Ken Holland on 97.1 this morning.

[amato 3,210]

7 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Exactly this. And it definitely will happen, just not so sure Holland will do it...

I think it depends on what the price will be. If they'll take a 4th to take Ericsson, I don't see why he wouldn't do it. Not saying that they would but who knows.. depends on how Vegas feels about whatever player the trade would be for I guess. 

Still wouldnt be surprised if they took Howard without any trade with the year he's had; especially if he shows up big in worlds. 

[Buppy 1,720]

Our "bad" contracts are not so bad, nor our need for cap space so pressing, nor our potentially unprotected players so good that we should be in any hurry to give up assets. I wouldn't necessarily be upset if we were to throw in a late pick to get Vegas to take Howard or Ericsson, but it isn't needed.

[Dabura 12,207]

12 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/nhl/red-wings/2017/04/12/detroit-red-wings-ken-holland/100377410/

More Holland.

Honestly, this latest round of quotes has convinced me that Holland himself doesn't believe half the things he says, that he treats his talks with the media as opportunities to run damage control and pay lip service to season ticket holders, corporate entities, et al. and say what he feels needs to be said in order to get as many butts in the seats as possible and keep those butts coming back. I almost want to say there's an institutionalized fear within this organization that 1) Wings fans are predominantly fairweather fans and 2) not making the playoffs -- even just for one season -- could mean losing a catastrophically large number of said fans and their $$$. Similarly, I guess you could make the argument that Devallano only said the things he recently said as a way of paying lip service to the "disgruntled diehard" demographic.

Edited April 13, 2017 by Dabura

[Dabura 12,207]

25 minutes ago, Buppy said:

Our "bad" contracts are not so bad, nor our need for cap space so pressing, nor our potentially unprotected players so good that we should be in any hurry to give up assets. I wouldn't necessarily be upset if we were to throw in a late pick to get Vegas to take Howard or Ericsson, but it isn't needed.

I'm not necessarily in favor or giving up assets in order to unload a contract. I'm just sayin'. If McPhee had to choose between Ouellet and Ericsson, he'd take Ouellet.

If we want to actively and successfully force a player on him for the purpose of freeing up cap space (again, I don't see this happening), we're going to have to work out a trade.

Edited April 13, 2017 by Dabura

[Buppy 1,720]

9 minutes ago, Dabura said:

I'm not necessarily in favor or giving up assets in order to unload a contract. I'm just sayin'. If McPhee had to choose between Ouellet and Ericsson, he'd take Ouellet.

If we want to actively and successfully force a player on him for the purpose of freeing up cap space (again, I don't see this happening), we're going to have to work out a trade.

Probably, though the list Chaps protected the choice would be Dekeyser (or Abby/Helm) or Sproul. Technically speaking, we could expose only big contracts that at least some people have complained about.

My point was more about deflecting the idea that making a trade to dump or protect a player is not the great move people are going to think it is. It would at best be a mostly irrelevant move.

[Dabura 12,207]

1 minute ago, Buppy said:

Probably, though the list Chaps protected the choice would be Dekeyser (or Abby/Helm) or Sproul. Technically speaking, we could expose only big contracts that at least some people have complained about.

Right, I was just using Ouellet and Ericsson to make the point that if there's a relatively big contract that McPhee would rather not take on, he'll have at least one cheaper alternative. I'm assuming that 9 times out of 10, he goes for the cheaper player.

We could, technically, expose only bigger contracts. But we all know there's absolutely no way that's happening, so I'm not sure it's even worth discussing.

8 minutes ago, Buppy said:

My point was more about deflecting the idea that making a trade to dump or protect a player is not the great move people are going to think it is. It would at best be a mostly irrelevant move.

I mean, if they'd take a 3rd for Abdelkader, that could end up helping us in the long run. We're not in the throes of an apocalyptic cap hell, but, at the same time, you can never have too much cap flexibility.

I get where you're coming from, though, and I don't entirely disagree.

[Dabura 12,207]

11 minutes ago, Dabura said:

Right, I was just using Ouellet and Ericsson to make the point that if there's a relatively big contract that McPhee would rather not take on, he'll have at least one cheaper alternative. I'm assuming that 9 times out of 10, he goes for the cheaper player.

Actually, I'm gonna call bulls**** on myself here. I hadn't really given the expansion draft much thought until today, in terms of possible scenarios. Now that I really think about it...sure, I could maybe see Vegas taking Helm/Abdelkader/DeKeyser over a younger, cheaper option. Though, I'm sure at least two of those three will be protected.

Edited April 13, 2017 by Dabura

[chaps80 1,591]

12 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

Nielsen only has a nmc the first year. If a team is dumb enough to take him he can be moved once the new league year starts.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

Cool, didn't know that. Does his NMC reduce to an NTC or M-NTC though, or is he completely moveable anywhere?

[chaps80 1,591]

4 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

He has a full NMC next season too. His modified NTC kicks in 2018-19.

s***ty buzz. Kenny gave him every damn incentive to sign  in Detroit huh? Besides bonuses, but knowing Kenny, he probably slipped him a huge stack of hundreds under the table. It's Frans Nielsen ffs, not John Tavares. Lol Not his money though, he doesn't give a s***.

Edited April 13, 2017 by chaps80

[DickieDunn 2,571]

Yeah I thought I read the nmc was only the first year. Makes a dumb deal dumber.

Vegas will have to hit the cap floor, they might take a guy like Helm.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[kliq 3,755]

2 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

Yeah I thought I read the nmc was only the first year. Makes a dumb deal dumber.

Vegas will have to hit the cap floor, they might take a guy like Helm.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

Not sure I understand your point? Are you saying it was dumb of holland to only give a NMC on the first year opposed to all the years? Sure we all would rather there not be one at all, but I fail to see how one year of a NMC is dumber the 5 years with a NMC? Or am I missing something?

[DickieDunn 2,571]

Not sure I understand your point? Are you saying it was dumb of holland to only give a NMC on the first year opposed to all the years? Sure we all would rather there not be one at all, but I fail to see how one year of a NMC is dumber the 5 years with a NMC? Or am I missing something?

I was mistaken. It's 2 years of nmc. Dumb.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[derblaueClaus 1,668]

16 hours ago, chaps80 said:

At the trade deadline, swap Green for picks and try to convince Nielson to waive his NMC and then shop him. I'm sure at 33 he'd like a shot at a Cup. He'll probably be impossible to move, but Holland should try. Ditto for Howard if he can stay healthy and play well. Again though, probably unmovable.

Not at all. Holland just needs to retain some salary. About 1 Mil. don't hurt us and should be more than enough to make him palatable.

[Buppy 1,720]

3 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

I was mistaken. It's 2 years of nmc. Dumb.

Technically it's 6 years, but with some trade options the last 4. But people need to stop crying about NTCs, they're practically meaningless. If a player is performing so bad that you really want to get rid of them, that is going to limit your trade options as much or more than a NTC. 

Nielsen's contract is fine. Standard fare for a FA of his level. It's not the contract anyone should object to, it was signing him at all given our situation.

[krsmith17 7,191]

No contract is untradeable. If Holland really wanted to, he could easily move Ericsson and Howard this summer. Howard likely will be moved, whether it be through the expansion draft or trade to another team. I'm one of the few that doesn't think Ericsson or his contract is awful. I think he's a decent 3rd pairing defenseman that is mildly overpaid. He could easily be moved, I just don't think Holland wants to move him.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

41 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

No contract is untradeable. If Holland really wanted to, he could easily move Ericsson and Howard this summer. Howard likely will be moved, whether it be through the expansion draft or trade to another team. I'm one of the few that doesn't think Ericsson or his contract is awful. I think he's a decent 3rd pairing defenseman that is mildly overpaid. He could easily be moved, I just don't think Holland wants to move him.

No

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

No

No what? No he shouldn't or no he won't?

I'd say yes he should, and likely will. Definitely a possibility we at least start the season with both again though...

[LeftWinger 4,959]

40 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

No what? No he shouldn't or no he won't?

I'd say yes he should, and likely will. Definitely a possibility we at least start the season with both again though...

He's saying no because he's team Jimmy.

But ya, Howard will be moved and i believe Ryan Miller will be signed as the veteran backup to play behind Petr. Which means Drew will be re-signed as well. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

2 minutes ago, LeftWinger said:

He's saying no because he's team Jimmy.

But ya, Howard will be moved and i believe Ryan Miller will be signed as the veteran backup to play behind Petr. Which means Drew will be re-signed as well. 

Why? And WHY? No thanks on Ryan, unless he comes extremely cheap (he won't). And hell no to Drew...

[LeftWinger 4,959]

Just by listening to Holland, I get that feeling he's looking at getting that type veteran backup to be behind Petr. Just a sense I get i guess.

[kliq 3,755]

5 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

I was mistaken. It's 2 years of nmc. Dumb.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

I still don't understand your point? So are you now saying it was dumb of holland to only give a NMC on the first two years opposed to all the years? 

[DangleDangleBeach 16]

13 hours ago, NerveDamage said:

So does the team that loses a player to Vegas get anything in return? aside from that salary being freed up, I guess...

Don't think on like a per player basis they get anything aside from the cap relief, as you stated; however, I think Vegas did fork up something like 500 mill for expansions fees, which goes to the other owners from what I remember. 

Edited April 14, 2017 by DangleDangleBeach
Grammar.

[DangleDangleBeach 16]

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Why? And WHY? No thanks on Ryan, unless he comes extremely cheap (he won't). And hell no to Drew...

But they're a package deal! Lol. 

I personally don't see why Vegas would want Jimmy. I actually for the more part liked what I saw from him this year, but he hasn't been able to stay healthy consistently. Furthermore, there are other solid goalies who will be available who have, so I just don't see it personally. 

Also don't think he will be traded. Too big of a contract and too much uncertainty as to how many games he can play for ya. Jimmy will be back imo, for better or for worse. Like I say, I actually think when he was healthy he gave the team a chance to win this year more often than not. 

[kliq 3,755]

15 minutes ago, DangleDangleBeach said:

But they're a package deal! Lol. 

I personally don't see why Vegas would want Jimmy. I actually for the more part liked what I saw from him this year, but he hasn't been able to stay healthy consistently. Furthermore, there are other solid goalies who will be available who have, so I just don't see it personally. 

Also don't think he will be traded. Too big of a contract and too much uncertainty as to how many games he can play for ya. Jimmy will be back imo, for better or for worse. Like I say, I actually think when he was healthy he gave the team a chance to win this year more often than not. 

You may not be wrong, but if I am being fair here are the pro's and con's

Pro's

• When Healthy Jimmy is a very good goalie
• Is only under contract for two more years, can be used to help mentor a young goaltender
• Will Help them get to the cap floor
• Only under contract for 2 more years, so not a long term investment

 

Con's

• Injury Prone
• Possibly better veteran choices out there (ie. Fleury,)
• Depending on who else they draft, cap hit could be an issue
• Overpaid for a injury prone goaltender

[DickieDunn 2,571]

Ok. Ignore what I was saying. Nielsen shouldn't be a Red Wing if the goal was winning a Cup anytime soon. Period.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk