Richdg

About 10 pages ago I mentioned something about players getting moved for far less than was rumored, and yet we NEVER seem to be in on those deals. mentioned the Nash deal. Now today we see Kesler move for less than we could have offered (yes this one is a little diff because of the NTC) and then Neal get moved for very little. We could have done better in btoh of those trades and still have young talent left over.

The Larkin pick is a good one. By the time he makes it to the RW's he will be in the 6-2/6-3 range and 200+ pounds. he has speed grit and NEVER quits. Give him 4 years and he will be or 2C for about 12-15 years.

LW what did you expect? Holland saying that is about as constant as him not making moves......LOL

PM, my question has nothing to do with the pens and their cap issues. it has to do with how our fans would be acting if Niskanen was ours and he was leaving. Would everyone be ok with that? No. So why are many thinking picking him up would be a bad idea?

Just some random stuff. Spector had a story up that Boyle is looking for 2 years at 5.5 million per season. I wonder how RW fans would be acting if Niskanen was our UFA and Holland was letting him go and not willing to pay him 6-7 million per season? Just looking down the road a bit. 2 years from now the cap will be 80 million or so. Dekeyser will be 25, Niskanen will be 29, Smith 27, Kronwall 35, Ericsson 33, Sproul 22, Oullett 22, Marchenko 24, lashoff 25. The total cap hit for those guys is going to be about 33 million with projections for raises based on development of Dekeyser and Smith. Now that is 9 guys for 7 roster spots so we will have a surplus and be able to make moves to further improve out team elsewhere. Of course this all based on us signing Niskanen, which is a need and we do have room for.

Naw, if 2 out the 3 that we are talking about turn into players as good as Nickasen is or better, that would be a major surprise. But lets say they do. 2 years from now we are heading into datsyuks last year. is it possible we could need a new top C? How do you get guys like that? Draft/trade/sign UFA's. Having 8, 9, 10 NHL caliber Dmen is a positive thing. Not a negative.

As for those worrying about the young Dmen, don't. Yes Oullett, Sproul, and Marchenko only have 2 years that they can go down to GR without passing waivers. But what is the chance that all 3 turn out? About 0. Plus 2 years from now Kronwall will be 36. His NTC is also gone. Lashoff is our 7th as of today. That makes 2 possible spots right there. Not to mention since when is having to much talent a bad thing? maybe 1 or 2 get moved to fill another whole on the roster. There is no down side here.

I am not sure why so many are down on Niskanen. he is 27, a RHed shot, and is very good defensively. For the last 6 seasons, he has been better than Kronwall defensively in 5 on 5 play. he has been developing offensively as well. At 27 years of age a 7 year deal brings him to 34 or the same age that kronwall turns this year. Adding guy like Niskenan makes our D better for each pair. having a guy like Niskanen to pair with Dekeyser to form a top pair. Niskanen is a very solid 2/3. Many of us believe that Dekeyser is turning into a 1/2. That makes a true top pair and allows Kornwall and either Ericsson or Smith to form a solid/great 2nd pair. That would make Kronwell/Ericsson better. Thus our whole D becomes better.

So Yzerman thinks a guy is good and signs him to a market rate-maybe slightly below contract, and a bunch of internet forum GM's think he screwed up? I wonder who's side I should take on this one???????

Been wondering about what it will take to get the RW's back to the top of the mountain. So I looked back to see what the past 20 winners had in common. From 1994 through 2014 there have been 20 SC won. Looking at the draft status of the talent on each of those teams. Everyone of those teams had at least 1 guy on the team that was drafted in the top 10. About half of those top 10 picks were traded to the team that won the SC. 14 of the 20 SC winners had 4 or more guys on their roster that were top 10 picks. 1 team had 1 top 10 pick (us in 08), 5 had only 2 guys that were top 10 picks. The makeup of those top 10 picks was a bit surprising. Only 1 was a G-MAF with Pitt. Most were in fact forwards. Very few were Dmen, and most of them are in the HOF. Stevens, Murphy, Leetch, etc..... So what if anything can be learned from this? No not every top 10 pick turns out. A few were busts. Most however became stars in this league. Be it for the team that drafted them or later on. Every team had a top 10 pick on their team that they drafted but the 08 RW's. That means every team that won a SC over the last 20 seasons, has some crappy years to get a top 10 pick. That also means they had better drafting position overall. Looking back at our SC winning teams we had 5 top 10 picks in 97 and 98. We only had 2 left in 02 and only 1 in 08. Currently we have 1 top 10 pick-Weiss. 2 if/when Alfie comes back. neither will be around much longer. So what do I see from this? You win with talent. To get the top talent you have to have some guys that were drafted in the top 10. To get top 10 picks, you have to have some bad seasons, or make a trade for guys picked top 10 by other teams.

Ditto. Or big enough.

So, the need isn't there. Ok cool. Glad you agree with me that we need to miss the playoffs and draft in the top 10. That is the path we are on right now. There is not enough talent in this organization today to win a cup, and IMHO even to continue to make the playoffs. So we can do 2 things. Continue on this path a crash out, or pick up stars now. Stars cost talent to get. 2-3 mid level prospects to get one star.

Ok.... Nikitin signed a 2 year deal Callahan signed a 6 year deal for a cap hit just under 6 million per Greene resigned with LAK 4 years 10 million Gabby maybe done today...... I did see a rumor where Vanek MAY go for a shorter 3-4 year deal........

Good luck. Best move for him I think.

So once again a top flight UFA signs for less money than they were asking for publicly. So much for the weeping and nashing of teeth about how we can't afford player x, y, and z. Yes the 5th and 6th year may be an issue for TB. But if they win a SC over the next 6 years, well worth it.

I will take that bet. In 5 years after all of those top 5/10 picks have developed and matured, they will have a great team-provided they keep them all. Just like every other team that has won the SC the past 30 years. They have 5 years period of sucking, then a 5 year period were they are developing into a good team, and then a period were they dominate. happened to Pitt, Bos, Chicago, and LA as well. 14 of the last 20 SC winners disagree with you. Each of those teams including us in 97 and 98 had 4 or more top 10 picks. As I also mentioned earlier, when you pick in the top 10 in the first your whole draft is going to be better in every round.

You may be to young to remember, but in the 80's and first part of the 90's, no one was scouting eastern europe but us. Even when people knew about players, many never got drafted becasue you couldn't get them over here to play. Thus all the cloak and dagger we pulled off to get federov and klima out from behind the iron curtain. We also had pure blind luck. No one from the NHL ever had seen datsyuk play hockey. Just Andersson did. But that is getting sidetracked.

Most years there are 10 or more quality picks in the first round. But I also very clearly said that some top 10 guys are busts. The fact remains that 70% of the last 20 SC winning teams had 4 or more top 10 picks on their roster when they won the cup. That means they had top end talent. About half of those guys were drafted by the team they won with. So, 70% of the last 20 SC winners had at least 1 top 10 pick of their own. That means they had bad seasons to get that pick. But half of the top 10 guys were picked up as trades or ufa's. That tells us that no teams build 100% through the draft. Can't be done.

The don't read the posts. Pretty simple.

No what I said is you have to get top talent. Of the last 20 teams that won the SC, 70% of them had 4 or more top 10 picks on their roster when they won the cup. That is the proven path to winning. You can do that 3 ways: draft, trade, or UFA. Very few make it to ufa anymore so that leaves 2 options: draft and/or trade. Hoilland doesn't seem to have the guts or desire (whatever it is) to make trades. That leaves one option: the draft. To get top 10 picks and the premium talent you have to not make the playoffs. Or have bad seasons. We are done with a 20 year run or so. But we were really bad for a long time. It was when we started to draft well, with a purpose, and develop the young talent that we started to win. yes we have some luck along the way and did things others were not doing like scout/draft eastern euros/russians. But the team from 95 through 02 was loaded with guys that were top 10 picks for various teams. Yzerman doesn't come if we don't lose. same with lapointe and Premieau. Prems of course becomes Shanny another top 10 pick. Not to mention picks up like Murphy and Ward. Now of course there are exceptions to every rule. Our 08 team was one of them. But that is also why that teams core players have only won one cup.

LOL. Where I went to school 10x10=100.........

mar, I fully understand the rebuilding process, I just wish we would do it or go for the cup. I don't mind if we have 2-3 losing seasons, get highly rated top draft choices and then begin the next 15 year run. Its the half a$$ patch and pug approach that bothers me. We are not getting better and we are not getting the young high end talent we need to get better. When it comes to bad for long periods of time, I remember the 70's all to well. The RW's had no real plan. Very similar to what we are doing today.

We of course can't argue the future. So we don't know how Ed. will look in 5 years. The odds are more of their guys under 25 turn out than our guys under 25 do. The question for them is, do they have the patience to wait. Some of their guys may very well turn out to be stars for other teams. Now back to what I was writing about. 70% of the SC winners had 4 or more top 10 picks on their team when they won. Yes some were to young to help, some never made it, and some were older vets going for one more cup. But most of those players were in the prime of their careers between 26 and 32. half were drafted by the team they won the cup with. The most any team had was 7. Now that was just top 10 picks. Most teams had between 10-13 1st round picks on each team. But again those players were pretty close in terms of drafted by the same team they won a cup with or a different team.

If people don't like my opinions, I couldn't care less. We do all have one thing in common: We want the RW's to win SC's. That simple. The fact is our record has gotten worse every year for the past 4 seasons. The answer being provided to us is: bring everyone back and expect better results. Nothing works like that.

As long as we continue to make the PO's each year Holland isn't going to make bold moves. That is my humble opinion. Being in the top 53% is fine with him, that is becoming very clear.