tsn.ca/okposo-discloses-illness-in-letter-to-fans-1.812397 Buffalo Sabres forward Kyle Okposo wrote a thank you letter to his fans on the team's website Monday, revealing that he battled illness stemming from medication he took last season and possibly suffered a concussion. "I've worked with a lot of different people - concussion experts and people who have dealt with concussions themselves - and I feel confident in the fact that I can play hockey again," he wrote on the Sabres website. "In fact, I know I can play again. "I know I can play and not worry about hitting my head, which is a major hurdle for someone who's dealt with this. If I didn't feel 100 percent right now, that probably wouldn't be the case." Okposo was sidelined on March 28 when he complained of feeling ill before a game at Columbus. He had just returned to the lineup and played two games after missing 10 because of a rib injury. "It all started with a routine hit in practice on a normal play," he explained. "Just a hard bump. In fact, the play was so common that I sort of just brushed it off without thinking much of it. "But in the ensuing days, my mood began to change. I didn't notice, but the people around me did. By the time we were playing our game against Florida on March 27, I had been having trouble sleeping for a couple of days already. My senses for some reason were worsening with each passing day. I thought I was just overtired." Okposo said the medication he took to sleep caused a "negative reaction," as he still could not sleep and lost weight at an "alarming rate." He was sent to intensive care at Buffalo General Medical Center. "At one point, I weighed less than 200 pounds," he continued. "I haven't weighed that little since I was 17. Now, the initial thought was a possible concussion." Okposo missed the rest of the regular season with what the Sabres called an undisclosed illness, citing medical privacy laws in declining to reveal its nature and severity. New Sabres general manager Jason Botterill said last month that Okposo looked great and is on track to report for the start of training camp in September. "Winning here is something that I want badly, Okposo wrote in Monday's letter. "I said at my opening press conference that I came to the Sabres because I think we have a chance to win the Stanley Cup, and I really believe that. "I think Jason and Phil [Housley] are going to be a big part of it. I can't wait to be back with the boys next month to get this going." Okposo's recovery took another step last week as he skated in a summer game in Minnesota - his first since missing the end of the regular season. "The first game itself was not good," he wrote. "We got whacked, 10-3. But I've come a long way since March and April, so it was nice to just play hockey again. I'm healthy and feel great!" In his first season with the Sabres, the 29-year-old scored 19 goals and 45 points in 65 regular season games. He spent his first nine seasons with the New York Islanders before signing a seven-year, $42-million contract with Buffalo last July.

I'll be honest, I have a lot of 21 year olds that work for me, and I see a HUGE gap in maturity between those in their early 20's and those in their late 20's its not even close. I would even argue that those in their 20's right now, are closer in maturity level of a 16 year olds when comparing to my generation (I am 35). This is not even a dig on this generation, it's just a reality of the way culture is now a days. Of course there are many outliers, but the average 21 year old is not as mature as you may think.

I dont think the playoffs should be the bar, for Blashill it should be what does he get out of his players. If it's a repeat of last year, I think he will not be renewed. As far as Holland goes, I think that's more wishful thinking on your part as I dont see Holland going anywhere regardless of how we finish.

Can't exactly blame the guy because his own D-man essentially barreled into him with another player. I agree Jimmy has an injury history, but put yourself in Holland or Blashill's shoes.....they see Jimmy playing amazing, he gets hurt by his own teammate, Mrazek steps in and absolutely stinks up the place. You can see why they would give Jimmy the net back. Now, with that being what it is, I am hoping both play great and we re-sign the younger Mrazek and then trade Howard in the final year of his contract.

You can look at it both ways, if a goalie is an average talent, most likely once he hits 30+ teams will give up on him because they want either A) a kid with potential, or B) an elite/upper tier goaltender. There are only realistically around 60 spots in the entire NHL. The reason why elite goalies can sustain elite play, is because the main thing that slows down athletes more then anything is wear and tear/injuries. Obviously goalies get injured, but if a goalie can keep his groin/knees healthy, there is no reason to believe they can't go for a long time at a high level. Add to that the fact that you can watch the minutes a goalie plays to decrease the chance of injury, they can hold off injuries a lot longer. For a player, even if they are older and smarter, they are getting hit and knocked around every game and their chance of avoiding injury IMO are less. They need to be careful of injuries to their groins, knees, shoulders, head, legs, arms etc. Not that a goalie cant suffer a concussion, broken arm, dislocated shoulder etc. but I'm pretty sure it's a lot less likely. I could see a healthy 38 year old goaltender winning a Vezina. I could never see a 38 year old winning the Art Ross or Hart.

The Wings are not the one's that look bad from this post.

If I remember correctly, Helm received other offers (I think Buffalo & Vancouver) and this was slightly below what the other teams were offering him. Given our cap situation, I agree we shouldn't have signed him.