Interview with Petr Mrazek

[TimeBinder 28]

What happened to the scouts finding hidden gems??

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

26 minutes ago, TimeBinder said:

What happened to the scouts finding hidden gems??

They do that for Tampa, Dallas, and Toronto now

[chaps80 1,591]

19 hours ago, kliq said:

The article says

"Holland said he talked “numerous times” to Arizona general manager John Chayka, who operates one of the few low-budget teams in the NHL. Around pick 13 Friday, when Arizona's target pick of Jakob Chychrun was still available, Chayka contacted Holland and the deal was swung."

All this tells me is that Chayka contacted Holland first the night of the draft. The way you tell it, is that Chayka laid out every aspect of the deal and Holland simply said "OK". Long story short, none of know what was said on the phone and none of know who brought what terms to the table.

So we gave up a chance to pick Jakob Chychrun to pick up Dennis Cholowski, Filip Hronek and unload Datsyuk's contract. Hopefully one of Cholowski or Hronek turn out better then Chychrun.

I guess what I originally said came out a bit different, but you asked for a source that said Chayka contacted Holland and the deal was made. That was the point I was trying to make. It wasn't Holland "working his magic", or "pulling a rabbit out of a hat". Arizona wanted Chychrun and went to Holland to try to get a higher pick because they had talked earlier about Datsyuk's contract but couldn't reach a deal. Chychrun being available as the draft almost started hitting playoff teams made them make that deal. I know Holland was focusing on moving Datsyuk's contract since he decided he was "retiring", but I think he was a bit too eager, because he actually thought he had a chance at Stamkos. Even if he wasn't interested in Chychrun, He could have taken him with his pick and probably traded him for more than a one season salary dump and a 2nd rounder.

 

15 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Kliq, good luck. Clearly he's not mad about the actual trade, he's mad Neilsen was signed. 

No i'm not mad about Nielson. I didn't like the signing, but it is what it is. It sucks Holland didn't take the better player in the draft instead of focusing so much on dumping Datsyuk's contract. Not only Chychrun, but Max Jones was still available as well.

After Stamkos resigned in Tampa, Holland should have just stood pat in regards to new long term big money deals. If he couldn't land an elite forward, then save the money. Or, sign a couple more Vanek-like cheap short term deals. Spend the cap that's opened up for the season, or two or three, but don't add another huge long deal. Nielson isn't a game changer. He's a good player, but far from the elite guy Kenny was aiming for. He overpaid because he was in a hurry to get someone signed when Stamkos ignored him.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

32 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

I guess what I originally said came out a bit different, but you asked for a source that said Chayka contacted Holland and the deal was made. That was the point I was trying to make. It wasn't Holland "working his magic", or "pulling a rabbit out of a hat". Arizona wanted Chychrun and went to Holland to try to get a higher pick because they had talked earlier about Datsyuk's contract but couldn't reach a deal. Chychrun being available as the draft almost started hitting playoff teams made them make that deal. I know Holland was focusing on moving Datsyuk's contract since he decided he was "retiring", but I think he was a bit too eager, because he actually thought he had a chance at Stamkos. Even if he wasn't interested in Chychrun, He could have taken him with his pick and probably traded him for more than a one season salary dump and a 2nd rounder.

 

No i'm not mad about Nielson. I didn't like the signing, but it is what it is. It sucks Holland didn't take the better player in the draft instead of focusing so much on dumping Datsyuk's contract. Not only Chychrun, but Max Jones was still available as well.

After Stamkos resigned in Tampa, Holland should have just stood pat in regards to new long term big money deals. If he couldn't land an elite forward, then save the money. Or, sign a couple more Vanek-like cheap short term deals. Spend the cap that's opened up for the season, or two or three, but don't add another huge long deal. Nielson isn't a game changer. He's a good player, but far from the elite guy Kenny was aiming for. He overpaid because he was in a hurry to get someone signed when Stamkos ignored him.

Dude, you say you're not mad about the Nielsen signing, but then you go on to explain why it is exactly Nielsens contract as to why you have a problem with the deal. All in the same post.

If Holland had dumped Datsyuks contract and signed Stamkos in UFA would you have had a problem with the Chychrun deal?

[kickazz 5,459]

12 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

If Holland had dumped Datsyuks contract and signed Stamkos in UFA would you have had a problem with the Chychrun deal?

GOOD QUESTION!

[chaps80 1,591]

On February 14, 2017 at 8:10 PM, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Dude, you say you're not mad about the Nielsen signing, but then you go on to explain why it is exactly Nielsens contract as to why you have a problem with the deal. All in the same post.

If Holland had dumped Datsyuks contract and signed Stamkos in UFA would you have had a problem with the Chychrun deal?

 Yes and no. I still wouldn't like the fact he missed out on a high ranked defenceman in the draft when defence is the glaring issue on the team. But, if ditching Datsyuk's contract resulted in signing an elite forward like Stamkos, well, you have to give assets to get assets. Stamkos would be well worth it obviously. There's no way Holland could have known Stamkos would ignore him, or could he have? He must have had some idea of how things were going in his camp prior to or during the draft. Free agency was 6 days away. So he does the deal, opens up the needed cap, but doesn't get Stamkos. So why just turn around and hand a much lesser player 6 million for 6 years? Why not stand pat or do smaller short term deals instead? Somehow he felt a need to hand out another long term high dollar contract (along with a NMC which automatically takes up a valuable protection slot from Vegas at the end of his first season. What if he turned into another Weiss after he got here?) to the best guy he could scrounge up that was willing to come to Detroit. Did he simply feel he had to make a move? Or was he just being typical Ken Holland with money to spend? Everytime the guy gets cap space he acts like like crackhead who just found a twenty on the sidewalk.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

15 hours ago, chaps80 said:

 Yes and no. I still wouldn't like the fact he missed out on a high ranked defenceman in the draft when defence is the glaring issue on the team. But, if ditching Datsyuk's contract resulted in signing an elite forward like Stamkos, well, you have to give assets to get assets. Stamkos would be well worth it obviously. There's no way Holland could have known Stamkos would ignore him, or could he have? He must have had some idea of how things were going in his camp prior to or during the draft. Free agency was 6 days away. So he does the deal, opens up the needed cap, but doesn't get Stamkos. So why just turn around and hand a much lesser player 6 million for 6 years? Why not stand pat or do smaller short term deals instead? Somehow he felt a need to hand out another long term high dollar contract (along with a NMC which automatically takes up a valuable protection slot from Vegas at the end of his first season. What if he turned into another Weiss after he got here?) to the best guy he could scrounge up that was willing to come to Detroit. Did he simply feel he had to make a move? Or was he just being typical Ken Holland with money to spend? Everytime the guy gets cap space he acts like like crackhead who just found a twenty on the sidewalk.

Exactly. You don't have a problem with clearing Chychrun and cap. You have a problem with spending that cap on Nielsen. Thanks for making that clear.

[BringBack19 110]

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Exactly. You don't have a problem with clearing Chychrun and cap. You have a problem with spending that cap on Nielsen. Thanks for making that clear.

I don't necessarily give Holland a pass with regards to Chychrun either. His plan was to move Dats contract to sign Stammer. He didn't so as of now it is not a successful move. Now if we get a good pick for Vanek, and Nielsen is competent through the whole contract then it wouldn't be one of Hollands worse moves by far. The book isn't closed on this move, and we probably won't know until whoever we pick develops. All of this being said I don't think Holland deserves to be bashed for trading with Arizona. He swung for the fences, good for him.

Edited February 16, 2017 by BringBack19

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

14 minutes ago, BringBack19 said:

I don't necessarily give Holland a pass with regards to Chychrun either. His plan was to move Dats contract to sign Stammer. He didn't so as of now it is not a successful move. Now if we get a good pick for Vanek, and Nielsen is competent through the whole contract then it wouldn't be one of Hollands worse moves by far. The book isn't closed on this move, and we probably won't know until whoever we pick develops. All of this being said I don't think Holland deserves to be bashed for trading with Arizona. He swung for the fences, good for him.

EXACTLY my thinking. Thank you.

Until we know what kind of players Chychrun and Cholowski both are we can't close the book on this deal. We also don't know what will become of Vanek, Nielsen, and Ott just yet. And to be fair they haven't been able to play on a decent Red Wings team yet.

Everyone's constantly clamoring for Holland to swing for the fences, and then when he actually swings people complain. He missed the ball on this one, but that was out of his control. He tried. Nielsen and Vanek were plan B.

[chaps80 1,591]

10 minutes ago, BringBack19 said:

I don't necessarily give Holland a pass with regards to Chychrun either. His plan was to move Dats contract to sign Stammer. He didn't so as of now it is not a successful move. 

Exactly. As it sits, he missed out on Chychrun to sign a 32 y/o Nielson for 6 years at $6million per. Hardly worth it.

[chaps80 1,591]

19 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

. He missed the ball on this one, but that was out of his control. He tried. Nielsen and Vanek were plan B.

Thing is, he misses the ball often. If he didn't have a history of bad contracts and being unprepared for major changes, the Chychrun deal might have just slid by without too much notice even though he didn't get his target (Stamkos).

[kliq 3,755]

43 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

EXACTLY my thinking. Thank you.

Until we know what kind of players Chychrun and Cholowski both are we can't close the book on this deal. We also don't know what will become of Vanek, Nielsen, and Ott just yet. And to be fair they haven't been able to play on a decent Red Wings team yet.

Everyone's constantly clamoring for Holland to swing for the fences, and then when he actually swings people complain. He missed the ball on this one, but that was out of his control. He tried. Nielsen and Vanek were plan B.

100% agree with you, I would just add Filip Hronek in that convo since we we got 2 picks for the 1.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

58 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

Exactly. As it sits, he missed out on Chychrun to sign a 32 y/o Nielson for 6 years at $6million per. Hardly worth it.

Again, you're jumping to conclusions on a player and a trade before either has had a chance to pan out. Book is still open.

And we've established that you are OK with the Chychrun/Datsyuk trade for the right player. You just personally don't like Nielsen. Personally I'd like to see what he can do on our team when it's being coached properly before I pass judgement.

39 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

Thing is, he misses the ball often. If he didn't have a history of bad contracts and being unprepared for major changes, the Chychrun deal might have just slid by without too much notice even though he didn't get his target (Stamkos).

Again, you're mad at him for missing, not swinging. So why are we going round and round talking about Chychrun when the root of the problem for you is Nielsen versus Stamkos.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

15 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

There's far too much reasonable debate taking place in this thread...What I wanna know is why there aren't more players on the Detroit roster that can punch faces?

#makeRedWingsfuntowatchagain

Pass the scotch

[chaps80 1,591]

4 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Again, you're jumping to conclusions on a player and a trade before either has had a chance to pan out. Book is still open.

And we've established that you are OK with the Chychrun/Datsyuk trade for the right player. You just personally don't like Nielsen. Personally I'd like to see what he can do on our team when it's being coached properly before I pass judgement.

Again, you're mad at him for missing, not swinging. So why are we going round and round talking about Chychrun when the root of the problem for you is Nielsen versus Stamkos.

Well anyone would be happy if Datsyuk's ghost contract and Chychrun ended up landing Stamkos. Least I would hope so. I don't hate Nielson, I just hate his contract. For what he has brought so far it's way too much. But it's def possible that it could just be bad coaching and playing on a disorganized team many nights that's prevented him from living up to the deal.

[lomekian 201]

Hell if Stammer had come here, everyone would have hailed KH as a genius.

As things stand, jury's out and it far too early to make a judgement on the trade.

Chychrun will probably round out as a #3 d-man, but could rise to a #2 or stall to a #5. Cholowski is much more boom or bust. His passing and skating are both excellent, and he's clearly a very smart kid both on and off the ice, but much will depend on his physical development and ability to cope with NHL physicality. He could be a top pairing guy if it all pans out or he could never make it past GR. Hronek looks a great pick at this stage, a sort of combination of Sproul and Oullette, but better rounded than both. Very impressive points totals to date, and impressive international play. Still too far off to make a call, but he certainly has 2nd pairing potential.

And of course the other factor is how Nielsen does for us, and perhaps what we get in return for Vanek, who took up the rest of the space cleared by Dats. If Nielsen maintains a decent level of play and the Vanek pick is used well, we'll look like big winners on this deal unless Chychrun hits that 1st pairing potential and neither Cholowski or Hronek hit their potential.

All far too far off to guess at.

What I will say is that it is undoubtedly the case that Nielsen is being affected by the coaching and systemic mess we currently have. Seeing as Blash has made every single previous roster player's points output drop by a significant %, its safe to assume Nielsen may be affected by that as well.

[Juklitz 85]

11 hours ago, chaps80 said:

Chychrun deal might have just slid by without too much notice even though he didn't get his target (Stamkos).

Yes, but.. later then it was confirmed that Ken never spoke to Stamkos. Nor even Shanahan did.

There was ZERO chance Stamkos is going elsewhere, Stamkos confirmed he didn´t even think about moving, whole story was done by journalists.

So, Holland wasn´t even in touch with Stammer and made that Chychrun move anyway, which was later then reported as Chayka´s/Arizona idea (no source), not Holland´s. 

I do agree these reactions on Holland´s move are sometimes dumb, but I can´t hardly remember day when Holland hit that ball. Everybody´s missing the balls time to time, like my wife, like Nill with goaltending - nobody´s perfect unless you have Bowman as your family name, but couple last seasons Ken started to miss the ball very frequently and still considered as a one of the best GMs there. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Last game against the Rags, Mrazek allowed 4 goals and ended the game with a .871% save percentage.

With almost no threat from Howard or Coreau taking his job all season, he now sits at .900% save percentage, allowing an average of 3 goals per game.

You guys still over the moon about this kid? Or is reality starting to sink in?

[BinMucker94 302]

22 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Last game against the Rags, Mrazek allowed 4 goals and ended the game with a .871% save percentage.

With almost no threat from Howard or Coreau taking his job all season, he now sits at .900% save percentage, allowing an average of 3 goals per game.

You guys still over the moon about this kid? Or is reality starting to sink in?

I agree Mrazek has had a bad year but as far as last nights game against the Rangers, I don't think there was much he could do. Two seam pass one timers to guys completely unmarked, two goals by their defenseman standing in our crease surrounded by red and still going untouched. 3 on 1 rush on the power play with 4 players caught behind their goaline. That can not, should not, happen at the NHL level.

Mrazek needs to get his s*** together for sure. But he hasn't been the issue in every single game he's played like some want to think. After every goal there's always 5 or so posts blaming Mrazek, even if it's a 5 on 0 tick tack toe goal. Starting to get old.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

2 minutes ago, BinMucker94 said:

I agree Mrazek has had a bad year but as far as last nights game against the Rangers, I don't think there was much he could do. Two seam pass one timers to guys completely unmarked, two goals by their defenseman standing in our crease surrounded by red and still going untouched. 3 on 1 rush on the power play with 4 players caught behind their goaline. That can not, should not, happen at the NHL level.

Mrazek needs to get his s*** together for sure. But he hasn't been the issue in every single game he's played like some want to think. After every goal there's always 5 or so posts blaming Mrazek, even if it's a 5 on 0 tick tack toe goal. Starting to get old.

I'd say the exact opposite. There's way more Mrazek apologists than there are those being critical of him. "Not his fault" "Just a down year" type stuff, as you demonstrated.

[BinMucker94 302]

9 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I'd say the exact opposite. There's way more Mrazek apologists than there are those being critical of him. "Not his fault" "Just a down year" type stuff, as you demonstrated.

I am probably just biased playing defense my whole life. Seeing the amount of space and chances the team as a whole gives up is ridiculous. There's no doubt that Mrazek has been as bad as the rest of the team. I wouldn't even be opposed to trading him for the right price. That's if Howard can stay glued together long enough to find another solid young goalie.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

25 minutes ago, BinMucker94 said:

I am probably just biased playing defense my whole life. Seeing the amount of space and chances the team as a whole gives up is ridiculous. There's no doubt that Mrazek has been as bad as the rest of the team. I wouldn't even be opposed to trading him for the right price. That's if Howard can stay glued together long enough to find another solid young goalie.

Agreed. But Jimmy played behind the same defense and didn't allow anything close to the number of goals Petr has let in.

[DickieDunn 2,571]

At this point I'd agree. But if you are actually aware of his career, you'd know he was a 1st round pick that was completely mismanaged. 
Ok let's just start playing all the kids as soon as we draft them. You wouldn't have a problem with that would you?

How the hell was McCollum mismanaged?

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

13 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

How the hell was McCollum mismanaged?

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

Little late to the party eh? I take it you don't remember St. Louis

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

7 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Little late to the party eh? I take it you don't remember St. Louis

I don't think McCollum was mismanaged. He was just a really big disappointment. He was great in the OHL and had that one really good World Junior tournament, but took quite a while to even be competent in the AHL - splitting with Toledo in his first 3 years pro.

And I don't see the problem with the 10-3 St. Louis game from a development angle. McCollum was in his 2nd year pro and that's when many goalies get a shot. He probably wasn't ready, but it was forced by injuries to Ozzy and Howard. Anyway, he was only there to be Joey MacDonald's backup until Joey got blown out. McCollum was only in for 3 goals, so it's not like we sent the young kid out to the slaughter.