• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Hockeytown0001

Official 2016 Detroit Red Wings Offseason Thread

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Oh Jesus, are you really falling back on semantics? OK fine. He's been good in the AHL. Now what?

He already answered that question.

Good play gets you a call up. Solid doesn't unless it's just a temporary injury replacement

So we can agree yea? Callahan should be called up?

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he's so good why has his former coach who always praised him not given him a shot?

Because his genius GM keeps re-signing the grey haired boat anchor every year. There's no question Callahan brings more to the table than Miller, but we're the Red Wings, so loyalty trumps all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Callahan did play 1 NHL game and was pretty good from what I remember. I think injury played a role him not getting more of a shot.

I think last year was the first time he wasn't waiver exempt. That would make the previous year his overripe stage when we give most prospects a shot in their last entry-level year. He was on a good pace (38pts in 48games), but he saved a goal with his face and was out the rest of the year with a concussion/broken jaw. Maybe some of you remember the picture of his bloody toothless face that he posted.

Edited by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, by your calculations PVD, Callahan is over-over-ripe, past-ripe. or pre-rotten? :lol:

Also, in TroubaNews:

Michael Traikos in the Winnipeg Sun: Looking at six team that could use a defenseman like Jacob Trouba and that could have the assets to trade for him.

Toronto Maple Leafs – The Leafs need to improve their blueline and find a top pairing partner for Morgan Rielly. The Jets may want Rielly, but that isn’t happening. Jake Gardiner could be a starting point, but they may need to add a lottery-protected first round pick or a top-prospect like William Nylander.

Boston Bruins – Though they have Connor Hellebuyck as the their goalie of the future, Malcolm Subban could give the Jets added depth. If they are wanting a defenseman, Jakub Zboril and Charlie McAvoy could be options.

Buffalo Sabres – The Jets would probably want Rasmus Ristolainen, but from the Sabres side, is it an upgrade, lateral move or a downgrade?

Vancouver Canucks – it would take Olli Juolevi for the Canucks to get Trouba.

Detroit Red Wings – Anthony Mantha and a defenseman like Danny DeKeyser or a top-end prospect like Evgeny Svechnikov or Dennis Cholowski.

New Jersey Devils – Pavel Zacha straight up for Trouba might not be enough, but adding goalie Mackenzie Blackwood might be enough.

Edited by e_prime

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if Callahan deserves a spot, now we're even more crowded. What do we do? Everyone can't stay.

Don't get ahead of yourself. I think Callahan DOES deserve a shot at making the roster, and I think he'd be a cheaper alternative to Ott or Miller, but given the Wings offseason signings and preference for veterans he'll most likely be waived and sent to GR. Which I'm fine with. Sucks for him, sucks for the team (maybe) but he's also a 4th liner so I'm not going to get worked up about it. Callahan, for one, will not be contributing to our logjam at forward.

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, in TroubaNews:

Mantha and Svechnikov or Cholowski?

Hmmmmm.....how good is Svech or Cholo supposed to be? I thought I read Cholo was supposed to be a 2nd round pick so would he and Mantha be worth it? Is Svech one of those we'd regret trading? For Trouba this might be worth it. We'd have to dump salary somewhere...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I think his window has past - so maybe past ripe e-prime, haha. With the Miller and Ott being signed the team clearly don't have him in their plans. I think the first forward call-ups this year will be Mantha, Nosek and maybe Bertuzzi judging from some of Blashill's comments (assuming AA's on the team).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I think his window has past - so maybe past ripe e-prime, haha. With the Miller and Ott being signed the team clearly don't have him in their plans. I think the first forward call-ups this year will be Mantha, Nosek and maybe Bertuzzi judging from some of Blashill's comments (assuming AA's on the team).

I don't know that his time is past, but I agree that he's not a priority. And to be honest, it's not the end of the world if that's the case. As much as I'm annoyed by our organization's "grit" and "desire" and "veteran leadership" fetish, if you're going to prioritize those things I'd rather you do it on the fourth line than on the second or first (looking at you Brad Richards).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently Matthias Janmark is going to miss majority (or all) of the season with a "joint issue" which required surgery. And this has got me wondering...

People said the Erik Cole trade was bad, and blamed Holland excessively, because Cole got hurt and couldn't help us. So now that Janmark is hurt, does that make the Cole trade good again? Or better at least?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently Matthias Janmark is going to miss majority (or all) of the season with a "joint issue" which required surgery. And this has got me wondering...

People said the Erik Cole trade was bad, and blamed Holland excessively, because Cole got hurt and couldn't help us. So now that Janmark is hurt, does that make the Cole trade good again? Or better at least?

The Janmark injury/surgery/missing time seems a little coincidental to really offer Holland "an out" for the trade. It was a bummer that Cole wasn't able to really play for the team and make a worthwhile contribution in the playoffs, but let's be honest some folks will never forgive or give Holland the benefit of the doubt no matter what the situation or what happens with hindsight. ...and like I said before, had we kept Janmark... he'd just be another log in the jam that's stuck somewhere between a second/third-line tweener.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because his genius GM keeps re-signing the grey haired boat anchor every year. There's no question Callahan brings more to the table than Miller, but we're the Red Wings, so loyalty trumps all.

To play the style he plays, you need to be big or fast. He's neither. Although he has decent goal numbers, his overall production looks a lot like an AHL version of Clarkson, meaning he does nothing to help drive possession. There is zero indication that he's better than anyone in Detroit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To play the style he plays, you need to be big or fast. He's neither. Although he has decent goal numbers, his overall production looks a lot like an AHL version of Clarkson, meaning he does nothing to help drive possession. There is zero indication that he's better than anyone in Detroit.

Since when do you care about possession? When it's convenient for your argument? Tatar is one of the best possession wingers in the league, has been for a couple years, and you complain about him incessantly. Also, the AHL doesn't even track possession metrics so I'm not sure where you're getting that information from. Chances are you have absolutely no idea what he does for possession and are just making things up to serve your point of view. Thirdly, Callahan's numbers in the AHL are reminiscent of Abdelkader's and better than Ott's numbers at the same level. And while neither of those guys is a great possession player at the NHL level (and you've made your distaste for Abby quite clear) even you have to admit that they are/were at least deserving of an NHL jobs, possession vacuums or otherwise. What makes Callahan different?

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dickie, did Mitch f*** your mom or sister or girl or something? I don't get it. Not a single person is saying that he needs to be on this team, or that if he gets claimed he'll be a big loss or anything. All anyone is saying is that he should be given a shot to make the team over Miller or Ott... Why is that so crazy to you?

"To play the style he plays, you need to be big or fast. He's neither." The style who plays? Needs to be big or fast compared to who? Callahan is definitely faster than both Miller and Ott, and he's also bigger than both, listed at 6'0", 195lbs. vs. 6'2", 180lbs. and 6'0", 189 lbs. respectively...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, I definitely said I'd rather he be on the team than either of them. Even if he's only AS good as them, he's still a better option because he's cheaper. I don't see how as team as absymal as ours was (at times) last year signs either of those two goofballs to a contract. Actually, I'd throw Glendening into that mix as well. I'm not going to be heartbroken if Mitch isn't on the team, in fact I think we've got MUCH better options for our fourth line, but Miller and Ott aren't it. I'm tired of our team's weird fetish for gritty, experienced, plugs on the fourth line. If we absolutely HAVE to have a gritty, shot blocking, pk guy on the fourth line I'd rather it be Mitch.

Here's a novel idea, do away with this notion of a "matchup" fourth line. Let your best players play against other teams' best players, and put together a fourth line that could roast other teams' fourth lines. Then you might actually see "depth scoring", which would be helpful. In some ways (and I know I'll catch a ton of s*** for this) I blame the glorification of the Grind Line for this. People seem to think that the Grind Line was a matchup line, and that is some tried and true strategy for line deployment. It wasn't. Firstly, they hardly ever matched up against top lines on good teams. They were dangerous because they were WAY better than other depth lines.

Hypothetically, if you did something like this, our fourth line would absolutely bury other depth lines on other teams.

Tatar-Neilsen-Abby

Z-Larkin-Vanek

Nyquist-AA-Mantha

Jurco-Helm-Sheahan

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, I definitely said I'd rather he be on the team than either of them. Even if he's only AS good as them, he's still a better option because he's cheaper. I don't see how as team as absymal as ours was (at times) last year signs either of those two goofballs to a contract. Actually, I'd throw Glendening into that mix as well. I'm not going to be heartbroken if Mitch isn't on the team, in fact I think we've got MUCH better options for our fourth line, but Miller and Ott aren't it. I'm tired of our team's weird fetish for gritty, experienced, plugs on the fourth line. If we absolutely HAVE to have a gritty, shot blocking, pk guy on the fourth line I'd rather it be Mitch.

Here's a novel idea, do away with this notion of a "matchup" fourth line. Let your best players play against other teams' best players, and put together a fourth line that could roast other teams' fourth lines. Then you might actually see "depth scoring", which would be helpful. In some ways (and I know I'll catch a ton of s*** for this) I blame the glorification of the Grind Line for this. People seem to think that the Grind Line was a matchup line, and that is some tried and true strategy for line deployment. It wasn't. Firstly, they hardly ever matched up against top lines on good teams. They were dangerous because they were WAY better than other depth lines.

Hypothetically, if you did something like this, our fourth line would absolutely bury other depth lines on other teams.

Tatar-Neilsen-Abby

Z-Larkin-Vanek

Nyquist-AA-Mantha

Jurco-Helm-Sheahan

I agree with all of this. There is no reason for shutdown lines anymore. Especially when you have this much depth up front. I'd rather see 4 lines that can play and keep the puck in the offense zone for extended periods of time than watch 1 or 2 lines constantly play in the defensive zone with no offensive skill other than dump and change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dickie, did Mitch f*** your mom or sister or girl or something? I don't get it. Not a single person is saying that he needs to be on this team, or that if he gets claimed he'll be a big loss or anything. All anyone is saying is that he should be given a shot to make the team over Miller or Ott... Why is that so crazy to you?

"To play the style he plays, you need to be big or fast. He's neither." The style who plays? Needs to be big or fast compared to who? Callahan is definitely faster than both Miller and Ott, and he's also bigger than both, listed at 6'0", 195lbs. vs. 6'2", 180lbs. and 6'0", 189 lbs. respectively...

Every team in the league has passed on him twice now. He's had years worth of "shots" to make the team, and he just hasn't been good enough. For anyone. To speculate that maybe he could be better than Miller or Ott based mostly on the idea that Miller and Ott are just that terrible is a poor reason to suggest he should make the team. We have a bunch of guys that should be far ahead of him.

...

Here's a novel idea, do away with this notion of a "matchup" fourth line. Let your best players play against other teams' best players, and put together a fourth line that could roast other teams' fourth lines. Then you might actually see "depth scoring", which would be helpful. In some ways (and I know I'll catch a ton of s*** for this) I blame the glorification of the Grind Line for this. People seem to think that the Grind Line was a matchup line, and that is some tried and true strategy for line deployment. It wasn't. Firstly, they hardly ever matched up against top lines on good teams. They were dangerous because they were WAY better than other depth lines.

Hypothetically, if you did something like this, our fourth line would absolutely bury other depth lines on other teams.

Tatar-Neilsen-Abby

Z-Larkin-Vanek

Nyquist-AA-Mantha

Jurco-Helm-Sheahan

Certainly worth experimenting with, and I don't want to see Miller and Ott both in the lineup all season (unless they prove themselves effective), but I don't think I'd expect those lower lines to "bury" anyone. Wouldn't even take it as a given that they'd outperform a "mathcup" line by enough to offset whatever our top lines lose by playing tougher minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because his genius GM keeps re-signing the grey haired boat anchor every year. There's no question Callahan brings more to the table than Miller, but we're the Red Wings, so loyalty trumps all.

yeah but Miller kills penalties. That counts for like 25 goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, I definitely said I'd rather he be on the team than either of them. Even if he's only AS good as them, he's still a better option because he's cheaper. I don't see how as team as absymal as ours was (at times) last year signs either of those two goofballs to a contract. Actually, I'd throw Glendening into that mix as well. I'm not going to be heartbroken if Mitch isn't on the team, in fact I think we've got MUCH better options for our fourth line, but Miller and Ott aren't it. I'm tired of our team's weird fetish for gritty, experienced, plugs on the fourth line. If we absolutely HAVE to have a gritty, shot blocking, pk guy on the fourth line I'd rather it be Mitch.

Here's a novel idea, do away with this notion of a "matchup" fourth line. Let your best players play against other teams' best players, and put together a fourth line that could roast other teams' fourth lines. Then you might actually see "depth scoring", which would be helpful. In some ways (and I know I'll catch a ton of s*** for this) I blame the glorification of the Grind Line for this. People seem to think that the Grind Line was a matchup line, and that is some tried and true strategy for line deployment. It wasn't. Firstly, they hardly ever matched up against top lines on good teams. They were dangerous because they were WAY better than other depth lines.

Hypothetically, if you did something like this, our fourth line would absolutely bury other depth lines on other teams.

Tatar-Neilsen-Abby

Z-Larkin-Vanek

Nyquist-AA-Mantha

Jurco-Helm-Sheahan

I like that idea, but as long as AA and Mantha have options, they'll be in GR unless a spot opens up due to injury. Which sucks....

Now, we know Pulkkinen will be out, I'm pretty sure Jurco as well. I'm not quite sure Z will be ready either, so there's 3 spots right there, but they'd have to knock miller and Ott out of the lineup. Plus you have to hope your better guys out of options don't get picked up off waivers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every team in the league has passed on him twice now. He's had years worth of "shots" to make the team, and he just hasn't been good enough. For anyone. To speculate that maybe he could be better than Miller or Ott based mostly on the idea that Miller and Ott are just that terrible is a poor reason to suggest he should make the team. We have a bunch of guys that should be far ahead of him.

Certainly worth experimenting with, and I don't want to see Miller and Ott both in the lineup all season (unless they prove themselves effective), but I don't think I'd expect those lower lines to "bury" anyone. Wouldn't even take it as a given that they'd outperform a "mathcup" line by enough to offset whatever our top lines lose by playing tougher minutes.

In my example above, Jurco's the most unproven of the proposed 4th liners. Otherwise Helm and Sheahan have shown decent ability to produce against tougher competition than a fourth line would provide. Not many 4th lines around the league actually play hockey. Most, like ours, are checking line guys who play the majority of the time in their own zone. I have plenty of faith (I acknowledge that it's just speculation) the 30+ points that Sheahan and Helm have proven capable of producing against tougher matchups would carry over against lesser lines...even despite the reduced ice time. 60 odd points out of your fourth line would be pretty nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every team in the league has passed on him twice now. He's had years worth of "shots" to make the team, and he just hasn't been good enough. For anyone. To speculate that maybe he could be better than Miller or Ott based mostly on the idea that Miller and Ott are just that terrible is a poor reason to suggest he should make the team. We have a bunch of guys that should be far ahead of him.

.

So what if teams passed on him. That's not really a convincing argument. Almost as weak of a point as the one being pointed out in your post. Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I look at Callahan the same way I look at Andrej Nestrasil from a couple years ago. Is losing him some big loss? No. Is he anything more than a fourth liner at the NHL level? No. Did he produce more in 55 games last season than Drew Miller or Steve Ott have in their last 100 games? Absolutely. And if you can field guys like that for your 4th line more cheaply than you can sign either of those guys, why wouldn't you do it?

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.