Tatar, Athanasiou, and XO's new deals

[DickieDunn 2,571]

13 hours ago, kickazz said:

Denial is the first step

Ok but do you understand that you are wrong about AA not beng able to go to camp? Or not? That you're purely speculating that they will somehow purposely not bring AA to camp when they have every ability to do so. (unless they are trading him and don't care to bring him to camp)

if he isn't signed he isn't going to camp

12 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Umm yeah... What's your point? You must have missed the post where I mentioned all the players that are guaranteed a spot in both Detroit and Grand Rapids...

None of those guys, except maybe Russo, have any real shot of being NHL players.  Any or all can be let go with no consequences.

11 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Man, if Holland waives Sproul, he really needs to go. His inability to manage the cap is getting out of hand. I know we haven't lost any players of much significance to waivers yet, but we did just waive Jensen last season (luckily he cleared). He went from being waived, to one of our 3 protected defensemen in the expansion draft, to a fixture in our top 4. It took Jensen that long to prove his worth and Sproul is two years younger. To give up on him now would be terrible asset management. But of course, best case scenario for him here would be our 7th defenseman and play sporadically anyway, so he'd be better off waived and claimed by a team that would actually give him a shot...

Sproul might be as good as Brett Lebda someday.  Regardless of his potential when he was drafted, he hasn't come close to it.

[krsmith17 7,191]

4 hours ago, Buppy said:

I guess all that stuff about him playing in GR was just your clever method of misdirection so I wouldn't see that "we'll have to guarantee him an NHL spot" bomb coming. But regardless, that isn't a reason for us to not pursue him, it's a reason for him to not choose us.

We don't know that we wouldn't offer him an opportunity. Don't know for sure that we aren't pursuing him, or if we aren't, exactly why. Could just as easily be because we have already been told he wouldn't come here. 

Daley may not have been a depth signing, but he pushes others down the depth chart, as you have said yourself when arguing that we shouldn't have signed him. And was Sulak signed to play the rest of his career in Europe, or are we now just going to say that the whole depth thing only counts this year?

Sure, we have a bunch of guys that could potentially play the 3rd pair. So why exactly should that mean we shouldn't want that group to be as good as possible? Why shouldn't someone get an opportunity to show that they're better than what we currently have?

Your reasoning seems to boil down to: 'Because he'd be worse than what we have but for some unfathomable reason he'd still take a spot away from someone better.'

I said right from the beginning that if he were signed, he would likely expect to start in the NHL. All that stuff about him playing in Grand Rapids was just to point out that I wouldn't want him taking ice time down there either. The Daley signing and my reasoning for not liking it was exactly that, he pushed everyone else down the depth chart. And the same would go for Butcher being signed. And no, that doesn't necessarily mean he would be better than everyone pushed down below him. If Butcher were signed, Hronek and Saarijarvi would be below him for sure, despite both having much higher ceilings and possibly even being better right now.

The bolded is exactly the point I argued with the Daley signing and a huge reason we shouldn't sign Butcher. Of course players should be given every opportunity to prove they're better than whatever coaching / management have them pigeon-holed. The Daley signing took an opportunity away from the likes of Ouellet or Sproul, and signing Butcher would likely take an opportunity away from Hronek, Saarijarvi or someone else deserving.

Butcher's camp said that Detroit was high on his list of landing spots. So what changed in the past couple weeks? Maybe he realized Detroit would be a horrible choice because there are way too many defensemen fighting for one or two spots. There are 8-10 defensemen vying for spots in both Detroit and Grand Rapids.

Like I said, too much depth can definitely be a bad thing, otherwise, why not just go out and sign Polak as well? If we could trade Hicketts (who I think is a similar style player) and then sign Butcher, I guess I'd be okay with it, but I'm not okay with just signing Butcher. It makes no sense to me.

My reasoning to not sign Butcher boils down to, we don't have room for him on the NHL roster or the AHL roster, we don't have the cap space (still trying to sign our own RFA), we have more than enough similar depth players, and I just don't think he will be that good. He's a diminutive defenseman, former 5th round pick, that put up less than stellar numbers in 4 seasons of NCAA hockey. I honestly can't think of a single reason I would want to sign him right now...

[krsmith17 7,191]

5 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

if he isn't signed he isn't going to camp

None of those guys, except maybe Russo, have any real shot of being NHL players.  Any or all can be let go with no consequences.

Sproul might be as good as Brett Lebda someday.  Regardless of his potential when he was drafted, he hasn't come close to it.

Russo? Seriously? So you think he has a shot at being an NHL player, but not Hicketts, Hronek or Saarijarvi? I'd put Russo at the bottom of that list despite being closer to being NHL ready now.

Sproul has played a whopping 28 games in the NHL, and has 7 points, has looked very impressive in a few games, and very bad in a few, which is to be expected of a player just entering the league. 0.25 points per game isn't anything to scoff at for a young defenseman. He still has the potential to be a solid top 4 (at worst bottom pair) offensive defenseman. The fact that you're ready to give up on him after 28 games is asinine to me.

[DickieDunn 2,571]

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Russo? Seriously? So you think he has a shot at being an NHL player, but not Hicketts, Hronek or Saarijarvi? I'd put Russo at the bottom of that list despite being closer to being NHL ready now.

Sproul has played a whopping 28 games in the NHL, and has 7 points, has looked very impressive in a few games, and very bad in a few, which is to be expected of a player just entering the league. 0.25 points per game isn't anything to scoff at for a young defenseman. He still has the potential to be a solid top 4 (at worst bottom pair) offensive defenseman. The fact that you're ready to give up on him after 28 games is asinine to me.

I was referring to your list of guys who were "guaranteed" to make the Griffins roster.  None of them should be if a younger player shows the ability to push them out.  None of the older guys have any real chance of playing a meaningful number of NHL games going forward.  Of course, it IS Uncle Kenny's Red Wings, so there really isn't much chance of them getting cut loose, because LOYALTY

Sproul is 24 years old and has only played 28 NHL games because of his poor defensive play in the AHL.  Scoring 7 points in those 28 games isn't that impressive when he's been as bad in his own zone as he has been.  Not everyone needs to be a shutdown defender and the best defense is a good offense, they should be competent at least.  And potential to be a bottom pair offensive d-man is exactly what Lebderp was.  As far as top 4?  Only if he takes a miraculously big step forward in his development, and then probably only for a team lacking a real top 4 player.

Edited August 18, 2017 by DickieDunn

[kickazz 5,459]

4 hours ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Our team blows.  Smith at 4.35 million is going to look mighty good to Wings fans about 20 games in this year.

He's on a contending team now, if he doesn't look good that would be laughable. 

[Buppy 1,720]

6 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

... I honestly can't think of a single reason I would want to sign him right now...

The logic just doesn't make any sense to me at all. That you think you have his potential pegged when you probably don't know a single thing about him is bad enough. Then thinking that he isn't good, but will win a spot regardless is worse. Thinking that winning a spot would come at the expense of someone you think is better is just mind boggling.

 

2 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

...Sproul is 24 years old and has only played 28 NHL games because of his poor defensive play in the AHL.  Scoring 7 points in those 28 games isn't that impressive when he's been as bad in his own zone as he has been.  Not everyone needs to be a shutdown defender and the best defense is a good offense, they should be competent at least.  ....

7 points in 28 games isn't that impressive, period. Defensive play is not Sproul's only problem. His AHL scoring wasn't even that great, and he hasn't developed much at all in 3 years. Mediocre NHL scoring and terrible metrics (especially for a kid so sheltered) on top of that, and we should be starting to think that maybe Sproul just isn't very good offensively, rather than perpetuate this myth that the Wings don't value offense.

[MileHighWingsGuy 178]

20 hours ago, Never_Retire_Steve said:

I'm really sad about this because signing guys like this should be a pretty easy task yet here we are discussing all these things that need to fall into place to get AA signed and it's solely due to incompetence from the FO.

I'll never understand the dysfunctional relationship with the front office towards some of these kids ready to tear it up and the undying loyalty to veteran unproductive guys. Its criminal AA wasn't one of the first priorities and taken care of months ago. I love the Wings but their management makes me want to see them fail to facilitate new management and direction.

[kipwinger 8,518]

On 8/18/2017 at 3:57 PM, Buppy said:

7 points in 28 games isn't that impressive, period. Defensive play is not Sproul's only problem. His AHL scoring wasn't even that great, and he hasn't developed much at all in 3 years. Mediocre NHL scoring and terrible metrics (especially for a kid so sheltered) on top of that, and we should be starting to think that maybe Sproul just isn't very good offensively, rather than perpetuate this myth that the Wings don't value offense.

This.  I remember Sproul looking really good in exactly one game, against Tampa in November when he scored a goal and an assist.  Both came on the powerplay where he was used in the Ovechkin spot on the left side.  That's pretty much optimal deployment for him and he produced, but otherwise I've never really noticed him that much.  He'd definitely need to shape up his 5 on 5 play before he'd be anything I'd worry about losing.  I suppose it's possible he's another Justin Schultz and just needs the right situation/team and a little more seasoning.  But more likely he's Brendan Smith all over again.  An "offensive" defenseman who never scores any offense.