eva unit zero

Hudler is just as capable of playing the role of setup man as he is of playing the shooter...so don't count on Zetterberg being stuck in a setup man role all year and not scoring goals. Expect both players to serve in both roles.

I used to drool over the idea of a Lidstrom/Fischer pairing. It always seemed like the perfect idea for so many reasons. Lidstrom was the cornerstone...Fischer was the future cornerstone. Lidstrom was subtle, and played a positional game. Fischer was quick, physical, and intimidating but still had very good puck skills. A perfect complement to Lidstrom's style IMHO. Imagine this top four: Lidstrom/Fischer Rafalski/Kronwall That's just unfair.

If Nashville loses their team, fine. But I think it's despicable for people to be ROOTING for anyone to lose their team. Especially people who then turn around and say 'It's horrible that Winnipeg and Hartford lost their teams." as those cities supported the teams less than Nashville does in terms of attendance, despite having better "hockey tradition" in the area.

If Ericsson is not several years behind Fischer, then he is good enough NOW that the Wings will MAKE space for him on this year's team by trading away some of the guys who are currently taking up the 5-8 slots. Fischer is only four years older than Ericsson; he is only one year older than Kronwall. If we want to measure their development at similar ages, Fischer was MUCH better in 2003-04 than Ericsson was last season or Kronwall in 2004-05. In fact, Ericsson is arguably the worst of the three as measured at the age of 24. This is to be expected, as he has only been a defenseman for a few seasons. I don't understand how someone can possibly argue that a player who has only played the position since the age of 18 can be developmentally ahead of someone who was a top-three defenseman on a Cup-winning team at the age of 22, and was considered a can't miss two-way defenseman prospect with a decimating physical presence and rockets for skates when he was a teenager. Fischer was an 'everything' prospect as far as his tools. He had the skating, the shot, the playmaking, the defense, the bone-crunching bodychecks, the vision...he was a can't miss, blue chip blueliner. Ericsson was converted to defense because he had a good skill set and Wings scouts felt he might be better suited to the position, and his work ethic allowed him to make massive strides in development. Ericsson will be a good player...but anyone who feels he is ahead of Jiri Fischer developmentally, either Fischer at 24 or Fischer when he left the team, you clearly didn't watch nearly enough of Fischer to see just how good of a player that kid was, and how good he was going to be. Fischer forced himself onto the roster when the Wings didn't want to put him there due to his age. He was simply too good to keep off, in an era when the Wings could much more easily stack their blueline full of stars. Ericsson hasn't been able to do the same thing, although he has come close and may do it this year, and he is much older.

Yeah, because it's not like there was a player's strike less than a year before Bettman was hired. He certainly wasn't hired into a league that already HAD a tense labor relations environment...yep, it was all Bettman.

Franzen was playing center in Sweden when he was drafted... BUT, he was converted to play that position because his Swedish team liked his size and his defensive responsibility. He is not a natural center.

"Clement, Clement, hands of cement" scored 148 goals and 356 points in 719 games for the Philadelphia Flyers, Washington Capitals, and Atlanta/Calgary Flames from 1971-72 to 1981-82. Not as solid as Osgood's career was when he first left Detroit, let alone now, but he was a good solid depth player and served as team captain in Washington for the partial season he was there. Also has two Cup rings with Philly.

Yes. He used Jason Williams over Mikael Samuelsson...and Jiri Fischer was on the team at the time. Ericsson is several years behind Fischer's development at either end of the ice.

One problem with your arguments toby.. You argue 'Well, you need to look at career stats.' but then say 'Well, those players were playing in different roles when they came to Detroit.' That's the entire point. Ray Whitney was generally viewed as a failure by Wings fans, even though he scored just as well per minute in Detroit, because he played on a lower line and received much less PP time. The entire point was that in Detroit, players play in different roles that usually result in lower overall scoring. Did you not understand that?

I like the lines Babcock is using right now; the HDH and FZH combos provides two lines with the same kind of dynamics that the DZH line had. But if we are trying to assemble different lines, the only other significant reason I can see to be using different lines, barring injury or significant slump, which would be unpredictable, would be if the DZH line were reassembled. So, with DZH intact, I would use one of the following lineups for the second and third lines. Hudler/Filppula/Hossa Cleary/Franzen/Samuelsson Primary advantage - Hudler is allowed to serve in a more offensive role with Filppula serving as the defensive safety valve on line two. Primary disadvantage - Franzen is not a natural center and so the third line sees a bit of a disadvantage on draws. Franzen/Hudler/Hossa Cleary/Filppula/Samuelsson Primary advantage - Hudler is the top playmaker that can be paired with Hossa, and Franzen is a very solid physical player and defensive safeguard that can also serve in a Holmstrom-esque capacity. Primary disadvantage - Questions about Hudler's size, as always, would be posed about having him center the second line. Cleary/Hudler/Hossa Franzen/Filppula/Samuelsson Primary advantage - Hudler is the top playmaker that can be paired with Hossa, and Cleary's speed and shot, plus defensive ability make him the perfect secondary winger on that line. FFS is an established line with scoring chemistry that would be very effective playing as a third line. Primary disadvantage - Again, Hudler's size.

As far as TV revenues go...Bettman wanted a deal from ESPN similar to the one he squeezed out of ESPN in the mid 90s that was worth $120m per season. When ESPN tried to go to a revenue-sharing format that would have resulted in NO GUARANTEED REVENUE for the NHL, Bettman went to Versus, then known as OLN, which had offered a better deal than the previous ESPN contract. Bettman's job as Commissioner is to ensure the health of all league franchises. To do that, he has to do what is best to ensure that the highest percentage of them can have fiscal stability; this means things like a salary cap and higher guaranteed shared revenues. The NFL is a stable league because the salary cap is below the TV revenue; in other words; the club's share of the TV revenue pays every cent of the player salaries. Team staff is all that tickets have to pay for. As long as the concessions break even, the team is fine. In the NHL, ticket revenues pay a huge portion of player salaries So to criticize Bettman because he did what provided the best stabilitity for the most league franchises is like saying to a burger flipper at McDonald's "you know, you effectively flipped all of those burgers with that spatula, but next time you might want to try using chopsticks. I hear they're great."

Yes, and as I stated...Balsillie never filed an actual binding agreement. He sent a non-binding letter of intent. Then he proceeded to act as if he had filed a binding agreement and the NHL's approval of his previous attempt to purchase attempt was still valid. There was unanimous approval by the BoG of his attempt to purchase the Penguins before he pulled out, did you know that? As there was no sale in place and no appearance that it was moving towards one, Leipold asked the BoG to disregard further requests from Balsillie until a binding agreement had been reached. A binding agreement never was reached, and the team was sold to different prospective owners. A common example I use is this: If you are selling a car for parts and hope to get $1000, and need to sell it by the end of the day, and at 10:00 a.m. someone says "I will give you $1,500 for that car, I just need to make a couple phone calls to be sure that a friend needs that kind of car" you listen. Well, if at 5 p.m. they say "Well, I can't get in touch with my friend." and then someone else says "Hey, I'll give you $1,000 cash for that scrap car right now." What would you do? Do you wait on the chance that maybe, just maybe, the guy with the bigger offer MIGHT decide he is going to buy it, or do you sell to the buyer who WILL buy it right now?

Now, it's not necessarily untrue that those mortgages won't make money...isn't it possible they have already lost all the value they'll lose?

The NHL bylaws state there must be a good-faith effort to keep a team in its current market before any attempt to relocate. This bylaw has been around since before Bettman worked for the NBA. It means any team, not just teams in the US that might move to a Canadian city. Also, Bettman doesn't control such things; the BoG does. The BoG will not rule on a potential move until a sale is approved. The BoG will not rule on a sale until there is a binding agreement. The pro-Balsillie crowd likes to talk about how "Bettman nixed the deal" but ultimately, what happened is that Balsillie was never willing to enter into a binding agreement with Leipold. He wanted the Bog to approve the sale and the move without a binding agreement; he wanted a yes answer that he could move the team before he paid a cent for the team. People who feel that non-traditional markets don't "deserve" hockey because they didn't have pro teams 100 years ago conveniently ignore the fact that Balsillie doesn't own the Preds because Balsillie wasn't willing to play by the established rules. If he had entered into a binding agreement, he'd likely be the owner of the Preds and be moving to Hamilton within a couple years. It's that Burger King mentality I guess. He wants it his way, right away. Damn spoiled brat.

So the thing you hate about Sammy the most is the fact that he's good enough offensively and defensively, and his coaches have enough faith in his versatility, that he plays ahead of natural defensemen with offensive talent and power play experience on the power play? How about this. Name a potential replacement for Sammy who can take on ALL of Sammy's responsibilities, or name multiple replacements, and do so without losing any performance or increasing the cap hit. I'll give you a hint; the chances of such replacement being found are slim to none. The best bet? A combination of Stuart on the PP point and Leino or Helm on the third line wing. And that is still a huge question mark. Leino and Helm have yet to prove they can consistently provide the level of offense or defense Sammy provides nightly. Stuart is at best a wash on the point, and he doesn't provide the righty-lefty that Babcock likes and Sammy brings. There are several players on the Wings who should be out before Sammy if we are kicking players off the team.

The only person? I have consistently defended Sammy's solid all-around play and strong contribution when others have recommended he be shipped out in favor of others like Darren McCarty, Matt Ellis, Ville Leino, or Darryl Bootland, or any number of others.

Scott Niedermayer and Teemu Selanne had both already decided to play for Anaheim before Burke was hired. While he didn't do anything to screw that up, it's not like he had to go out and get them. Pronger was offered to him as a sweetheart deal by his then-friend Lowe after Pronger decided he wanted out of Edmonton and asked for a trade. Beauchemin is overrated and has not proven he is better than a #4-#5 guy; the only time he has ever looked better than that is when he is on the ice with Scott Niedermayer as his partner. Marchant's continued presence on the roster and Burke's refusal to remove him has been the cause, direct or indirect, or many of the questionable moves Burke has made. Had he waived Marchant last season, he doesn't have to trade McDonald. This season, if he had waived Marchant, he doesn't have to trade O'Donnell. I wonder for what reason it is that he gives up cheaper players who mean more to the team in order to keep a fourth liner with a no-trade clause whose value to the team is minimal at best. Burke did a solid job of establishing a team style, but he gave up more value in most of the trades he made than he got back. Without Murray's impressive foundation, there is no Cup for Anaheim; irrespective of Burke's moves. Murray's prospects and veterans, and the assets he had in place that Burke traded away at discount prices to get 'his kinda guys' are what made that Cup possible. If you compare that to the way Ken Holland has built his Cup teams, how many times has Holland traded away players for less than they were worth at the time? Burke has done it several times in his short tenure in Anaheim. Often after overpaying to acquire the player to begin with. Andy McDonald/Doug Weight is a good example...he could have waived fourth-liner Todd Marchant to achieve the cap space he needed. Instead he trades his first line in-his-prime center, who has strong chemistry with his first line RW, for a past his prime playmaker who is a UFA at the end of the season and wasn't worth nearly what McDonald was in a trade. The Ducks end up losing valuable assets and becoming a worse team when they didn't need to. This while his team is struggling to find offense. Burke is an OK GM, but he's not on that top tier with guys like Holland. He makes too many stupid mistakes like trading McDonald and O'Donnell for cap space while he keeps Marchant around to fill the fourth line center spot. With a $56.7m cap, the maximum average salary for a 23-man roster is about $2.5m. We'll assume that "Average" breaks after the sixth forward, fourth defenseman, and starting goalie...so anyone beneath those points should not make $2.5m or more. Fourth liners and 7th/8th defensemen should not be making more than $1m except in rare instances where they can really justify it; such as Kris Draper where he is still a very good defensive forward and top faceoff man, and the Wings are just that good that he plays the fourth center position. Todd Marchant making more than $2.5m to play the fourth line cannot be justified. That's top-six forward money.

Sorry to kill your Helm man-love, but Hudler was the anchor. Helm was a big part, but that line doesn't work if it's a guy like Kopecky, Maltby, or Downey in that spot instead of Hudler. Replace Helm with one of those guys, and the line is still quite effective.

Lilja is the most logical to go. If he doesn't, then it has to be Lebda. If Lebda goes, then Maltby or Samuelsson has to be the departing forward. If Lilja goes, then the forward can be McCarty or anyone else. There is the chance that more than one defenseman is traded, but at least one of Lilja and Lebda will be removed.

Wonder if Balsillie is willing to play by the rules this time. You know, the 'Make a good faith attempt in the current market' bylaw? I also wonder if he was ever prosecuted for copyright infringement or illegal tampering for his marketing stunt last go-round.

I don't ever act like other people aren't allowed to have opinions. I will debate opinions, and I will aggressively defend my position, but I won't ever tell anyone they can't have their own position, nor will I ever say anything stronger than "I think you are incorrect, and here is why" followed by reasons backing up my opinion. NN typically acts in a similar fashion with regard to the opinions of others. Hardly justification for the accusations of message board fascism that harold spat out.

Haven't you kept up with the Anaheim talks on this board? Burke has no idea what to do. He just waits for me to post and figures out how to proceed from my suggestion of what moves he should make.

I've always worn a cage...which with the number of shots I block and guys I've played with who can't keep their sticks down, is a GOOD thing. I once dropped to block a shot, and it got deflected and hit me in the face; would have knocked out a few teeth had I not been wearing the cage. I actually got my only hockey related stitches while wearing it though. Wasn't even on the ice at the time. Jackass got knocked down by the bench, stood up flailing his stick, and caught me right up under the cage. A few seconds later, the guy next to me noticed that there was blood spilling out of my chin cup.

Glad to see all my posts in this thread have provoked such an angry reaction.

Schneider was the best defenseman on the team last season. Pronger looked like s*** all year, Beauchemin is hugely overrated and was exposed in his first NHL season not playing primarily with Niedermayer, and Niedermayer took a while to get back to form. While admittedly, Nieds for the full year and in shape should offset the loss of Schneider, what happens with Pronger? Does Pronger return to the Norris candidate he used to be, or is he on his way down? The answer there could go a long way towards determining the Ducks' fate. This trade, assuming Larsen and Painchaud are destined for the minors, clears up $4.5m in cap space for the Ducks. If you assume Burke wants to include all three of Ryan, Miller, and Selanne on his opening day roster, then he has 23 players on his roster (14F-7D-2G) and is $800k under the cap, and needs to drop a forward to sign Selanne. There are four choices here. May or Parros, as they are the least skilled forwards. May is the worse player, but is in the same boat as Schneider regarding cap hits; waiving him likely puts him in the minors, but it only clears $100k from the cap. Parros would clear more, but he's a better player who is 8 years younger. The third choice is to leave Ryan in the minors. The fourth choice, which I favor is, again, waiving or trading Marchant. Send that 2.5m cap hit to a team that can use him as a third-line checking center instead of paying him that kind of coin but having to play him on the fourth line because you have Sami Pahlsson. All in all, it just comes down to one thing. eva unit zero > Brian Burke