Some good news for Red Wings

[YoungGuns1340 1]

In four full seasons in Boston he averaged 57 points.

In three full seasons in Minny he averaged 67 points.

Sounds like a pretty significant drop to me.

20-30 goals? He only topped 20 goals in two of four seasons in Boston.

And guess who else the Wings don't have? His BFF Todd White.

Oh yeah: Rolston is a left winger, not right.

1. Rolston is a Right Winger. Occasionally he plays center

2. He had 19 goals twice - pretty much 20, the other times he had nearly 30, and over 30

3. How is averaging 57 points 4 years ago, and then moving up to 67 points for the next 3 years a significant drop? If anything, its impressive that he put up those numbers with the Wild.

4. Todd White is a 3rd line center in any league. Rolston has put up 30 goals with at least 3 different centerman over his career. Him being centered by White again would be a credit to his offense, rather than a knock against it.

Edited June 28, 2008 by YoungGuns1340

[YoungGuns1340 1]

That's absolutely laughable. I understand and respect your point that neither Hossa nor Rolston is going to sign a one-year deal at this point in their respective careers, but your value judgment is way off here -- and in this thread in general, it seems. To address the Hossa-Rolston comparison: the former could easily fetch 9 on the open market, whereas the latter will ultimately get something in the neighborhood of 4. And I'll tell you why:

Hossa - A lights-out, world-class scoring forward with a strong defensive game, of which there are barely a dozen in the NHL.

Rolston - A solid second-liner with a great defensive game.

Yes, yes, I know -- Brian Rolston can walk on water and turn water into wine. He can't, however, maintain his recent production in Motown. This is a no-brainer. Rolston's production has been what it's been not just because he's a good player, but also because he has gotten a ton of ice time, played with the likes of Gaborik, and manned the point on the PP. Those are things he wouldn't get with the Wings, for reasons others have already explained.

So, again, pass on Rolston.

Dude, what are you smoking? Do I have to spell it out for you?

1.Hossa signing at 1 year for 3M = NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN

2. Rolston signing a 1 year contract OR taking 2.5M a year = NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN

3. NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN + NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN = SAME THING.

It was really simple logic that you made into some sort of absurd argument over a point I wasnt even making. If you want to fight just for the hell of it, go on Court TV. But dont start arguments about something Im not even arguing. You may have an obsession with numbers, but I was merely throwing out the numbers as an example of the absurdity. I could have also said its no more likely that the Wings will sign Rolston for 3 years at 2.5M than they would sign Todd Bertuzzi for 6 years at 11.34M per.. Typically the point of statements containing the phrase "no more likely" is to express to 2 examples that only grow in absurdity and/or exaggeration. Hence, Hossa at 1 year for 3M.

Also, Rolston never regularly played with Gaborik.

Edited June 28, 2008 by YoungGuns1340

[YoungGuns1340 1]

Apart from the whole being a 2nd liner (on our team) looking for first line money for multiple years. That's a horrible fit. Speed is the first thing that goes with age. Woe be the team that signs Rolston for 3 years and expects the wheels to be there throughout.

Except that 4 of our 2nd unit are locked in tight. Franzen is the Homer. Hudler is the Datsyuk. Kronner is the Lidstrom. Sammy is the Raf. If all four are healthy they won't budge off the second unit. The only potential spot for Rolston is that 3rd forward spot that he'd share with Filppula and Cleary who I'm sure you've noticed Babcock loves like sons.

All the spots Rolston would want to fill are already occupied. Which is why he's a bad fit for us.

Hudler is the Datsyuk? Sammy is the Raf? Talk about stretch comparisons.

As for saying Rolston would be a good fit on the Wings, I was speaking strictly about the game he plays. If you havent caught my point in the last dozen posts, I dont want the Wings to sign Rolston as he wouldnt agree to a contract that would fit our terms. What I AM arguing is that he'd be easily on our 2nd line, and our best offensive asset on the 2nd line, unless Franzen continues his insane pace.

Also, your suggestion that Rolstons best asset is his speed is wrong. Its easily his wrister. And just to add to that, a lot of time when hes on the point, you'll see him come down close to the boards and go for the wrister. Hes a roving point man without a doubt.

Edited June 28, 2008 by YoungGuns1340

[norrisnick 1]

Hudler is the Datsyuk? Sammy is the Raf? Talk about stretch comparisons.

As for saying Rolston would be a good fit on the Wings, I was speaking strictly about the game he plays. If you havent caught my point in the last dozen posts, I dont want the Wings to sign Rolston as he wouldnt agree to a contract that would fit our terms. What I AM arguing is that he'd be easily on our 2nd line, and our best offensive asset on the 2nd line, unless Franzen continues his insane pace.

Also, your suggestion that Rolstons best asset is his speed is wrong. Its easily his wrister. And just to add to that, a lot of time when hes on the point, you'll see him come down close to the boards and go for the wrister. Hes a roving point man without a doubt.

Hudler and Sammy had their roles on the 2nd unit locked down all season long. Sammy is comletely meh and mostly infuriating on the PP, but Hudler along with Kronwall run the 2nd unit. Those two along with Franzen in the crease make the 2nd unit viable.

He's still not a good fit because he's more of the same. Like trying to add Campbell on the blueline. Pointless and just a waste of money.

Wrister? Rolston is all slapper. He lets the slapper rip on breakaways and shootouts.

[Vladiator 116]

The Wings have a budget for bringing in a first or second line player for a one year deal. Just a one year deal and I am sure that an elite player will bite on that hook to have the chance to get the Cup. Would not be surprised if Sundin, Nasland, or Bertuzzi comes into the lineup ( Not in any order, but we all know the Wings organization will try to make the most of the cap this year)

[Rivalred 630]

I would enjoy to see Sundin here to be honest over most of the players available... The Wings have something good going right now and just need to fill 2-3 gaps (1 D, 1 F, and 1 G) which can easily be done...

I am not sure if Rolston would be a good hit here or not - gut is telling me no...

[YoungGuns1340 1]

Hudler and Sammy had their roles on the 2nd unit locked down all season long. Sammy is comletely meh and mostly infuriating on the PP, but Hudler along with Kronwall run the 2nd unit. Those two along with Franzen in the crease make the 2nd unit viable.

He's still not a good fit because he's more of the same. Like trying to add Campbell on the blueline. Pointless and just a waste of money.

Wrister? Rolston is all slapper. He lets the slapper rip on breakaways and shootouts.

The slapper was what I meant. In fact, since you know that he used the slapper in shootouts, you should know that he got away with it a few times IN A ROW in the 07 season which is impressive alone considering that goaltenders knew it was coming at that point. There was the story about Lemaire having the dream that Rolston scored in a shootout with the slapper blah blah blah and it ended up happening. In fact, I think the 2nd time he scored with the slapper was against the Wings in a shootout. Have to check that one though. Also, viable is one thing, improved is another. Its silly to place Rolston in a Franzen like role and compare them. Not that you are. Just proving a point that Rolston would take over Sammys role, so in terms of PP time, it would only make sense to compare Sammy and Rolston.

As for Sammy on the point, I still dont see where youre going with that. Sammy IS meh on the point. Which is why a guy like Rolston who has seen (mostly, not always as Bouchard took his place a little bit on the point this year) a lot of point time and has proved damn good at it would take his place. Its only good coaching.

Edited June 28, 2008 by YoungGuns1340

[Dabura 12,232]

Dude, what are you smoking?

You said Rolston at one year and, what was it, 2.5 is no more reasonable than Hossa at one year and 3. I understand what you're saying -- your point is that both are impossible scenarios, so any nitpicking is moot. But honestly, to even put Rolston on that level (no more reasonable than Hossa at 3 million? Actually, it's a lot more reasonable. Not that it'll happen) is ridiculous.

Maybe it's just a matter of semantics, but either way, I think you're very much overrating Rolston's potential value to this club. Again, he wouldn't have most -- if any -- of the perks he's enjoyed elsewhere. The argument that he'd be far and away our best 2nd-line guy is based on circumstances that wouldn't be present in Motown.

Think of it this way. Some family buys this fertilizer. The fertilizer needs lots and lots and lots of rainfall if it's going to work well. But hey, no problem -- this family lives in Seattle. So, of course, it works like a charm. So then this family from Las Vegas comes along and asks where they can get some of that stuff, to which the Seattle family says, "Um...you guys live in Vegas. This stuff needs lots and lots and lots of rainfall if it's going to be really effective, or at least worth the price they charge for it."

That's kind of what's going on here.

[norrisnick 1]

The slapper was what I meant. In fact, since you know that he used the slapper in shootouts, you should know that he got away with it a few times IN A ROW in the 07 season which is impressive alone considering that goaltenders knew it was coming at that point. There was the story about Lemaire having the dream that Rolston scored in a shootout with the slapper blah blah blah and it ended up happening. In fact, I think the 2nd time he scored with the slapper was against the Wings in a shootout. Have to check that one though. Also, viable is one thing, improved is another.

As for Sammy on the point, I still dont see where youre going with that. Sammy IS meh on the point. Which is why a guy like Rolston who has seen (mostly, not always as Bouchard took his place a little bit on the point this year) a lot of point time and has proved damn good at it would take his place. Its only good coaching.

My point with Sammy is that he's a right-handed shot. Rolston isn't. Babcock wants righty/lefty on the PP point. He's so stubborn on this issue that Sammy, who sucks on the point, is still on the ******* point.

Rolston is not going to budge Nick, Raf, Nik, or Sammy from the points on the PP. That's where 39 of his goals from the last three seasons have come from. One in a string of many reasons why Rolston won't be nearly as good in Detroit as many people hope he might be. Diminished role, diminished returns.

[YoungGuns1340 1]

You said Rolston at one year and, what was it, 2.5 is no more reasonable than Hossa at one year and 3. I understand what you're saying -- your point is that both are impossible scenarios, so any nitpicking is moot. But honestly, to even put Rolston on that level (no more reasonable than Hossa at 3 million? Actually, it's a lot more reasonable. Not that it'll happen) is ridiculous.

Maybe it's just a matter of semantics, but either way, I think you're very much overrating Rolston's potential value to this club. Again, he wouldn't have most -- if any -- of the perks he's enjoyed elsewhere. The argument that he'd be far and away our best 2nd-line guy is based on circumstances that wouldn't be present in Motown.

Think of it this way. Some family buys this fertilizer. The fertilizer needs lots and lots and lots of rainfall if it's going to work well. But hey, no problem -- this family lives in Seattle. So, of course, it works like a charm. So then this family from Las Vegas comes along and asks where they can get some of that stuff, to which the Seattle family says, "Um...you guys live in Vegas. This stuff needs lots and lots and lots of rainfall if it's going to be really effective, or at least worth the price they charge for it."

That's kind of what's going on here.

Thats a terrible scenario. Rolston has played for the Wild the last three years. Thats effectively living in Las Vegas in your little scenario.

Its amusing to me that the guy played in a very defensive minded role in Boston - where he nearly put up 30 goals twice - and then played with the Wild - in a very defensive minded system - and put up 30+ goals every year - and yet with Detroit he'd fall amongst the many 40 point players we have according to you folks.

And Im not even advocating that we sign the guy.

[norrisnick 1]

Thats a terrible scenario. Rolston has played for the Wild the last three years. Thats effectively living in Las Vegas in your little scenario.

Its amusing to me that the guy played in a very defensive minded role in Boston - where he nearly put up 30 goals twice - and then played with the Wild - in a very defensive minded system - and put up 30+ goals every year - and yet with Detroit he'd fall amongst the many 40 point players we have according to you folks.

And Im not even advocating that we sign the guy.

Ray Whitney.

Big fish, small pond. Small fish, big pond.

[YoungGuns1340 1]

My point with Sammy is that he's a right-handed shot. Rolston isn't. Babcock wants righty/lefty on the PP point. He's so stubborn on this issue that Sammy, who sucks on the point, is still on the ******* point.

Rolston is not going to budge Nick, Raf, Nik, or Sammy from the points on the PP. That's where 39 of his goals from the last three seasons have come from. One in a string of many reasons why Rolston won't be nearly as good in Detroit as many people hope he might be. Diminished role, diminished returns.

Is that why he had Schneider and Lidstrom - both lefties - eating up PP time together like nobodys business for the past few years? Cause hes so stubborn about it?

Give me a break. Youre advocating that a guy who has scored 16 goals in 3 years on the PP (and likely not all of those were from the point, as Willy had that point spot for almost half that time) with Detroit is going to stick to the point over a guy that scored 39? Just cause hes a righty? Thats ridiculous. Who else do the Wings put on the point?

If a guy can average 13 goals from the point in the last three years, you put him on the point. Same reason why Babcock must have made a concession to have Schneider and Lidstrom out there together as two lefties. You play your best players in that regard. The fact that Wings have no one else of note to supply the point shot is not a testament to Babcocks obsessions, but rather our weakness in that area..

[YoungGuns1340 1]

Ray Whitney.

Big fish, small pond. Small fish, big pond.

Ray Whitney. Averaging more PP time before coming to the Wings before any other player at over 6 minutes a game. We all know Rolston averages 6 per

[norrisnick 1]

Is that why he had Schneider and Lidstrom - both lefties - eating up PP time together like nobodys business for the past few years? Cause hes so stubborn about it?

Give me a break. Youre advocating that a guy who has scored 16 goals in 3 years on the PP (and likely not all of those were from the point, as Willy had that point spot for almost half that time) with Detroit is going to stick to the point over a guy that scored 39? Just cause hes a righty? Thats ridiculous. Who else do the Wings put on the point?

If a guy can average 13 goals from the point in the last three years, you put him on the point. Same reason why Babcock must have made a concession to have Schneider and Lidstrom out there together as two lefties. You play your best players in that regard. The fact that Wings have no one else of note to supply the point shot is not a testament to Babcocks obsessions, but rather our weakness in that area..

Schneider was out there because that's the one and only thing he's good at.

If Babcock puts a forward on the point, he's going to be a righty because a lefty is not going to budge Nick, Raf, or Nik from their spots. Period.

Nick, Raf, and Nik is hardly a weakness. We'd be better off with Stuart or Meech on that 4th spot, but again, Babcock is a bit stubborn about ideas he picked up as a Cincy Duck.

[norrisnick 1]

Ray Whitney. Averaging more PP time before coming to the Wings before any other player at over 6 minutes a game. We all know Rolston averages 6 per

The actual numbers are irrelevant, but the point remains the same. Rolston was a big fish in Minnesota. That would not be the case in Detroit.

[YoungGuns1340 1]

The actual numbers are irrelevant, but the point remains the same. Rolston was a big fish in Minnesota. That would not be the case in Detroit.

The actual numbers are key. Rolstons PP ice time wouldnt be diminshed by nearly 4 minutes.

[YoungGuns1340 1]

Schneider was out there because that's the one and only thing he's good at.

If Babcock puts a forward on the point, he's going to be a righty because a lefty is not going to budge Nick, Raf, or Nik from their spots. Period.

Nick, Raf, and Nik is hardly a weakness. We'd be better off with Stuart or Meech on that 4th spot, but again, Babcock is a bit stubborn about ideas he picked up as a Cincy Duck.

Schneider put up 17 PP goals in his last 3 years with the Wings. Im using your stat here, but you said Rolston put up 39 from the point. Clearly Rolston is a damn good point man as well. Which is probably why hes always used there. Maybe not as good as Schneider, but certainly good enough to boot Sammy off the point.

And point me in the direction of where I said the Nick, Nik, and Raffi were weaknesses? I said it was a testament to our weakness that Sammy is on the point. Meaning we have 3 strong point men....and nothing else to speak of.

[norrisnick 1]

The actual numbers are key. Rolstons PP ice time wouldnt be diminshed by nearly 4 minutes.

He still wouldn't be the primary option on the 1st PP unit's point bombing away. Rolston's numbers would take a significant hit in Detroit.

[norrisnick 1]

Schneider put up 17 PP goals in his last 3 years with the Wings. Im using your stat here, but you said Rolston put up 39 from the point. Clearly Rolston is a damn good point man as well. Which is probably why hes always used there. Maybe not as good as Schneider, but certainly good enough to boot Sammy off the point.

And point me in the direction of where I said the Nick, Nik, and Raffi were weaknesses? I said it was a testament to our weakness that Sammy is on the point. Meaning we have 3 strong point men....and nothing else to speak of.

Clearly.

You would think, but we've got half a dozen better options than Sammy, and yet he's still there.

[YoungGuns1340 1]

He still wouldn't be the primary option on the 1st PP unit's point bombing away. Rolston's numbers would take a significant hit in Detroit.

Rolston had 3:47 in PP time this year. He had 31 goals. 11 were PP goals. If he were on the 2nd unit PP, his PP time would likely decrease by 25% (2:50 PP TOI. Sammy was at 2:43 this year). Thats a little less than 3 PP goals fewer. Thats 28 goals down from 31 goals. I guess 3 goals is a significant hit these days.

[norrisnick 1]

Rolston had 3:47 in PP time this year. He had 31 goals. 11 were PP goals. If he were on the 2nd unit PP, his PP time would likely decrease by 25% (2:50 PP TOI. Sammy was at 2:43 this year). Thats a little less than 3 PP goals fewer. Thats 28 goals down from 31 goals. I guess 3 goals is a significant hit these days.

You have to factor in the relative strength of the rest of the PP unit between Minny's 1st and our 2nd. Simply bombing away isn't going to cut it. The PKers won't have Gaborik and Demitra to worry about.

[betterREDthandead 58]

3. How is averaging 57 points 4 years ago, and then moving up to 67 points for the next 3 years a significant drop? If anything, its impressive that he put up those numbers with the Wild.

That whooshing sound was my point, flying over your head. Less ice time in Boston + Less power play time in Boston = Less production in Boston. The same would happen here.

As for Rolston's position:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/players/1044

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/players/prof...rId=797&out

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php3?pid=4643

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players/bio/?i...ubname=nhl-wild

[Guest Shoreline]

I wanted Rolston when he left Colorado, and again when he left Boston. He is a damn valuable all-around player. Think of him as a Draper (two-way player) who scores points, has a wicked slapshot, and a bit less of a mucker. He is useful at the point on the power play, a center on the PK, and 5 on 5, both a set up man and scorer. If he commands a reasonable salary (he's older, so logically his production won't be as high as when he left Boston), I say go for it.

Edited June 28, 2008 by Shoreline

[Leadzedder 4]

Haven't read the whole thread but wanted to throw this idea out there. We have alot of space this year, not so much the next year. If Rolston or another player for that matter was looking for 8 over 2. Why not do this? On a handshake, sign him for a 1 year deal paying him 6 mil. People complain it was abit much. Over the summer, dude says I love playing for the wings. He then proceeds to take a hometown discount at 2 mil for 1. Sure it's a circumvention of the cap but kept quiet it would all be good. I'm not even sure it would come across as obvious at Rolston's age. Even if so, look what the ducks just pulled off last off season. The team is the only one taking risk, not the player.

[up2here 41]

WE WON THE CUP@@@ LETS NOT IMPROVE OUR TEAM@@@@

that makes an amazing about of sense

I never said to not improve the team. I'm just sick of people saying we arent tough enough,we were tough enough to win the cup this and we will be tough enough next year. There a diffrence between being tough and fighting. We dont have many guys that can fight but we have plenty who are tough.