krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted July 21, 2017 15 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said: Pretty sure you need to prevent goals to win too Sent by my keyboard via typing True, but not every player should be defense first. We need some more offense first wingers. I'm hoping we allow Mantha to play his game, and do what he does best, score goals. 1 BadgerBob reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted July 21, 2017 1 minute ago, krsmith17 said: True, but not every player should be defense first. We need some more offense first wingers. I'm hoping we allow Mantha to play his game, and do what he does best, score goals. When I knocked Tippett for being one-dimensional, it wasn't because of his defense, but what a few writers said about him. He tries to rush the puck up the ice quickly and shoot, or receive the puck and drive to the center lane and shoot. That's 100% of his offensive game. Go towards the net and shoot. That's a good quality to have in a player, but it's utterly one-dimensional... and the rest of his game is lacking. His board work is not good and his ability to cycle the puck is not good. Make fast. Much shoot. Then you have Rasmussen who is also a great skater, who also has soft hands, but who also brings a lot more to the table, and is described as a coaches dream for his ability to be deployed in all situations. A much more versatile player than Tippett. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jacksoni 418 Report post Posted July 21, 2017 10 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said: When I knocked Tippett for being one-dimensional, it wasn't because of his defense, but what a few writers said about him. He tries to rush the puck up the ice quickly and shoot, or receive the puck and drive to the center lane and shoot. That's 100% of his offensive game. Go towards the net and shoot. That's a good quality to have in a player, but it's utterly one-dimensional... and the rest of his game is lacking. His board work is not good and his ability to cycle the puck is not good. Make fast. Much shoot. Then you have Rasmussen who is also a great skater, who also has soft hands, but who also brings a lot more to the table, and is described as a coaches dream for his ability to be deployed in all situations. A much more versatile player than Tippett. Like Sheahan. Great. 1 F.Michael reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kliq 3,755 Report post Posted July 21, 2017 17 minutes ago, Jacksoni said: Like Sheahan. Great. Just because a Rasmussen has similar characteristics to another player who didn't develop the way we hoped, doesnt mean that Rasmussen is going to go down the same path. Not saying he was the best pick (I admit I wanted Vilardi), but Holland cant say "I dont want Rasmussen because Sheahan was a flop". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted July 21, 2017 22 minutes ago, Jacksoni said: Like Sheahan. Great. More like Eric Lindros Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy Pred 48 337 Report post Posted July 21, 2017 7 hours ago, krsmith17 said: I'm confused. Aren't you doing just that with Adams? Looking at his great stats in college and massive size and assuming he could develop into a top line winger? I think Adams could be a steal too. Not many 6th rounders become NHLers, and I think he could develop into a decent bottom 6 guy, if we're lucky. I just think it's a tad unrealistic to think he could become a top 6 forward. Sure, he could (I hope he does), but that's very unlikely. I think Rasmussen will be a reliable two-way center. I have my doubts that he'll ever become anything more than a middle 6 center, although I hope he becomes a stud number one in the mold of a Getzlaf... that is the point KR, anyone can do anything with figures and make them work how they want them to come across, i was using Adams as an example. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted July 21, 2017 1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said: When I knocked Tippett for being one-dimensional, it wasn't because of his defense, but what a few writers said about him. He tries to rush the puck up the ice quickly and shoot, or receive the puck and drive to the center lane and shoot. That's 100% of his offensive game. Go towards the net and shoot. That's a good quality to have in a player, but it's utterly one-dimensional... and the rest of his game is lacking. His board work is not good and his ability to cycle the puck is not good. Make fast. Much shoot. Then you have Rasmussen who is also a great skater, who also has soft hands, but who also brings a lot more to the table, and is described as a coaches dream for his ability to be deployed in all situations. A much more versatile player than Tippett. I think there's a middle ground for both Tippett and Rasmussen. You and LeftWinger are the two extremes for both. I doubt either will be bad NHLers, and it's highly likely that neither will be "great" NHLers. I think Tippett has a higher ceiling, and I would have preferred him over Rasmussen (though Vilardi was who I wanted), but I hope Rasmussen exceeds expectations. 25 minutes ago, Andy Pred 48 said: that is the point KR, anyone can do anything with figures and make them work how they want them to come across, i was using Adams as an example. Not sure what you were getting at, but okay... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted July 21, 2017 1 minute ago, krsmith17 said: I think there's a middle ground for both Tippett and Rasmussen. You and LeftWinger are the two extremes for both. I doubt either will be bad NHLers, and it's highly likely that neither will be "great" NHLers. I think Tippett has a higher ceiling, and I would have preferred him over Rasmussen (though Vilardi was who I wanted), but I hope Rasmussen exceeds expectations. Not sure what you were getting at, but okay... Tippett better invest in some Banana Boat Kids SPF100, cause those Florida burns on that eggshell skin are gonna hurt extra bad when Big Ras tumbles him into the boards Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SwedeLundin77 460 Report post Posted July 21, 2017 (edited) Apparently we have a 2nd buyout window since Tatar elected Arbitration. We could potentially buyout Ericsson. Buyout Details SEASON SALARY INITIAL CAP HIT ACTUAL COST SAVINGS BUYOUT CAP HIT 2017-18 $4,000,000 $4,250,000 $1,388,889 $2,611,111 $1,638,889 2018-19 $4,250,000 $4,250,000 $1,388,889 $2,861,111 $1,388,889 2019-20 $4,250,000 $4,250,000 $1,388,889 $2,861,111 $1,388,889 2020-21 $0 $0 $1,388,889 -$1,388,889 $1,388,889 2021-22 $0 $0 $1,388,889 -$1,388,889 $1,388,889 2022-23 $0 $0 $1,388,889 -$1,388,889 $1,388,889 Sorry the last number is what is most important... that's the cap hit for the next six seasons. The 2nd column from the right would be our savings, so it would buy us 2.6-2.8 million in extra cap the next 3 seasons. Edited July 21, 2017 by SwedeLundin77 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kliq 3,755 Report post Posted July 21, 2017 12 minutes ago, SwedeLundin77 said: Apparently we have a 2nd buyout window since Tatar elected Arbitration. We could potentially buyout Ericsson. Buyout Details SEASON SALARY INITIAL CAP HIT ACTUAL COST SAVINGS BUYOUT CAP HIT 2017-18 $4,000,000 $4,250,000 $1,388,889 $2,611,111 $1,638,889 2018-19 $4,250,000 $4,250,000 $1,388,889 $2,861,111 $1,388,889 2019-20 $4,250,000 $4,250,000 $1,388,889 $2,861,111 $1,388,889 2020-21 $0 $0 $1,388,889 -$1,388,889 $1,388,889 2021-22 $0 $0 $1,388,889 -$1,388,889 $1,388,889 2022-23 $0 $0 $1,388,889 -$1,388,889 $1,388,889 Sorry the last number is what is most important... that's the cap hit for the next six seasons. The 2nd column from the right would be our savings, so it would buy us 2.6-2.8 million in extra cap the next 3 seasons. I see zero reason to buy out E this year...we do that and all we have to show for it in the short term is an extra 4 mil in cap space that will remain unused. If next off season we cant move him AND we need the money, then I am open to it. Plus it saves us a year against the cap. 2 Son of a Wing and krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SwedeLundin77 460 Report post Posted July 21, 2017 4 minutes ago, kliq said: I see zero reason to buy out E this year...we do that and all we have to show for it in the short term is an extra 4 mil in cap space that will remain unused. If next off season we cant move him AND we need the money, then I am open to it. Plus it saves us a year against the cap. We can't do the same buyout next year, it's a one time option unless Larkin or Mantha elect arbitration (under CBA rules). It gets a pretty useless player off of our roster and gives Sproul a better chance to show what he can do and if he's worth investing more time and development in. Ericsson does nothing for this roster. 1 marcaractac reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted July 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, SwedeLundin77 said: We can't do the same buyout next year, it's a one time option unless Larkin or Mantha elect arbitration (under CBA rules). It gets a pretty useless player off of our roster and gives Sproul a better chance to show what he can do and if he's worth investing more time and development in. Ericsson does nothing for this roster. No need. Sproul is garbage. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 4,963 Report post Posted July 22, 2017 3 hours ago, SwedeLundin77 said: We can't do the same buyout next year, it's a one time option unless Larkin or Mantha elect arbitration (under CBA rules). It gets a pretty useless player off of our roster and gives Sproul a better chance to show what he can do and if he's worth investing more time and development in. Ericsson does nothing for this roster. There is always a buyout period for teams, but there's the 2nd if a player elects arbitration. Larkin and Mantha are not arbitration eligible, but Sheahan, Sproul and Mrazek are. I'm sure with three players eligible, we'll get the 2nd buyout period. 1 krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SwedeLundin77 460 Report post Posted July 22, 2017 5 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said: No need. Sproul is garbage. Sproul hasn't had a chance to be consistently in the lineup... and he won't unless we move some players. 1 krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kliq 3,755 Report post Posted July 22, 2017 8 hours ago, SwedeLundin77 said: We can't do the same buyout next year, it's a one time option unless Larkin or Mantha elect arbitration (under CBA rules). It gets a pretty useless player off of our roster and gives Sproul a better chance to show what he can do and if he's worth investing more time and development in. Ericsson does nothing for this roster. I don't buy the Sproul argument. If management and coaching staff want Sproul playing over E, all they have to do is waive E, or make him a healthy scratch. Also, they can buy him out next year. What you are thinking of is the Second buyout Window. See below: When can a team buy out a contract? There are two different answers to this question. The first is the most common - the regular buyout window. The start of this window shifts - it is either June 15th or 48 hours after the Cup is awarded, whichever is later. This window ends at 5pm EST on June 30th, just in time to let the dust settle before free agency starts. The second is a window related to arbitration, and it carries some extra restrictions. For this window to open, the team has to have a player that filed for arbitration. This window opens on the third day after the team's last arbitration is concluded (or settled, if it doesn't make it to a hearing) and is open for 48 hours. There are also restrictions on which players can be bought out - First, the player has to have been on the reserve list as of the last trade deadline (so no buying out that off-season signing you regret until the next trade deadline). Second, there is a minimum cap value for a contract to be eligible for this - $2.75m AAV initially, but the value goes up based on the average league salary each year. The notable absence in those restrictions is that it has nothing to do with who went to arbitration, any player who meets those two restrictions can be bought out. There's one last catch, though - this can only be done three times by each team. Not three times per year - three times over the entire length of the current CBA. The one exception to this extra window is when the only arbitration case is team-elected, and that player earned more than $1,750,000 (in 2013 dollars - it's adjusted up based on league average salary) in the previous season. In that specific case, the window does not open. Note: There was originally a third answer mentioned here but upon further investigation, the section of the CBA it was drawn from was referring to the arbitration buyout window and not a third buyout option. We apologize for this error. https://www.silversevensens.com/2015/6/10/8737195/nhl-buyout-rules-refresher-guide Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jacksoni 418 Report post Posted July 22, 2017 Waiving Ericsson and putting Kronwall on LTIR would for me, seem to be the optimal approach for this team, allowing the young defensive 'prospects' to play. Ericsson would almost certainly clear waivers and could be a veteran presence in the AHL. If he accepts that role, I have no idea about that. Doubt it. Kronwall is proud and tough-nosed, it'd be hard to make him agree to go on long term injury, unless he realizes he's done for. Perhaps stress him a little, make him play heavy preseason games. If he sees that he can't compete effectively, maybe he'll agree on the LTIR. Speculative but that's what I would do. And I'd see what he could bring to the team if the knee holds up. I have no belief what so ever that these events will happen though. Well well, Ericsson was our best defender the first 5 games last season in my opinion, maybe we can get another 5 good ones. But he is done for, he's way too slow for the NHL, which forces him to stay in position and keep large buffers on defense, which in turn renders him mostly useless in todays game. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted July 22, 2017 And of course he can't learn to do anything elaeSent by my minions via telepathy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted July 22, 2017 17 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said: No need. Sproul is garbage. You're garbage... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 4,963 Report post Posted July 22, 2017 According to Custance, Detroit not going to use buyout option. Also says nothing imminent in the AA negotiations. But hey, we got Helm. 1 SwedeLundin77 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted July 22, 2017 22 minutes ago, LeftWinger said: According to Custance, Detroit not going to use buyout option. Also says nothing imminent in the AA negotiations. But hey, we got Helm. Good news. 1 kliq reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kliq 3,755 Report post Posted July 22, 2017 3 minutes ago, krsmith17 said: Good news. Agreed, there is no need to spread E's cap hit over the next 6 years just to have empty cap space this year or to bring in a guy like Vanek. 2 Rick D and krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SwedeLundin77 460 Report post Posted July 22, 2017 7 minutes ago, kliq said: Agreed, there is no need to spread E's cap hit over the next 6 years just to have empty cap space this year or to bring in a guy like Vanek. Wonder if E will start on LTIR and that helps with that decision. He's just such a worthless player to have on the cap at over 4 million for another 3 seasons. Even if he plays, he'll only get worse from here. 36 minutes ago, LeftWinger said: According to Custance, Detroit not going to use buyout option. Also says nothing imminent in the AA negotiations. But hey, we got Helm. I just cannot figure out what's holding up AA's re-signing... Should be fairly straightforward. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kliq 3,755 Report post Posted July 22, 2017 16 minutes ago, SwedeLundin77 said: I just cannot figure out what's holding up AA's re-signing... Should be fairly straightforward. Its not as urgent, so my guess is they wanted Tatar signed first to give themselves a better idea of the cap. 1 krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted July 22, 2017 3 hours ago, kliq said: Its not as urgent, so my guess is they wanted Tatar signed first to give themselves a better idea of the cap. Yeah, there's absolutely no rush on Athanasiou's contract. Wouldn't be surprised if it's another month or so before the deal gets done. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MileHighWingsGuy 178 Report post Posted July 22, 2017 50 minutes ago, krsmith17 said: Yeah, there's absolutely no rush on Athanasiou's contract. Wouldn't be surprised if it's another month or so before the deal gets done. Kind of funny Vanek and AA were my favorite two Wings to watch last year. They could care less about getting AA done quickly and Vanek likely won't be signed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites