Wings Need on D and Glaring Inconsistencies

[Bill Berzeench 310]

Yep and when it comes to who the Wings draft, you know who has final say.....Ken Holland. A GM's job is to hire the right people, and gather as much info as they can from those people and ultimately make the right decision. If the Wings have a bad draft, you know who that falls on....Ken Holland. If the Wings have a great draft, you know who deserves credit....Ken Holland.

Cant have it both ways. You cant praise all the guys he drafts, but then say he is "garbage".

Nick Polano hired Andersson. Mike Ilitch hired Devellano. DEBUNKED.

[Bill Berzeench 310]

- Kronwall (34) = Jones (21) ????? also K has NTC or maybe NMC

- 10 mill probably wouldn;t have landed P+S IMO, but I wouldn't want Parise for 10 mill anyway.

- Your DK rebuttal also applies to P+S - Free agents are free to choose - It's not always certain GMs fault for not getting them. Sometime it's for money, sometime's it;s hometown, sometimes it organizations reputation...

Not going into the coattail argument. You have no idea what goes on behind the closed doors of the organization and your claims just show a personal bias.

Anyway, I know you won't change your mind. I think the team is in a great position as our strategy of building from the draft is coming to fruition. We did some placefiller deals in these transition years (Sammy, Tootoo, coliacovo, Weiss, cleary). I'm glad we didn;t trade away our draft picks or get tied up overpaying UFAs (Other than with Weiss). Good night.

Kronwall is a number 1 Defenseman. Holland is the one who put his NMC there.

Suter and Parise turned Holland down any which way you look at it.

Conceded point on DeKeyser.

Result - Successful arguments both ways.

lol! Why even try. If someone cant see the difference between trading for a 21 year old who isn't close to his peak or a 34 year old in decline, there is just no point.

Ken Holland signed Kronwall to a 7 year contract. Why would he do this if Kronwall was "in decline"? That seems dumb.

DEBUNKED

Actually, the year Suter and Parise were signed we were giving Howard, Ericsson, Tootoo, and Sammy $10.4 million combined. Weiss wasn't signed until the next year. Regardless, having those two at $7.5 per until they're 40 would've been tough enough. $10 would be even moreso, and you can't even say for sure that would have been enough.

And seriously, Nyquist equivalent to Eriksson? He's barely close right now. When that trade was made Nyquist was still a prospect. 40 games played, 4 goals, 13 points. Another 2g, 5p in 18 playoff games.

That and the Kronwall thing prove just how irrational you're being.

Franzen then. Pick your poison. Either we had a tradeable winger who led the team's wingers in scoring, or Holland did such a terrible job, that we didnt have a single winger with any value. Just choose one.

DEBUNKED

Edited January 9, 2016 by Bill Berzeench

[kipwinger 8,524]

I'd take Buf long term in a heartbeat. Squeeze all his value as a defenseman out and he will still have value as a forward at the front of the net. The dude can skate, is durable, and has had no serious injuries in his career. He will be good for another 5 or 6 years.

[kipwinger 8,524]

You might have to swallow a year or two of bad contract,but it won't even be that big of a deal with cap inflation.

[Bill Berzeench 310]

You might have to swallow a year or two of bad contract,but it won't even be that big of a deal with cap inflation.

Agreed. Anticipate the cap ceiling rising.

[kliq 3,755]

Ken Holland signed Kronwall to a 7 year contract. Why would he do this if Kronwall was "in decline"? That seems dumb.

DEBUNKED

What did you "debunk" lol. My point was that a 34 year old Kronwall and a 21 year old Jones do not have the same trade value.

All you did was say a random thought. Telling me that Holland signed Kronwall to a 7 year deal does not counter anything that I said and has nothing to do with comparing trade value.

I am actually not even sure what you are trying to get across with your point. Is it that the Kronwall's contract was a bad one? Is it that Kronwall is not in decline?

Your lack of detail and random thoughts that have nothing to do with the original post are an example of why people call you a troll.

Franzen then. Pick your poison. Either we had a tradeable winger who led the team's wingers in scoring, or Holland did such a terrible job, that we didnt have a single winger with any value. Just choose one.

DEBUNKED

None of the above. We had a winger who suffered from a brain injury and as a result had little trade value.

Suter and Parise turned Holland down any which way you look at it.

Conceded point on DeKeyser.

Result - Successful arguments both ways.

They have both publicly stated that they wanted to be closer to home and that was the reason for their choice, to "blame" Holland for not signing them is ridiculous and putting unrealistic expectations on him.

Edited January 9, 2016 by kliq

[Bill Berzeench 310]

What did you "debunk" lol. My point was that a 34 year old Kronwall and a 21 year old Jones do not have the same trade value.

All you did was say a random thought. Telling me that Holland signed Kronwall to a 7 year deal does not counter anything that I said and has nothing to do with comparing trade value.

I am actually not even sure what you are trying to get across with your point. Is it that the Kronwall's contract was a bad one? Is it that Kronwall is not in decline?

Your lack of detail and random thoughts that have nothing to do with the original post are an example of why people call you a troll.

None of the above. We had a winger who suffered from a brain injury and as a result had little trade value.

They have both publicly stated that they wanted to be closer to home and that was the reason for their choice, to "blame" Holland for not signing them is ridiculous and putting unrealistic expectations on him.

Holland signed Kronwall to be our #1. If he is our #1, how can he not have trade value?

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

You might have to swallow a year or two of bad contract,but it won't even be that big of a deal with cap inflation.

Won't be going up that much , and the Canadian dollar is worthless which won't help

We also have the Weiss buyout as a bad contract to deal with and Howard might soon be someone we might have to eat some money off .... Not interested in taking some bad contracts in a deal

Could see the jets dealing byfuglien If they land hamonic/or if contract talks are going nowhere and they are far from a spot, if not they might keep him for a playoff run since i think they got swept last year?

[Buppy 1,720]

...

Franzen then. Pick your poison. Either we had a tradeable winger who led the team's wingers in scoring, or Holland did such a terrible job, that we didnt have a single winger with any value. Just choose one.

DEBUNKED

Franzen is 6 years older than Eriksson, and even back then wasn't quite as good. There is a difference between "value" and "enough value". For that matter, there's a difference between value in the general sense and value to a specific team. To speculate that Boston's GM (or any other) would value a player exactly the same as you is even more evidence of your irrationality.

...Ken Holland signed Kronwall to a 7 year contract. Why would he do this if Kronwall was "in decline"? That seems dumb....

Holland signed Kronwall to be our #1. If he is our #1, how can he not have trade value?

Kronwall was signed 3 seasons ago, at a very friendly cap hit. While he may have been starting his decline even back then, the business is what it is. Given that you are so adamant that Holland should have signed a defenseman who isn't much better for more than double the cap and for a much longer term, you should know that. But I get the feeling you only live in the moment. That's why you didn't note the difference between Nyquist now and Nyquist 3 years ago.

And again, there is a world of difference between "trade value" and "the same trade value as Seth Jones".

But all of this is stupid. You're not happy with the team, so Holland is your scapegoat. Clearly, nothing he could do will ever be enough for you. Even if he wins another Cup I'm sure you'll just give credit to everyone else.

[Buppy 1,720]

Won't be going up that much , and the Canadian dollar is worthless which won't help

We also have the Weiss buyout as a bad contract to deal with and Howard might soon be someone we might have to eat some money off .... Not interested in taking some bad contracts in a deal

Could see the jets dealing byfuglien If they land hamonic/or if contract talks are going nowhere and they are far from a spot, if not they might keep him for a playoff run since i think they got swept last year?

Much like Abby's deal, a theoretical Buffy deal (assuming it's reasonable in the short term) wouldn't likely turn bad until almost everything on our books now is expired. Almost every team in the league has quite a bit of wasted cap space, including us now. It's normal. Obviously, you don't want too much, but if you can spend to the cap you don't need to be super-efficient either. I'd be a lot more concerned with the cap in the next couple seasons than further down the road.

[kliq 3,755]

Holland signed Kronwall to be our #1. If he is our #1, how can he not have trade value?

Buppy pretty much nailed this, but I want to add that you are again putting words in my mouth. I never said Kronwall has no trade value, what I said was that his trade value is not the same as Seth Jones.

[Krayzie_Bone 58]

Kronwall has seems to have taken a big slide backwards and Smith is still clueless alot of times.

Edited January 9, 2016 by Krayzie_Bone

[TheXym 2,606]

Byfuglien's points are going to drop pretty severely over the next couple years regardless of what team he's on. I don't want him as a rental because I don't think he's a player that puts us over the top, and I definitely don't want him long term.

Shattenkirk, that's a player I'd like to see us go after. I'd kill to get Trouba or Faulk though. A combination of Nyquist, Pulkkinen, Ericsson, Marchenko, Ouellet, draft picks for any of those 3 would be unbelievable...

Faulk would be awesome, but no way do I see Carolina letting him go.

[krsmith17 7,191]

I agree xym, and even if Faulk or Trouba were to become available, we'd definitely have to give up a ton. I think it'd probably be worth it for either of those guys though. But again, very unlikely, especially with Holland manning the ship.

[e_prime 1,936]

No way Carolina is letting Faulk go.

I can't imagine that Trouba is going anywhere either, especially if they're moving away from Buff.

Shattenkirk would be awesome.

Still need to sort out some of our roster issues before I can see us adding an additional FA like Yandle to the mix.

Hell, we don't even have room to re-sign Quincey which I am not opposed to if Ericsson could be moved. (Doubtful except in a package?)

[LeftWinger 4,961]

So, the D is playing better now, still a bit inconsistant, but better....IF we aren't able to land any UFA or UFA to be via trade, I think if we either dumped E somehow PLUS let Q go, we'd be able to keep 3 of the 4 kids and just fill the roster with those guys and be good. They'd be #6/#7 on the team anyhow, we'd still have our veteren core...even if we were able to just shed one of E or Q (UFA) I still think we'd be able to carry 8 D-men up here and the bottom two can rotate in and out with the #6 guy,or injury replacement.

If I am chosing one of trading E or re-signing Q, I pick Q over E everyday. I just hope we don't keep both and lose 2 of the 4 kids to waivers, since odds are we'd waive Sproul and Jensen, two RH'd guys that we'd miss big time. XO is ready too...damn its going to be a tough choice!