What if Datsyuk didn't leave for the KHL

[Datsyukian-Deke 722]

Here is a pretty good read about the effect it's had on the 2016-2017 Red Wings without Pavel Datsyuk on the roster.

http://wingsnation.com/2017/3/4/what-if-datsyuk-didn-t-retire-early

[kickazz 5,459]

"If Pavel didn’t leave for Russia with one-year left on his contract, the Red Wings would be in much better shape than they are today. 

They would have a bonafide A-prospect in Chychrun. They wouldn’t have Nielsen and Helm on the books through 2021. They very likely would have been a better team all throughout 2016-17 and could have been a playoff team. They would have $7.5M of free cap-space at the end of the season to continue to re-tool and finally, they wouldn’t have to worry about protecting Datsyuk, cause he’s retired or Nielsen’s no movement clause and would be in even better shape heading into the expansion draft. "

So he screwed the Red Wings over by leaving? I thought we concluded this already...  

Edited March 5, 2017 by kickazz

[Datsyukian-Deke 722]

12 minutes ago, kickazz said:

So he screwed the Red Wings over by leaving? I thought we concluded this already...  

What I thought was interesting is the effect it has had on many of the players on the team without him.

[kickazz 5,459]

2 minutes ago, Datsyukian-Deke said:

What I thought was interesting is the effect it has had on many of the players on the team without him.

Indeed, Datsyuk was a hell of a player but the article is moot since Datsyuk was injured most of his KHL season anyways. He was done as an NHL player and likely would have been injured longer this season if he was still here.

Now if Datsyuk played most of the 82 games then I'd say instead of being a 13th seed team we would have been the standard 9th or 10th team as we have been. If he was 2008 version of Datsyuk maybe we would have been 5th seed team. 

Edited March 5, 2017 by kickazz

[GMRwings1983 8,799]

If this team didn't have so many injuries this season, they'd be a playoff contender like in previous seasons.  If they had Datsyuk, that would obviously help too.

Even with making the playoffs, they'd still be out in the first round like the last few years.  Just not good enough. 

[shocky2002 36]

Still be out of the playoff chase.

[chaps80 1,591]

Dude pulled a real dick move for sure. Holland didn't HAVE to move his contract either though. It's both their faults everything complained about in the article happened. Oh well, rebuild is on at least.

 

 

 

Edited March 5, 2017 by chaps80

[DickieDunn 2,571]

38 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

Dude pulled a real dick move for sure. Holland didn't HAVE to move his contract either though. It's both their faults everything complained about in the article happened. Oh well, rebuild is on at least.

 

 

 

Then how could he have given Helm and G-dog their "I won the lottery" contracts?

I don't think it was a dick move on Datsyuk's part though.  People quit their jobs while under contract all the time.  The only difference with him is that he's a public figure where Joe Schmo isn't.  

Also, there's no guarantee that they wouldn't have drafted the kid they did anyway.

In the end, it's probably for the best long term that he retired and Blashill is a moron who dragged the team down to where it is, because the higher draft pick is more likely to help down the road than the 16th pick would have, especially since they're going to be picking earlier in every round and they wouldn't have sold off the guys they did to get more picks.

[kliq 3,763]

2 hours ago, kickazz said:

Indeed, Datsyuk was a hell of a player but the article is moot since Datsyuk was injured most of his KHL season anyways. He was done as an NHL player and likely would have been injured longer this season if he was still here.

Now if Datsyuk played most of the 82 games then I'd say instead of being a 13th seed team we would have been the standard 9th or 10th team as we have been. If he was 2008 version of Datsyuk maybe we would have been 5th seed team. 

This....really couldnt say it any better. Had he stayed his GP would likely be around 40 or less IMO by the end of the year, so with that being said I think we would be in the same position or worse because we would not have Nielsen. Though capwise better, because I dont like the Nielsen contract. 

As far as Chychrun goes, who knows if the Wings were even interested. At least we got 2 young D prospects for him

[LeftWinger 5,036]

It was time. Even last season we only made the playoffs because Boston didn't. Similar to the year prior. Maybe a few players would've had a few more goals, Abby comes to mind, but in reality it wouldn't have made too much of a difference. 

[kickazz 5,459]

9 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

 

I don't think it was a dick move on Datsyuk's part though.  People quit their jobs while under contract all the time.  The only difference with him is that he's a public figure where Joe Schmo isn't.  

 

Ooo.. bad argument. Generalizing dick moves made by people doesn't justify the said move made by Datsyuk. All it does is clump him into the dick move category along with the rest. I don't think anyone appreciates people leaving in the middle of their contract obligations in any field of work. And more often than not those people are banned from being re-hired. Just a bad way to end things.

Edited March 5, 2017 by kickazz

[Datsyukian-Deke 722]

For me, the takeaway from this article is to show how valuable Datsyuk was to the team. I have a friend who is a Kings fan who thinks we are a better team without Datsyuk because he was "too old" and his points were "easily replaceable." People outside of Detroit don't realize that even at an older age, Datsyuk simply made players better around him. His puck possession, takeaways, and defensive skills are not as replaceable as the 40+ points he prolly would have scored this year. People look at the points but Datsyuk was one of the top 3 all around players in the world in his prime when you add up all his intangibles.

[kickazz 5,459]

19 minutes ago, Datsyukian-Deke said:

For me, the takeaway from this article is to show how valuable Datsyuk was to the team. I have a friend who is a Kings fan who thinks we are a better team without Datsyuk because he was "too old" and his points were "easily replaceable." People outside of Detroit don't realize that even at an older age, Datsyuk simply made players better around him. His puck possession, takeaways, and defensive skills are not as replaceable as the 40+ points he prolly would have scored this year. People look at the points but Datsyuk was one of the top 3 all around players in the world in his prime when you add up all his intangibles.

Put it this way, if Datsyuk hadn't left for the KHL we would have still been struggling to make the playoffs , but we'd be in a slightly better position. 

[Datsyukian-Deke 722]

3 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Put it this way, if Datsyuk hadn't left for the KHL we would have still been struggling to make the playoffs , but we'd be in a slightly better position. 

I never said we would be a playoff team with Datsyuk.

[kliq 3,763]

29 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Put it this way, if Datsyuk hadn't left for the KHL we would have still been struggling to make the playoffs , but we'd be in a slightly better position. 

Could be worse if he missed more time that previous years, because if he was here we lose our "all-star" lol.

[kickazz 5,459]

I think Nielsen replaced Datsyuk just fine. He replaced him in production pretty much, his faceoff % is around 55-56% (better than Datsyuk's from last year). In terms of takeaways he doesn't quite have the same amount as Datsyuk but Zetterberg picked up his takeaway rate so it evens out. He replaced him in defense, I mean the guy plays on the penalty kill, what more could you ask for.

The only thing Nielsen couldn't replace is the possession. You can't replace that because Datsyuk was one of the best possession players. But that's one line out of 4 lines during a game. It's not like Datsyuk plays when all 4 lines are out there. 

This team is bad because of bigger reasons than Datsyuk leaving. He would have made 2-4 (counting defensman out there) players better than they are at a time. But we have 16 others who need to get their s*** together during the course of the game.

Edited March 5, 2017 by kickazz

[kliq 3,763]

4 minutes ago, kickazz said:

I think Nielsen replaced Datsyuk just fine. He replaced him in production pretty much, his faceoff % is around 55-56% (better than Datsyuk's from last year). In terms of takeaways he doesn't quite have the same amount as Datsyuk but Zetterberg picked up his takeaway rate so it evens out. He replaced him in defense, I mean the guy plays on the penalty kill, what more could you ask for.

The only thing Nielsen couldn't replace is the possession. You can't replace that because Datsyuk was one of the best possession players. But that's one line out of 4 lines during a game. It's not like Datsyuk plays when all 4 lines are out there. 

This team is bad because of bigger reasons that Datsyuk leaving. He would have made 2-4 (counting defensman out there) players better than they are at a time. But we have 16 others who need to get their s*** together during the course of the game.

I was just joking about Nielsen, in all seriousness I think he done done well here. I admit I dont like the contract, but he's played fine.

I do believe that if Datsyuk stayed and played say 25 games which I think is a strong possibility, I think with no Nielsen and very little Datsyuk we are worse. Now, if we got 82 games of healthy Datsyuk, there is no question we are better.

[kickazz 5,459]

Lol didn't even see you were talking about Nielsen, I was responding to the thread overall

Yeah I agree, it's better to have a consistent lesser player than a superior player for not even half the season. 

Edited March 5, 2017 by kickazz

[marcaractac 3,963]

14 hours ago, kickazz said:

"If Pavel didn’t leave for Russia with one-year left on his contract, the Red Wings would be in much better shape than they are today. 

They would have a bonafide A-prospect in Chychrun. They wouldn’t have Nielsen and Helm on the books through 2021. They very likely would have been a better team all throughout 2016-17 and could have been a playoff team. They would have $7.5M of free cap-space at the end of the season to continue to re-tool and finally, they wouldn’t have to worry about protecting Datsyuk, cause he’s retired or Nielsen’s no movement clause and would be in even better shape heading into the expansion draft. "

So he screwed the Red Wings over by leaving? I thought we concluded this already...  

1

The moves made to try and keep the playoff streak alive screwed the Red Wings more than anything. On the bright side, that should stop now. 

[kickazz 5,459]

19 minutes ago, marcaractac said:

The moves made to try and keep the playoff streak alive screwed the Red Wings more than anything. On the bright side, that should stop now. 

Need to rid a couple of contracts too and a coach or two.

[DickieDunn 2,571]

27 minutes ago, marcaractac said:

The moves made to try and keep the playoff streak alive screwed the Red Wings more than anything. On the bright side, that should stop now. 

I cannot like this post enough

3 hours ago, kickazz said:

Ooo.. bad argument. Generalizing dick moves made by people doesn't justify the said move made by Datsyuk. All it does is clump him into the dick move category along with the rest. I don't think anyone appreciates people leaving in the middle of their contract obligations in any field of work. And more often than not those people are banned from being re-hired. Just a bad way to end things.

So you've never quit a job where they were expecting you to be there long term?

[kickazz 5,459]

1 hour ago, DickieDunn said:

So you've never quit a job where they were expecting you to be there long term?

I've never signed a contract saying I'm working till 2017 and if I don't finish it the employer could excercise their rights and sue my ass and take me down.  

If I did, I'd probably finish the contract to avoid that problem. Or in Datsyuk's case Holland told him to honor the 2015/16 season and  if so the Franchise wouldn't take Datsyuk to court for 2016/17 season and prevent him from stepping into KHL. It was a mutual agreement. Datsyuk hired personal lawyers by the way and went to the NHLPA about it too. And it looked like he didnt have much luck. 

You're smarter than this Dickie, don't act like a simpleton, contract obligations aren't the same as being hired into a job you can quit. Most jobs require a simple two week notice, hockey contracts don't. They require you to finish the contract or retire from hockey or if given permission by the contractor you can walk away. Until then you're the contractor's ***** once you make the signature. 

Edited March 5, 2017 by kickazz

[DickieDunn 2,571]

He was leaving Detroit either way.  They could have said he could play in Russia, or they could have played hardball and not let him.  They chose to do the right thing and let him go, like a classy organization.

Also, for most people who do need to sign contracts (media people for example) they can quit whenever they want, they just can't go work for a direct competitor.  Even for people who don't have an actual contract, the two week notice isn't a requirement, it's just an expected courtesy.  

[kickazz 5,459]

45 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

He was leaving Detroit either way.  They could have said he could play in Russia, or they could have played hardball and not let him.  They chose to do the right thing and let him go, like a classy organization.

Also, for most people who do need to sign contracts (media people for example) they can quit whenever they want, they just can't go work for a direct competitor.  Even for people who don't have an actual contract, the two week notice isn't a requirement, it's just an expected courtesy.  

No, he was leaving Detroit in 2015. They threatened him to take action if he left and cut a verbal deal that if he stayed till end of 2016 season and he was free to go after that. 

Also media contract is not NHL contracts. What we do know from NHL contracts is that Datsyuk's only choice was to retire from hockey or given permission by the Wings to go play in the KHL. He got the permission after agreeing to honor the 2015/16 year.

Usually the two week notice is a way to end the employment on a good note, in case one wants to return. It's a matter of professionalism. Unless of course there's extreme circumstances. But depending on where you work, if you don't give the notice you can be terminated on paper which would mean putting it on your CV could lead to problems in case someone contacted the employer to confirm the employment history. In which case the employer could just say "we terminated him". Like Trump just terminated The Terminator on twitter yesterday. 

Edited March 5, 2017 by kickazz

[Buppy 1,720]

33 minutes ago, kickazz said:

No, he was leaving Detroit in 2015. They threatened him to take action if he left and cut a verbal deal that if he stayed till end of 2016 season and he was free to go after that. 

Also media contract is not NHL contracts. What we do know from NHL contracts is that Datsyuk's only choice was to retire from hockey or given permission by the Wings to go play in the KHL. He got the permission after agreeing to honor the 2015/16 year....

So you acknowledge that Datsyuk had no actual obligation to continue playing for Wings...what exactly are you pissed about then? That the Wings, who were "screwed" either way, chose not to be spiteful?