• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Andy Pred 48

Next Seasons Needs/Team Future

Rate this topic

2,595 posts in this topic

Or he can be a complete disaster and people can come here and ***** at holland for making such a stupid move

You keep saying this, what reason do you have to think he'd be a disaster? The kid is already better than all but (maybe) two of our defensemen. It's not like he's an unknown quantity. He's a young d-man just entering his prime, who has played his way onto the top pairing of a good defense, on a very good team. He plays on the PK, PP, and has put up points on two different teams.

You know how many defensemen we have who have put up 48 pts. a season (Niskanen's numbers this year)? One...Kronwall (career high 51 pts). You know how many defensemen we have who have put up 35 pts. in a season (Niskanen's second best year)? Two...Kronwall and Quincey. You know how many defensemen we have who have scored more than Niskanen did his rookie year? Two...Kronwall and Quincey.

Even if he never improved from his rookie year (which he obviously has) he's still better than every other puck mover on our team not named Kronwall.

marcaractac likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You keep saying this, what reason do you have to think he'd be a disaster? The kid is already better than all but (maybe) two of our defensemen. It's not like he's an unknown quantity. He's a young d-man just entering his prime, who has played his way onto the top pairing of a good defense, on a very good team. He plays on the PK, PP, and has put up points on two different teams.

You know how many defensemen we have who have put up 48 pts. a season (Niskanen's numbers this year)? One...Kronwall (career high 51 pts). You know how many defensemen we have who have put up 35 pts. in a season (Niskanen's second best year)? Two...Kronwall and Quincey. You know how many defensemen we have who have scored more than Niskanen did his rookie year? Two...Kronwall and Quincey.

Even if he never improved from his rookie year (which he obviously has) he's still better than every other puck mover on our team not named Kronwall.

Agreed. He has shown zero signs of being a one hit wonder. All the evidence point out to him just continuing to get better. He is exactly what fits this teams needs.

We're not gonna get a Shea Weber. For the Wings to win, they need to have 6 dmen who can all play responsible hockey and move the puck. Not every team is gonna have an all around dominant dman who can play 30 minutes a night. There are simply not enough of them in the league. Teams that do have to depend on that are also probably not deep enough to go the distance. *cough*wild*cough*

Kronwall, Niskanen, Ericsson and Dekeyser makes a sexy top 4. Smith and Ouellet/Marchenko can make for a very solid 3rd pairing. That gives us 5 dmen who can log a lot of minutes if need be, and space for 2 kids to get their experience at this level. If they outplay any of the said 5, even better for us.

Edited by marcaractac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm being kind of a wet, contrarian blanket. I can't say we need a solid top-four defenseman and then shoot down a seemingly perfect match who'd only cost money. And it's not like epic overpayment isn't the norm these days. I'd just feel better if he were a surer thing. Like, Yandle is a similar player who's rumored to be maybe kinda sorta available for a top-six forward and a prospect, and while Niskanen is right-handed and would only cost money, I'd probably rather trade a key piece or two or three for Yandle's services based on Yandle's body of work. Any acquisition is a risk, a gamble, but we could be 90% sure Yandle would be a beast for us. Niskanen? Less certain.

Edited by Dabura

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm being kind of a wet, contrarion blanket. I can't say we need a solid top-four defenseman and then shoot down a seemingly perfect fit who'd only cost money. And it's not like epic overpayment isn't the norm these days. I'd just feel better if he were a surer thing. Like, Yandle is a similar player who's rumored to be maybe kinda sorta available for a top-six forward and a prospect, and while Niskanen is right-handed and would only cost money, I'd probably rather trade a key piece or two or three for Yandle's services based on Yandle's body of work. Any acquisition is a risk, a gamble, but we could be 90% sure Yandle would be a beast for us. Niskanen? Less certain.

Or you could sign Niskanen, take the risk, and use those assets on a forward with size, speed, skill, and grit who has already identified your team as being one he'd wave his NTC to come to. Just sayin'.

marcaractac likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm being kind of a wet, contrarion blanket. I can't say we need a solid top-four defenseman and then shoot down a seemingly perfect fit who'd only cost money. And it's not like epic overpayment isn't the norm these days. I'd just feel better if he were a surer thing. Like, Yandle is a similar player who's rumored to be maybe kinda sorta available for a top-six forward and a prospect, and while Niskanen is right-handed and would only cost money, I'd probably rather trade a key piece or two or three for Yandle's services based on Yandle's body of work. Any acquisition is a risk, a gamble, but we could be 90% sure Yandle would be a beast for us. Niskanen? Less certain.

I do understand the concern. I agree no signing is a sure thing. But it is less of a risk when no assets are given up. Even if he didn't pan out, there are always teams like Florida who can't lure a UFA to save their lives who would likely take a gamble on a contract dump. It's not like they ever have to worry about cap space lol.

But based on Niskanen's body of work, the risk is very small. The reward is also potentially great. If he were to turn out to be a great Red Wing, that also allows Holland a little freedom in using a defensive prospect in part of a trade to fix future holes in the lineup.

Or you could sign Niskanen, take the risk, and use those assets on a forward with size, speed, skill, and grit who has already identified your team as being one he'd wave his NTC to come to. Just sayin'.

Just don't give up Smith is all :lol:

kipwinger likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do understand the concern. I agree no signing is a sure thing. But it is less of a risk when no assets are given up. Even if he didn't pan out, there are always teams like Florida who can't lure a UFA to save their lives who would likely take a gamble on a contract dump. It's not like they ever have to worry about cap space lol.

But based on Niskanen's body of work, the risk is very small. The reward is also potentially great. If he were to turn out to be a great Red Wing, that also allows Holland a little freedom in using a defensive prospect in part of a trade to fix future holes in the lineup.

Just don't give up Smith is all :lol:

Hey I'm not saying throw the kid away for nothing, despite my constant irritation with him I've said over and over that he will get better. With that said, I think we could handle losing him (provided we signed Niskanen), and it would definitely take the sting out of it if we were getting Kesler in return.

But...if you can get Kesler without giving him up, why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I'm not saying throw the kid away for nothing, despite my constant irritation with him I've said over and over that he will get better. With that said, I think we could handle losing him (provided we signed Niskanen), and it would definitely take the sting out of it if we were getting Kesler in return.

But...if you can get Kesler without giving him up, why not?

True. Thing is, if we were to get Niskanen and traded Smith, we'd still have to do something about the 3rd pairing to avoid having to put all of the faith in rookies. Either that or be stuck with Kindl and Lashoff again *puke*

I just think having Smith on the 3rd pairing with another dman who can play good minute with him gives us 3 defensive pairings that can get s*** done and log a lot of minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, we're dangerously close to being a salary floor team ourselves.

Eh, yes and no. We are, but it's mostly deadweight coming off the books. It's not like money is super-tight and we'd struggle mightily to find a good free agent who's willing to sign with us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, yes and no. We are, but it's mostly deadweight coming off the books. It's not like money is super-tight and we'd struggle mightily to find a good free agent who's willing to sign with us.

Let's not forget holland is our GM. So we will sign a couple guys aged 38+ To a couple year deals and NTC. Edited by DeGraa55

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not forget holland is our GM. So we will sign a couple guys aged 38+ To a couple year deals and NTC.

I get that you're trying to be funny, but these "kicking the tires" and "signing old guys" jokes have gotten old a year ago. He has already said it is now time to see what they got in the system. If players are added, it won't be washed up has beens that eat up the cap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get that you're trying to be funny, but these "kicking the tires" and "signing old guys" jokes have gotten old a year ago. He has already said it is now time to see what they got in the system. If players are added, it won't be washed up has beens that eat up the cap.

You can say they've gotten old a year ago but the FACT IS it's still who he is. Just last year who did he sign/resign? Alfie and cleary.

So who knows MAYBE it changes this year? But when he has a track record of doing something I'd like to see it to believe it. It needs to change if we're going to be successful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can say they've gotten old a year ago but the FACT IS it's still who he is. Just last year who did he sign/resign? Alfie and cleary.

So who knows MAYBE it changes this year? But when he has a track record of doing something I'd like to see it to believe it. It needs to change if we're going to be successful.

1. Alfie was a great pickup. If he plays another year here, it will make this team better.

2. The coach and team leadership all wanted Cleary back. Can't solely put that on Holland. He came of being a huge factor in the playoffs the year before. It didn't work out. These things happen. It did not hinder the team in any way in the end. People need to get over this.

krsmith17 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Alfie was a great pickup. If he plays another year here, it will make this team better.

2. The coach and team leadership all wanted Cleary back. Can't solely put that on Holland. He came of being a huge factor in the playoffs the year before. It didn't work out. These things happen. It did not hinder the team in any way in the end. People need to get over this.

Nothing against Alfie but when some young guys needed to be in team he shouldn't of been signed. Remember the reason why we made the playoffs? The old and useless were hurt and not playing going the young guys a shot. Several of which should've been up since day one.

Also since you're defending holland. Why did he sign Sammy and colo to two years? Why sign tootoo for three just to waste a buyout in him in his third year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing against Alfie but when some young guys needed to be in team he shouldn't of been signed. Remember the reason why we made the playoffs? The old and useless were hurt and not playing going the young guys a shot. Several of which should've been up since day one.

Also since you're defending holland. Why did he sign Sammy and colo to two years? Why sign tootoo for three just to waste a buyout in him in his third year?

Yeah, cause Alfie had nothing to do with helping the team through rough patches what so ever. Seriously. It was a compressed schedule due to the olympics, in a tournament where his team made the gold medal game and he was played for insane minutes by his coach. Even Kronwall took a couple weeks to get back into a grove from the same thing. If Alifie wants to play again, you're damn right he is gonna be with the team come fall. And rightfully so.

Also, since you're bashing Holland. Why does he not get any credit for drafting the kids, who you give sole credit to for the team making the playoffs? I'm not defending signing Sammy. It was a bad contract. People make mistakes. But at least I can be objective and point out the good and the bad rather than go in with all the blind hate like you are. You hate Holland, We get it. Do you really have to bring it up in every single thread? Why not make a Hate Holland thread so you and other like minded Holland haters could just go bash him and call for his head there? Would make the rest of the threads more enjoyable for a lot of people.

krsmith17 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing against Alfie but when some young guys needed to be in team he shouldn't of been signed. Remember the reason why we made the playoffs? The old and useless were hurt and not playing going the young guys a shot. Several of which should've been up since day one.

Also since you're defending holland. Why did he sign Sammy and colo to two years? Why sign tootoo for three just to waste a buyout in him in his third year?

It's always easy to say that we got in because of what happened at the end of the year, but Alfie put up points in the middle of the year and helped win games then. Alfie certainly contributed to us getting in the playoffs.

the only young guys that were projected to be on the team at the beginning of the year were Tatar and Nyquist. If you want to blame older players for keeping them off look to Cleary, Sammy, or maybe Bertuzzi not Alfie.

marcaractac likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be so sure that Niskanen will be available. Pens have about $16M, and I'd assume they'd try to move Scuderi before letting Niskanen walk. Most of their important forwards are signed, so a lot of their holes can be filled cheaply.

If he does make it to July 1st, there's a lot of teams with a lot of cap space, and every one would like to add a player like him. $5.5 is probably optimistic, even if you go 7 years.

I'm more confortable trusting the future of our defense to the growth of Dekeyser, Smith, and the kids in GR than I am with hoping Niskanen will be worth some huge contract. And there are likely to be other UFAs available in the future if the kids aren't looking so good. Staal, Sekera, Yandle, Goligoski, Johnson... all could potentially be available in the next two years. And then you have the trade option. I was all in for Suter, but not for Niskanen. We have too much going for us, I don't like the risk.

And for the record, he's 4th in TOI for the Pens, and isn't really used on the PK. Last on the team in PK time, playoffs and regular season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it comes down to this: Would you be ok with Niskanen @ $5.5 for 6 years? Would you be ok with our blue line being Kronwall, Ericsson, Niskanen, DeKeyser, Smith, and [one of Sproul/Ouellet/Backman/Marchenko] for the foreseeable future? Honest questions, not rhetorical. I'm genuinely curious.

If we're thinking Niskanen could be had for, like, $16M ($4M x 4y) - that'd be great, a no-brainer. But that isn't happening. Indeed, everything I've heard points to him re-upping with the Pens, even if he has to leave coin and term on the table to make it work. But let's say he does test the waters. Would we not expect a bidding war of biblical proportions (if only because the UFA class is just that thin)?

I get that he's doing really well this season and we wouldn't have to give up any assets to acquire him (actually, we would. Sort of.) But this would be a very serious investment. That's my hangup. Dude's gonna re-sign or he's gonna get P-A-I-D. Sky high stacks!

I'm not necessarily opposed to paying out the ass for him, though. Why? Simple: if this season is a sign of things to come from him, he's our new #2 defenseman and possibly our future #1. Point being, it's entirely possibly he is an elite NHL defenseman and this season has been his coming out party, and it only gets better from here for him and the team that's lucky enough to secure his services for the next five or six or seven years. Or maybe this season has set the bar too high and he'll never quite live up to expectations.

It's a tough call. That's what I'm saying.

Edited by Dabura

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would certainly be ok with paying him 5,5+ for 6 - 7 years. The Wings blue line needs help, he may not be elite but by far the best UFA option outthere. Yes they Pens have some capspace but the new contracts for Letang and Malkin are also kicking in. With the cap rising and rising who knows if Burkle and Mario will still spend to the cap that's a huge advantage for us we have the best owner in the sport and will always spend to the cap no matter how high it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't think twice about throwing 5.5 million at him. In the end, we NEED a righty in the top 4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, cause Alfie had nothing to do with helping the team through rough patches what so ever. Seriously. It was a compressed schedule due to the olympics, in a tournament where his team made the gold medal game and he was played for insane minutes by his coach. Even Kronwall took a couple weeks to get back into a grove from the same thing. If Alifie wants to play again, you're damn right he is gonna be with the team come fall. And rightfully so.

Also, since you're bashing Holland. Why does he not get any credit for drafting the kids, who you give sole credit to for the team making the playoffs? I'm not defending signing Sammy. It was a bad contract. People make mistakes. But at least I can be objective and point out the good and the bad rather than go in with all the blind hate like you are. You hate Holland, We get it. Do you really have to bring it up in every single thread? Why not make a Hate Holland thread so you and other like minded Holland haters could just go bash him and call for his head there? Would make the rest of the threads more enjoyable for a lot of people.

Actually I don't hate holland or Babcock at all. I through Babcock in just because I'd like to see blashill take over next year. Why? Not because Babcock is a bad coach...he is the best IMO. I just feel he and this team could use a change.

Holland sort of the same idea. He has done some good things but he has done more bad as well as several that could be bad.

What I mean is long contracts for example. Kronwall z and Franzen are signed until they're 40 iirc. The problem I have is how many players actually play at a high level for that long? Very few. Z is 2 or 3 years younger then dat but is slowing down faster then he is(mostly from injuries).

Kronwall changed his game and kronwalls people less so I believe he might be able to last now but before I had some questions.

The deals I like? Look at Howard. Got a 6 year deal it's up when he is 35. So he should be able to play at a high level for most or all of it.

So it's not that I hate holland I just feel he is doing more bad than good these last few years.

It's always easy to say that we got in because of what happened at the end of the year, but Alfie put up points in the middle of the year and helped win games then. Alfie certainly contributed to us getting in the playoffs.

the only young guys that were projected to be on the team at the beginning of the year were Tatar and Nyquist. If you want to blame older players for keeping them off look to Cleary, Sammy, or maybe Bertuzzi not Alfie.

Nyquist started the year in the minors. A guy who EVERYONE except holland should've been on the team dat one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I don't hate holland or Babcock at all. I through Babcock in just because I'd like to see blashill take over next year. Why? Not because Babcock is a bad coach...he is the best IMO. I just feel he and this team could use a change.

Holland sort of the same idea. He has done some good things but he has done more bad as well as several that could be bad.

What I mean is long contracts for example. Kronwall z and Franzen are signed until they're 40 iirc. The problem I have is how many players actually play at a high level for that long? Very few. Z is 2 or 3 years younger then dat but is slowing down faster then he is(mostly from injuries).

Kronwall changed his game and kronwalls people less so I believe he might be able to last now but before I had some questions.

The deals I like? Look at Howard. Got a 6 year deal it's up when he is 35. So he should be able to play at a high level for most or all of it.

So it's not that I hate holland I just feel he is doing more bad than good these last few years.

Nyquist started the year in the minors. A guy who EVERYONE except holland should've been on the team dat one.

Of all the contracts Holland gave it is Howard's you like?!

Franzen and Hanks contracts were signed before the new CBA and were designed to lower the cap hit. Neither player will play their contract until they end. They will retire when the salary gets down to a million per year.

Fire Holland, and he'll have a dozen offers for a new job the next day. Guess what happens if Holland were to go? He'd take a lot of his staff with him. I don't get the hate. His mistakes were signing guys like Sammy. Howard's contract is also for way too long. Mrazek will be outplaying him within 2 years of being in the NHL full time. Calling that now. In the end, the future is looking great. Prospect pool is stacked. All without having to spend a few years being a league embarrassment. Holland is going nowhere, and rightfully so. The mistakes he have made at no point handcuffed the team. The bad contracts he signed? They didn't play, if you haven't noticed. Sure it took injuries for it to happen, but it happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of all the contracts Holland gave it is Howard's you like?!

Franzen and Hanks contracts were signed before the new CBA and were designed to lower the cap hit. Neither player will play their contract until they end. They will retire when the salary gets down to a million per year.

Fire Holland, and he'll have a dozen offers for a new job the next day. Guess what happens if Holland were to go? He'd take a lot of his staff with him. I don't get the hate. His mistakes were signing guys like Sammy. Howard's contract is also for way too long. Mrazek will be outplaying him within 2 years of being in the NHL full time. Calling that now. In the end, the future is looking great. Prospect pool is stacked. All without having to spend a few years being a league embarrassment. Holland is going nowhere, and rightfully so. The mistakes he have made at no point handcuffed the team. The bad contracts he signed? They didn't play, if you haven't noticed. Sure it took injuries for it to happen, but it happened.

The prospect pool that's usually overrated. You think we will win a cup without ever making a good trade or free agent signing?

Some trades NEED to happen.

A good free agent signing under the age of 63 is needed.

Holland has shown he is too scared to make a big name trade. I mean when was the last time there was one?

This team honestly needs a shanahan type trade and I just don't see holland actually doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The prospect pool that's usually overrated. You think we will win a cup without ever making a good trade or free agent signing?

Some trades NEED to happen.

A good free agent signing under the age of 63 is needed.

Holland has shown he is too scared to make a big name trade. I mean when was the last time there was one?

This team honestly needs a shanahan type trade and I just don't see holland actually doing it.

The team isn't far enough along for a big trade yet. Why make a big trade when the kids have more growing to do? When the kids are good enough to be consistent and reliable, then trades are made for the pieces to put a team over the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The team isn't far enough along for a big trade yet. Why make a big trade when the kids have more growing to do? When the kids are good enough to be consistent and reliable, then trades are made for the pieces to put a team over the top.

Which is fine as well but what happened to the win now? The options are win now with dat and z or later after they're gone so what is the direction the team is aiming for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is fine as well but what happened to the win now? The options are win now with dat and z or later after they're gone so what is the direction the team is aiming for?

We trade for an impact player right this second, and the kids are still kids. You're suggesting Holland make a trade solely for the sake of making one. That's not how you win. Ask the flyers how fun that is. Or the Rangers for the past 20 years.

The effort will be made to win as soon as possible. It has to be within reason. Not to go make trades for the sake of making them.

Edited by marcaractac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now