kliq

If you were a Dallas fan, you would be calling for his head for missing the playoffs last year given the elite talent they have on top.

lol, this made me laugh: From TSN.ca Lining up figures to be one of the most sought after free agents on the market come July 1, and you can add the Tampa Bay Lightning to the mix of teams lining up trying to sign him. Joe Smith of the Tampa Bay Times reported the Lightning appear to be kicking the tires on the 28-year-old blue liner. Lightning general manager Steve Yzerman said he planned to explore free agency for potential needs, which include bolstering his blue line and adding a wing or two. And it sounds like Tampa Bay is kicking the tires on the biggest fish in the free agent market, veteran defenseman. But, as Smith reported, the Lightning could be hesitant to give up their newly-gained salary cap flexibility, which came at a cost for Tampa Bay earlier this off-season. "We've done a lot here to give ourselves a little bit of flexibility," Yzerman told Smith. "We don't want to put ourselves right back in the same position if we're not confident that it's really going to make a difference." Shattenkirk, who is ranked No. 1 on TSN Hockey’s Top UFA List, finished with 13 goals and 43 assists in 80 games split between the St. Louis Blues and Washington Capitals.

Not going to lie, if I started watching the Wings in 2010 I likely would have a very low opinion of Ken Holland. I see your perspective. I'm 35 and started watching the Wings in 1991 when I was 9. From there I pretty much watched them get better and better with high's and low's in between until about 2009 (FU Pens). The 2008 cup IMO is Holland's most impressive feat, he essentially re-built on the fly without the team really losing a step even with losing Hull, Robitaille, Shanny, Yzerman, Fedorov, Larionov and Hasek. I think this is why he refuses to truly sell now, as he has re-built on the fly before successfully in the cap era, the problem is that now he is locking up a lot of average to slightly above average players to long terms deals, back then he was locking up Datsyuk, Z, Kronwall, Franzen etc. Since 2010 its been pretty much downhill, though I am exited for the future. We just need to obtain some elite talent, hopefully a one or at least a few of Larkin, AA, Mantha, Chowolski, Hronek, Rasmussen etc. can become that. I think what makes the Rasmussen pick so hard to swallow is the fact that Vilardi was still available. Had Vilardi gone earlier, I dont think anyone other then maybe @LeftWinger has an issue. We needed a center.

If I was Holland I would be trying to unload players. Here is specifically what I would be doing: I would try to trade E for the roster spot. DO NOT buy him out, we dont need the 6 year cap hit. Trade him and retain 80% I dont care. I would ask Nielsen if he would waive his NMC if the trade was back to the NYI, then I would contact NYI and ask if there was any interest. If you get yes and yes, trade him for whatever. Contact Toronto and see if there is any interest in Glendenning, I think Babs would love him as a 4th line C. Then we can role down the middle with Z, Larkin, Helm, and Sheahan. We have no need for Nielsen or Glendening at this point. Lastly I would try to trade Tatar and picks/prospects for a top 4 D-man. If that includes AA or Svech, so be it.

I hope not. We have to be able to accept the fact that the playoffs are not goal anymore. I am ok with a couple 1 year deals, but this is the year I want the kids playing.

I truthfully don't know the answer to this question, does anyone know the shooting % of his wingers? Is he playing with studs on the Wing? Or he is playing with below average goal scorers? I've never seen him play, so I dont know.

Holland took over a team that was a Stanley Cup Champion so you literally couldn't take a team over at a higher high then that. It's really not fair to ask if the team in 1997 is better of worse then the team in 2017. Either way, IMO to answer you question is this: He took the team over at a high ('97), kept it there for a year, saw a slight regression, brought it higher with putting together one of the best teams in NHL history ('02), saw a regression, then again brought them back up to being champions in 2008, and since then yes has seen a decline. I think there is no question which list is has more on it, its "pro". Now if we are grading based on the criteria of "what have you done for me lately" then no doubt "cons" would take the cake. The question for me, is can he bring this team back. Unfortunately some fans (not saying you) have a tendency of nitpicking and tearing apart every decision he now makes because of where the team is which in all fairness is natural in the cynical nature of sports. Holland's strong suit is his ability of creating a great culture for his team, and his ability to retain players. When the team was good, he rarely lost a player that he wanted. Holland's biggest fault is his cap management, the guy just doesn't seem to get that you can't pay every player like it's 2006. Contracts today will bite you in the ass tomorrow. I don't think any one single contract was awful (at the time of signing other then the term given to Abby), but collectively he has put the team in a bad position. Is Holland good enough to succeed? Honestly, I dont know. If he learns how to manage the cap, I think yes. If he doesnt, I think no.

For the record, I am not saying Seabrook is at E's level, my comparison was the level of hate that he is getting from the fanbase due to the contract. That is what is similar between the two. Then again, E has 3 years left at 4.25mil, Seabrook has 7 years left at 6.875 which is why he gets it so hard. If Seabrook was 3 years at 4.25, I dont think Chicago fans would mind at all.

Agreed, but if Holland is the one who gets the criticism when a pick is bad, with that logic should he not get the praise when the pick is good? Not that you have said this Dickie, but this is a consistent narrative on this board.

I thought most were using it tongue in cheek because of a specific post the other day about Toews. It is a ridiculous and hypercritical term.

Same with Seabrook, both are bashed because of a long contract + regression.

If anything do this with Vilardi because other then you, nobody wanted a winger with the 9th pick. If they didnt take Rasmussen, I'm pretty sure they would have taken him.

If you go to the Blackhawks HOF boards, Seabrook has become their version of E. He just gets bashed because of his contract.

I will say, I wanted Vilardi like mostly everyone on here, but when 8 teams passed him over and then another two, I couldn't help but wonder why. I watched the kid play once in person, and he didnt impress me at all. If anything the kid on the Spits that really impressed me was Jeremy Bracco. That kid can skate! Very good point. It is funny how when Det drafts a good kid Holland gets zero credit, but when its a bad pick he gets 100% of the blame. Definite double standard.

To clarify, it ranks them losers for their first round pick, not overall draft.

Thats not the LeftWinger we all love and know....here let me pour fuel on the fire. What his LV offered to swap picks with Holland for a 5th rounder and Helm and Holland said no. Lets discuss. But he won 3 championships as a child! You can mock hardware all you want kickazz, but you are just a keyboard expert who doesn't understand intangibles!

Says a person constantly making strong opinions about about Towes like a fan boy using his keyboard lol. Oh the irony.

I am one who thinks you if you believe you found a gem in the draft (ie. Lindstrom) you don't hope he is available later, you grab him. Now with that being said, I can't say if I like or don't like a kid I first heard about 5min ago, but with over half of the elite D-men in this league being taken 2nd round or later, I hope going against the "safe pick" will be a benefit here. I am not saying this kid is a gem, what I am saying is that if the Wings feel he is, the pick is a good pick. Only time will tell. As soon as I saw Hauge was taken, my thoughts and prayer went out to you @LeftWinger

His contract is the reason why these moves need to be made, so of course it is going to be discussed. But hey, he has always been on good teams so he must be elite. Hopefully he can win one more and get to that McCarty/Holstrom/Draper level right. Because that's how you evaluate a persons talent, cups! Too bad Yzerman was never at the level of those three, if only he played 2 more years.

This may be the first time I actually 100% agree with you.

You're comparing D to a forward, apples and oranges. It's pretty well known that D drafted high flop quite often. Rasmussen was not JUST drafted because of his size, his 32 goals in 50 games had something to do with it as well.

These two posts kind of prove my point. You cannot please all the fans. One person criticizing Holland for taking the "safe pick", another person criticizing Holland for not taking the safe and obvious pick. I think when you are an elite team that has a fall, everything and anything you do is put under a microscope and scrutinized. I admit I wanted Vilardi, but I am not willing to bash the pick until I see how it plays out. Holland did an awful job drafting in the 1st a few years back (ie. Mccollum, Kindl, Sheahan), but since Mantha has done a great job (we'll have to see about Chowolski) all in all we simply have to wait until we see how this one turns out.

People were saying that he is a project, no where close to a sure thing, that there were much safer picks like Tippet or Vilardi available. This pick was nothing close to a "safe" pick. Vilardi would have been the safe pick

Isn't that the opposite of what people are saying about this pick?

Damn....I thought so. Here is a report on him, he compares himself to Sundin. http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/prospect-interest-411-michael-rasmussen/