• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

PavelValerievichDatsyuk

Tatar, Athanasiou, and XO's new deals

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, joesuffP said:

Tatar is very good secondary scorer. Pretty much the exact same player and impact as Hudler

I can agree with this post regarding Tatar and Hudler offensively.  Tatar isn't always the slowest guy on the ice like Hudler, though, so I don't think he's not as much of a defensive liability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:


They didn't "let" him walk, he had no desire to come back.

Sent by my minions via telepathy
 

To me the letting Filpulla go is more of a "Why didn't we flip Filp at the deadline?" rather than "Why didn't we re-sign him?"  ...but that's the nature of being a "contender."  Keeping those pending UFAs for the playoffs and then losing them to Free Agency.  ...but if you know he had no desire to come back, then it truly is a question of why didn't you trade him??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, e_prime said:

To me the letting Filpulla go is more of a "Why didn't we flip Filp at the deadline?" rather than "Why didn't we re-sign him?"  ...but that's the nature of being a "contender."  Keeping those pending UFAs for the playoffs and then losing them to Free Agency.  ...but if you know he had no desire to come back, then it truly is a question of why didn't you trade him??

From what I've heard he did want to come back. He came back and asked hill and for the deal he was originally offered. Holland declined, as he already spent the money on Weiss. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Euro_Twins said:

From what I've heard he did want to come back. He came back and asked hill and for the deal he was originally offered. Holland declined, as he already spent the money on Weiss. 

Wait, Holland offered him a contract, he didn't accept, then when he wants the offered contract, it's no longer on the table? No.....that never happens <cough cough> Fedorov <cough cough>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course offers are time sensitive. Lots of decisions have to be made over short periods of time. That's not on the Wings that he decided to change his mind or retract his demands. He made that mistake and both sides ending up losing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Euro_Twins said:

From what I've heard he did want to come back. He came back and asked hill and for the deal he was originally offered. Holland declined, as he already spent the money on Weiss. 

Yeah, He just wanted to check out free agency and talk to other teams to see what options are out there.

This is why it's so good that there's now that period before free agency when players get to talk to all teams before committing. If that was around then, we'd have Filppula, we wouldn't have signed Weiss - therefor we wouldn't have that buyout penalty for the next few years. And we probably wouldn't have signed Neilson, so we'd be in a better position with the cap.

Edited by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2017 at 2:45 PM, krsmith17 said:

I think a package of Nyquist / Tatar, Hronek / Saarijarvi, and a 2nd round pick could bring in a legit number 2/3 defenseman. I think we'd have to use one of Athanasiou / Svechnikov to have a chance at a number one defenseman though. And I'm talking young guys with potential, not established guys in their prime.

You are talking about Trouba and Fowler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, He just wanted to check out free agency and talk to other teams to see what options are out there.
This is why it's so good that there's now that period before free agency when players get to talk to all teams before committing. If that was around then, we'd have Filppula, we wouldn't have signed Weiss - therefor we wouldn't have that buyout penalty for the next few years. And we probably wouldn't have signed Neilson, so we'd be in a better position with the cap.


I didn't care less if Flip walked, but good points. No Weiss, probably no Nielson. God damn I hate that Nielson signing. With that term and length, and what he brings, it's immovable until the summer before the last season at best, or the last season's deadline to a contender looking for veteran scoring help (if the Wings are not contenders themselves again by then).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DickieDunn said:


They didn't "let" him walk, he had no desire to come back.

Sent by my minions via telepathy
 

After his 9 goals and 8 assists in 41 games he should have been too embarrassed to come back anyways. 

1 hour ago, PavelValerievichDatsyuk said:

Yeah, He just wanted to check out free agency and talk to other teams to see what options are out there.

This is why it's so good that there's now that period before free agency when players get to talk to all teams before committing. If that was around then, we'd have Filppula, we wouldn't have signed Weiss - therefor we wouldn't have that buyout penalty for the next few years. And we probably wouldn't have signed Neilson, so we'd be in a better position with the cap.

What makes you sure we wouldn't have bought out Filpula? His last stint with the Wings was terrible. He then went to a much better team and did okay. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, kickazz said:

After his 9 goals and 8 assists in 41 games he should have been too embarrassed to come back anyways. 

What makes you sure we wouldn't have bought out Filpula? His last stint with the Wings was terrible. He then went to a much better team and did okay. 

He wasnt any worse than Weiss or Nielsen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kickazz said:

After his 9 goals and 8 assists in 41 games he should have been too embarrassed to come back anyways. 

What makes you sure we wouldn't have bought out Filpula? His last stint with the Wings was terrible. He then went to a much better team and did okay. 

Weiss:   13-14: 24gp, 2g, 4pts     14-15: 52gp. 9g, 25pts     =29pts

Filppula:13-14: 75gp, 25g, 58pts 14-15: 82gp, 12g, 48pts   =106pts 

Filppula has never been an amazing player, but I think he would unquestionably have been a better option than Weiss. Much of Weiss' struggles and his eventual buyout were due to his extensive injury problems. It looks like Filppula has only missed 16 games in his 4 years away from the Wings. Some might be cursing his 5 mill caphit, but it wouldn't have been an unmoveable piece like Weiss. Just look at how the lightning traded him to the Flyers in anticipation of the expansion draft. They got Streit, and 4th + 7th round picks. I don't see any reason why he would have been bought out if we had re-signed him.

His last year in Detroit was pretty bad, but he had injured his medial collateral ligament in his right knee (had to look it up to remember the injury) during the lockout that year and never really got on track due to the injury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, PavelValerievichDatsyuk said:

Weiss:   13-14: 24gp, 2g, 4pts     14-15: 52gp. 9g, 25pts     =29pts

Filppula:13-14: 75gp, 25g, 58pts 14-15: 82gp, 12g, 48pts   =106pts 

Filppula has never been an amazing player, but I think he would unquestionably have been a better option than Weiss. Much of Weiss' struggles and his eventual buyout were due to his extensive injury problems. It looks like Filppula has only missed 16 games in his 4 years away from the Wings. Some might be cursing his 5 mill caphit, but it wouldn't have been an unmoveable piece like Weiss. Just look at how the lightning traded him to the Flyers in anticipation of the expansion draft. They got Streit, and 4th + 7th round picks. I don't see any reason why he would have been bought out if we had re-signed him.

His last year in Detroit was pretty bad, but he had injured his medial collateral ligament in his right knee (had to look it up to remember the injury) during the lockout that year and never really got on track due to the injury.

He did well on a stacked team, I'm not sure if he would do as well on our roster as he did on a cup finals/ conference finals team. He probably would not have been bought out here but I have a feeling people would not be happy with him on our roster. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, kickazz said:

He did well on a stacked team, I'm not sure if he would do as well on our roster as he did on a cup finals/ conference finals team. 

All true, but I'm not really arguing that he'd put up as many points as he did in TB or that he'd have been great here. The bar is lower when you're comparing with a guy that put up 29 points here over 2 years. I think people forget Weiss' injury woes and how little he actually played. Just based on health, I can't see any comparison between their situations. Buying out the guy who missed more than half the games for his 2 years is quite different than than someone who's underproducing for their contract. We have those guys and they've not been bought out.

Edited by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/14/2017 at 7:43 PM, kickazz said:

I think people see the "25 goal" mark from last season and are automatically assuming "great" goal scorer. But if you look at the full context, all of AA, Mantha, Tatar, Larkin, Vanek are one in the same in the goals department.

If we're looking at the "full context," we should be looking at more than just goal totals and goals-per-game rates.

VANEK

Vanek did what he did in an extremely sheltered role:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/thomas-vanek-traded-small-return/

Vanek started 49.5 percent of his shifts in the o-zone and 21.4 percent of his shifts in the d-zone. Despite this cushy deployment scheme, his possession numbers were poor:

https://s11.postimg.org/hqdpwzo8z/Story_40.png

(His CF% on the season was 47.5.)

Tatar started 31.8 percent of his shifts in the o-zone and 29 percent of his shifts in the d-zone. Despite the tougher deployment scheme, Tatar's possession numbers were better:

https://s9.postimg.org/ol2t5m5a7/Story_41.png

(CF%: 50.6.)

ATHANASIOU

For much of this past season, I really disliked how Blashill was handling AA. Towards the end of the season, I watched AA more closely and monitored his underlying numbers. I concluded that Blashill was fully justified in being hard on AA.

Let's look at zone starts again.

AA started 40.7 percent of his shifts in the o-zone and 25.9 percent of his shifts in the d-zone. Despite this cushy deployment scheme, his possession numbers were poor:

https://s14.postimg.org/6tbiywn0h/Story_42.png

https://s1.postimg.org/ywnl9amb3/Story_43.png

(CF%: 47.5.)

A lot of people will treat those charts as self-evident proof that AA is a great player. "If he scored that many goals in such a limited role, it only makes sense that increased ice time would lead to outstanding production, probably 60+ points."

Personally, I don't think it's safe to assume his numbers will scale up like that. IMO, AA's game is, at this time, immature and one-dimensional and problematic. If he's going to be hard-matched against top players next season, he's probably going to be a liability when the going gets tough.

Even if you take away Tatar's goals and assists, he -- Tatar -- is still an outstanding possession driver (i.e. not a liability):

https://s9.postimg.org/p46zhzfz3/Story_44.png

https://s2.postimg.org/jmq8d4kfd/Story_45.png

https://s4.postimg.org/aw0tr34el/Story_46.png

https://s22.postimg.org/a3d852h4x/Story_47.png

I think AA has a high ceiling. At this point in time, however, Tatar is the superior player. AA has to grow his game. He has a lot to prove.

MANTHA & LARKIN

They've arguably shown more promise than AA has shown, but the sample size is still incredibly small. At this point in time, Tatar is the better player. (I have to head out soon and am rushing this last bit.)

*     *     *

Mantha, Larkin, and Athanasiou are, I think, capable of surpassing Tatar. And if Tatar wants a mega deal, yeah, you're probably getting more bang for your buck with any of the aforementioned younger players. And that's not even considering the return that Tatar could bring in a trade. So, yeah -- if Tatar wants unreasonable money, I'm ok with signing the one-year deal and trading him.

But, like I've said before, we shouldn't be eager to part ways (unless his demands are unreasonable and he doesn't budge). "He's not a gamechanger and all of our kids are probably better than him anyway, so he's expendable" = "I don't fully understand and appreciate what we have in Tatar." He can score 25 goals and drive possession in a top-line role on a terrible possession team that can't score goals and doesn't have a functional power play and has a s*** blue line. (And it's worth noting that he only put up 8 points on the power play this season. Which is, to me, an indictment of the terrible power play.) He's a very good player. He's the kind of player you try to keep.

T.J. Oshie is a similar player and he just got $5.75M x 8. If we can get Tatar for just a bit less on the money side and two or three fewer years, I say that's a good deal (assuming his shoulder isn't A Thing). If that's what he's looking for and Holland feels our cap situation can't allow it, I'm going to call that mismanagement. Dump some salary! It's not like our roster is overloaded with "gamechangers" who'd leave gaping holes in our organizational depth chart.

On the other hand, if Holland has very good reason to believe he could get an exceptional return for Tatar on the trade market, maybe that does tip the scale in favor of moving him, even if he's asking for market value on this contract. That would be risky, though.

Edited by Dabura

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, what Dabura said.

Increasing ice time by 30% doesn't always, or even usually, lead to a 30% scoring increase because the increased ice time is usually against better competition.  

Nobody knows what younger players, even guys who have played in the NHL and have shown promise, are going to do long term.  They might get injured, or have off ice issues, or have some fatal flaw in their game that isn't evident in a small sample size.  You can't say "well, so in so is going to be better than what we have so we can lose this productive player."

The cap issues they're having now are a direct result of signing a bunch of guys to deals that are "maybe $500k or a million too much, but it's not THAT bad of an over payment, so it should be alright."  Which is what I said every time a deal like that was handed out, it all adds up and it will cause an issue eventually.  Glendening is making $800k too much, Abdelkader about $500k (unless he took less term, then his current hit is more palatable), Helm is $500k too much.  That's more than enough between them to avoid the cap issues.  Signing vets who aren't going to put the team over the top is the other issue.  They have $5.25 mil going to a 2nd line center that helped them to one of the worst records in the conference, and now $3.17 mil going to a defenseman who is going to be on the top pair by default but is probably a 2nd pair D on a good team.  We already had 2 of those guys in Dekeyser and Green.  This isn't a corporate budget where if you don't spend your allotment this year the bean counters will decide you don't need that much next year and will chop your budget.  They don't have to spend it just because they can.

Edited by DickieDunn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

In hindsight. At the time most were cool with it. It just sucked letting an asset walk for nothing.

Of course it's in hindsight.  It was 4 years ago. 

Peoples' opinions four years ago about Filppula are not relevant to the current conversation about Tatar.  I don't even remember if I posted anything about the Filppula/Weiss situation, but I'm not trying to say "I told you so."   We know now that it was clearly a mistake for Detroit to not re-sign Filppula.  If we're thinking that Tatar is an easily replaceable player, maybe the past situation with Filppula is a lesson learned to draw upon.

And, I don't think anyone is suggesting that Tatar will walk for nothing.  So, I think that's a different conversation as well.

Edited by barabbas16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now