Aethernum

I would be surprised if the veterans in that locker room allowed anything like that to fester for very long. But I do wonder whether there is some hesitancy on the part of Blashill to make decisions over the heads of the vets. You hear all the time, for example, that Datsyuk wants to play with Helm. Almost no one on these forums thinks that Helm should be on our Top 6 (I think he belongs there, but whatever...) But if I'm Blashill, even if I want Helm out of my Top 6, what am I going to do? I'm a rookie coach, and I'm going to override the explicit wish of Pavel 'effing Datsyuk? That's not really a locker room issue so much as it is a dynamic that could be hard for him as a rookie coach without credibility yet. I think as he grows into the role and becomes more comfortable - and gets farther along the learning curve - he'll be better able to deal with the mixture of youth and experience that is our roster.

Then these forums will implode, basically. You're spot on. A rookie head coach and three new faces rotating in and out of our Top 6 (AA, Mantha, Larkin). There's going to be some growing pains. If we make the playoffs this year, I think Blashill will have solidified his spot here in Detroit for many, many years. Here's my issue with those numbers: In your scenario, we're also getting rid of Nyquist, E, Howard, maybe Helm and Miller...those losses put players like DK and Pulk and Sheahan into bigger roles than they currently occupy. Suddenly, DK isn't a second or third pairing defenseman - he's our #1. Pulk isn't the odd man out getting scratched most games - in your scenario he's a third line contributor or maybe even Top 6. Which means you have to pay them accordingly. If DK stays where he is now in the lineup, then maybe $4.25M is appropriate for him. But if he's our future #1 like everyone says he is, he's getting $6M+. Similar logic applies to all the other contracts - except Mrazek, for whom I think you gave a very reasonable number - you have up there. If you're letting go three to six skaters, the rest of the guys and their agents will know that means it's pay day for them, and we're right back where I said we were in my long post - well over the cap before we even consider retained salaries or anything else.

My guess is that it's a best available player mentality. Being beholden to your team's supposed needs in the present, when you're drafting for the future, is never a good idea. Just pick whoever's at the top of your list.

For context: Boston - 69.7% Philadelphia - 75.5% Pittsburgh/NY Islanders - Above 97% So we're above a 50/50 shot, but we're still in last place. That said, we control our own destiny; the last three games of the season will decide our fate.

Uh. That was a really obvious penalty. And timing aside, I loved it. They needed to back off from Mrazek. YES! Game winner for Mantha. None of the rest of it matters - two points for Detroit!

Alright, Florida just put away Boston. Pittsburgh lost. Philly is tied after one period. This is your chance, boys! Don't let it slip away!

Kronwall was the one who made contact, but you might as well challenge. They need a timeout anyway. Edit: Except that was a really fast review. Welp.

Oof, that was rough for Mrazek. It seems like if he has a flaw in his mental game, it's the very beginning of periods. Or maybe that's a full team thing - but it feels like we give up a lot of those first minute goals. Gotta stay mentally engaged, now. Also, E gets the blame for that goal but he had two guys on him. It was someone's job to step in.

Calling it now: AA's face after that save is going to go viral. If it doesn't, it should. That was hilarious. Good to see the boys showing up tonight. AND Boston and Pittsburgh are down.

The Boston outcome is the far more significant one tonight - they're in our division, and closer to us than the Islanders. If one has to go our way, I pick that one.

Whoops - was thinking about Yandle. Point remains - Lucic is getting paid next year. As I addressed in my post, the $73M cap gets exceeded the moment you consider salary retention and buyouts. It still doesn't work.

Right. Okay, let's interrogate this. (LONG POST WARNING) So next year we'd be on the hook for the following, from your scenario: Z - $6.083M, Larkin - $0.925M, Dats - $7.5M, Mantha - $0.863M, Tatar - $2.75M, AA - $0.628M, Jurco - $0.9M, Abby - $4.25M, Glendening - $0.628M, Kronwall - $4.75M, Green - $6.0M, Smith - $2.75M, Renouf - $0.767M, Oulette - $0.715M, Kindl - $0.360M (Retained). Total: $39.869M And here's everyone we'd have to sign for your scenario, and estimates for their cap hits: Hiller - (Currently $4.5) : If he is our backup, we can be super generous and say he takes a 25% pay cut, for $3.375M. Mrazek - (Currently $0.737) : Let's be optimistic and say he gets a two-year bridge contract - a la Howard - for $3M each. DK - (Currently $2.187) : He's going to get paid top D-Man money - closer to $5M+ per year, but let's assume he gets the same contract as E or Quincey, for $4.25M a year. Yandle - (Currently $5.25) : A 29-year old D-Man? His salary isn't going down. Safe to say he gets at least his current $5.25M next year (although it's probably more). Backes - (Currently $4.5) : If he gets to free agency, there will be a bidding war. But we'll be generous and give him only a minor pay raise, for $5.5M per year. Lucic - (Currently $6.0) : One of the best players in the league, at 27? Someone will overpay, but we'll keep his hit the same for next year: $6M. Sheahan - (Currently $0.950) : Let's graciously say he gets Helm money, for $2.25M for a few years. Pulk - (Currently $0.735) : Helm money again here: $2.25M. Total: $31.875M Grand Total: $71.744M So we're already over today's salary cap. And that doesn't include any retained salary from any of the deals we would have to make (trading Howard, E, and Nyquist - even if we only retained 15% of their combined salaries that's another $2.15M), or anything else that we might be on the hook for, including the Weiss buyout (which is another $1M). Just to be clear, retaining 15% of Howard/E/Nyquist's salaries, plus the Weiss deal, already puts us over next year's increased cap. This scenario also makes a host of unreasonable assumptions about re-signing players next year: DK getting 3rd pairing money? Lucic and Yandle both not getting a pay raise? You know those are not happening. I just did it here to see if the math could ever possibly work (which it basically doesn't). Even if we allowed for those impossibilities, there are a bunch of enormously generous assumptions that could happen, but probably won't - including Mrazek signing a bridge deal, Hiller (or any backup) taking a pay cut, Sheahan and Pulk signing for peanuts. If any single one of those doesn't pan out, it blows up the plan. So yeah, the cap is going up next year. That's great. But look at all the ways this goes wrong. It just doesn't add up. I'm not saying this to go after you, personally. But it's important for us to recognize that the math doesn't add up. And I'm sick of people on these boards thinking that Holland can wave a magic wand and get anyone he wants for as much or as little as he wants to pay them. I'm sick of people saying it's just a matter of convincing the right people, or having enough guts to make certain signings. I'm sick of people saying "if only we would sign (insert three or four of the best free agents in the NHL) we'd be contenders again". Every team in the league thinks they're two or three players away - and most of them are right. That's not the issue here. The reason only a handful of teams are consistent contenders is because they're either fortunate enough to have some good young guys playing for nothing who are going to get paid eventually (Teravainen and Panarin playing for under $1 each in Chicago), or the people who they do pay big money are such giants on the ice at this point in their careers that they single-handedly change the game (Ovechkin, Perry/Getzlaf, Toews/Kane, Weber, etc.). And there are only a few of those guys in the entire league with that level of skill, and only for a very limited window. So neither of those methods of success is sustainable - and that's intentional by the NHL. Right now we're in a place where our guys who change the game are getting too old to have the same impact, and our young guys playing for peanuts (Larkin, AA, Mantha) aren't quite developed enough yet to have the same impact. We will be eventually, but these things take time and patience. So however much we want to win now, the fact is that there are no shortcuts with a salary cap; there is only the mathematical certainty that help is not on the way. Because whatever help is available on the free agency market is bought out by the most desperate team at the most exorbitant prices. And that kind of help is not a long term panacea - it's a short term fix which mortgages the team's future for a slightly better shot at winning now. Do you want that? We're all so devastated at the mere thought of missing the playoffs once - now imagine that being our reality for a decade. That is what happens to teams that resort to overpaying in free agency. Sure, we might win a Cup, maybe even two. Or we might not. I'd rather stay the course and have faith in our youngsters, that they will develop into the stars we need them to be, and choose to take care of the future. Take care of the future, and it will take care of the present. It's the gospel for salary cap teams in all sports. Believe in it. I promise your faith will be rewarded.

We all knew with a rookie head coach and an aging core - during a rebuild - that this was a possibility. Not necessarily. There's a decent chance if we make it, it's as the #3-seed in the Atlantic because Boston has fallen out. And if we make the first wild card slot we're playing Florida, who we can definitely beat.

We're at 50%, compared to 64% for Philly, 91% for Boston, and 95% for the Islanders. Of the bubble teams, we're the least likely to get in.

Ah, I see what you meant now. I suppose for me it's not so much having any ol' veterans around so much as it is having people with Datsyuk's vision to serve as an example for the kids. Nobody else on the team (or, perhaps, in the league) sees the game as well as he does. Playing next to a guy that smart, responsible, and skilled will teach the young kids a lot about the game that they can't get from playing experience alone. I certainly don't want them learning how to play the game from Ericsson. If we want AA on the ice more often than Glendening, we need to find some better penalty killers. Or be on the PK less often. I'm curious as to what Glendening's 5v5 usage is compared to the other guys. I've already said my piece about Richards on another thread. Also, just to repeat: Luke Glendening is the best face-off man on the Detroit Red Wings roster (statistically).

Every percent from the beginning of the season can be found by hovering over the data points here: http://www.sportsclubstats.com/NHL/Eastern/Atlantic/Detroit_ChanceWillMakePlayoffs.html Although no dates are attached to each data point, it shouldn't be hard to work out which day belongs to which data point, given that they do say whether/who we played.

Is my sarcasm detector broken, or...?

You should say something about Richards or Ericsson next.

You were saying? Edit - What music are they playing during this review?

Timely scoring, burying their chances, PP goals...all great signs. Now just close it out! Also worth noting - Larkin could have taken the shot the moment the puck landed on his stick. He hesitated ever so slightly to fake out #51 Campbell and open the shooting lane. That's veteran patience right there. He's one special kid.

Florida was owed one after the number of posts they've hit. Gotta get one back before the end of the period.

One mistake. That's the only reason this game is tied right now - the rest of that period belonged to Detroit. Gotta keep it up.

That seems to be the difference more often than not with this team - they generate plenty of chances, but they just don't bury them. The other teams do. Nyquist can't afford to miss the net on his breakaway and Ericsson can't make that mistake. They look great so far but they have nothing to show for it.

Leadership and grit.

Playing the young kids isn't what helps them develop. Playing them alongside established veterans who play responsible, smart, two-way hockey is what helps them develop. Putting them next to someone with the vision that Datsyuk has so they can see him in action is what makes them better. You want the burden of providing speed and energy and grit on the younger kids, to be sure, but they need people to learn from, as well. That's why you can't just play the Griffins squad at the NHL level and expect success.