Red Wings sign D Trevor Daley to 3 year, 3.166m/yr contract, includes NTC/Modified NTC.

[Dabura 12,207]

14 hours ago, kickazz said:

Might be one of your best posts I've seen. Solid points here.

1. People don't know Daley, are looking at his age (forgetting defenseman age is not equivalent to offense players) and judging.

2. Daley is easily our second best defenseman after Green.

3. He can play on all ends of the ice, and can play big minutes, including PK, PP (has a hell of a shot). 

4. Great puck moving defenseman

5. He's better than all of our young defenseman

6. Our "young" defenseman aren't that good, nor will they be. Sproul, XO are plugs (sorry guys I know some of ya'll are in denial but they aren't that good). Jensen is the only one with true potential without having major shortcomings on defense (which is the recipe for being an NHL defender). 

7. The young defenseman that COULD be good are still 2 years (probably more)  away (Saarijarvi, Cholowski, Hronek). Hicketts maybe 1-2 years. 

And the best point of all.

8. NHL is NOT a development league. If you're not already developed into an NHL ready player, then spend some more time in the minors. 

kickazz the kiss-ass.

[kickazz 5,459]

2 hours ago, Dabura said:

kickazz the kiss-ass.

[Dabura 12,207]

Just now, kickazz said:

I'm a straight male, bro. Calm thine cyberboner.

[kickazz 5,459]

4 minutes ago, Dabura said:

I'm a straight male, bro. Calm thine cyberboner.

Even straight males can cyberfun with straight males. No one would know

Edited July 3, 2017 by kickazz

[krsmith17 7,191]

9 hours ago, kickazz said:

I mean I like Sproul but I just don't see what the big deal is. Your whole premise is he "may be a top 4" with time. But if there is no guarantee then is it really worth it to sit here and invest in him and not make this team better with Daley? We obviously have bigger fish to fry. We need a long term 1D, two well developed Centers, we need our scoring wingers to put out more consistently. We need to be better on special teams and we need consistent goaltending. I don't see how Daley coming and and somehow taking some minutes away from Sproul (a guy who might not even be a top 4 or might be) is a bad thing. Sproul is such a small part of our issues; of this team. Daley is here to be an actual top 4 may be a top 2. Maybe we get into playoffs with his help, with Mike Greens help, with Dekeyser actually playing what his contract is worth, with Mantha, Larkin, AA having one more year under their belt, with Nyquist and Tatar being the 30 goals/60 point scorers they're supposed to be, with Blashill having more experience and actually getting more out of his players. 

Most of the pieces of our puzzle are there. The problem is we haven't been able to execute and put it all together. Our players aren't very good because they don't play at their ceiling. But if they did, we COULD be a good team. That's probably what Holland is thinking and the reason why he's not giving up on playoffs, on making a run. Maybe he thinks this team has the pieces and needs to execute fully. 

I'm not sure what the right answer is, I'm trying to think this through Hollands eyes. 

Yes I do think it is worth it to invest in your younger players with potential. And no, I don't think Daley in the lineup over Sproul makes this team THAT much better. What is realistic expectations for Daley at this point in his career? 60 games, 20 points? I don't think that would be out of the question for Sproul. I agree that we have bigger fish to fry, and Sproul likely wouldn't move the needle that much, but neither will Daley. For a team that should be rebuilding, we should be trying to figure out what we have in our younger players, not signing stop-gap vets that will not be part of the future. We should be making small improvements now to help the team in 3-5 years from now. If Sproul were able to produce in a top 4 role (I believe he could), his value would sky rocket. At some point you need to push them in the deep end to see if they sink or swim.

Again, having Daley in over Sproul is not the difference between the basement and making the playoffs. All of your other what if scenarios happen regardless whether or not we signed Daley. Look, I'm not Sproul's number one fan or anything, I'd be okay if we traded him or literally any defenseman on the roster or in the organization. But in order to trade any of them, they need to raise their stock, and to raise their stock, they need to be given an opportunity. An opportunity is all I'm suggesting he should get.

It might be sounding like I'm bashing Daley, but I'm not at all. I think he's a good defenseman, and this would be a GREAT signing for a playoff team. That we are not. However, I'd like to reiterate that I'm completely okay with this signing IF it's to replace one of Kronwall or Ericsson. If it's to keep one of the kids as a healthy scratch or to waive one of them, I think it's terrible asset management.

9 hours ago, puckbags said:

Sproul is never going to be a top 4, he will be a fringe 3rd pair/AHL'er. If they thought he had any top 4 potential they would've protected him. Daley isn't taking " minutes" from Sproul. Daley is good enough to play his own minutes. Sproul will have to play better and earn his 3rd pair minutes. 

Yup, not a single top 4 (potential top 4) defenseman was left unprotected in this expansion draft...

Edited July 3, 2017 by krsmith17

[xtrememachine1 795]

I'm pretty pleased with this deal.  Daley's made a difference on the Pens blueline the last couple seasons and he'll make a difference on ours.  Will it get us back into the playoffs?  Who knows?  I wish we had more cap space to solidify this defense a little more.

I understand it the popular belief that we should be "rebuilding" and "give the young guys a shot", but I don't think these are the right circumstances to do that.  Its not like we have defensive prospects that we're just chomping at the bit to get onto the big club and signing Daley screws that up.  We don't have the defenseman equivalent of Larkin, AA or Mantha just waiting in the wings, looking for a shot.  XO, Jensen, Sproul, don't show that same kind of potential.  Just throwing them out there to "see what they can do" is risky and a good way to ensure we're lottery picking again next June.  The AHL is where we should "see what they can do".    If their AHL numbers don't impress, why in the world would their NHL performance be any better?  I don't know, I feel like some people are just looking around for a place to lay down and die when things really are not THAT bad.  Give our young forwards a chance to carry this team.  If we have 6 train wrecks sitting on our blueline, how is that going to be helpful to them or our goaltending?  Veteran defensemen give you stability in a position that NEEDS stability.  They're a good bridge so when you do eventually sign or draft a really good defensemen they won't be walking into a disaster.

[joesuffP 1,746]

People are basically questioning management ability to judge their young players. Sproul not making this very weak lineup just shows where he stands within the organization. Personally rather have an established defensmen where we know what we're getting until the prospects are ready to jump into the NHL. Being an absolute train wreck on D will hold the team back and also won't help the Young D learn when they are just handed positions they don't deserve.

Wings don't have a problem letting players work through their struggles as they learn if they see potential. Just look at Smith. He was terrible until he hit the prime of his career which is arguably a 20 point defensmen. Says a lot about Sproul

Edited July 3, 2017 by joesuffP

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 hour ago, joesuffP said:

People are basically questioning management ability to judge their young players. Sproul not making this very weak lineup just shows where he stands within the organization. Personally rather have an established defensmen where we know what we're getting until the prospects are ready to jump into the NHL. Being an absolute train wreck on D will hold the team back and also won't help the Young D learn when they are just handed positions they don't deserve.

Wings don't have a problem letting players work through their struggles as they learn. Just look at Smith. He was terrible until he hit the prime of his career which is arguably a 20 point defensmen. Says a lot about Sproul

How dare they... No fan base has any right questioning management. They always do right, never make mistakes...

[joesuffP 1,746]

27 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

How dare they... No fan base has any right questioning management. They always do right, never make mistakes...

I was just saying, meant no offense. Personally think they've done a pretty good job of it. Rarely see any player Holland let walk turn into something substantial on any other team besides Eaves and of course... Hossa

Funny Hossa's LTIR situation makes the Franzen comparison continue

Edited July 3, 2017 by joesuffP

[kickazz 5,459]

9 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Yes I do think it is worth it to invest in your younger players with potential. And no, I don't think Daley in the lineup over Sproul makes this team THAT much better. What is realistic expectations for Daley at this point in his career? 60 games, 20 points? I don't think that would be out of the question for Sproul. I agree that we have bigger fish to fry, and Sproul likely wouldn't move the needle that much, but neither will Daley. For a team that should be rebuilding, we should be trying to figure out what we have in our younger players, not signing stop-gap vets that will not be part of the future. We should be making small improvements now to help the team in 3-5 years from now. If Sproul were able to produce in a top 4 role (I believe he could), his value would sky rocket. At some point you need to push them in the deep end to see if they sink or swim.

 

 

Well I'm glad you're not the GM then... Being worried about some possible career AHLer or bottom pairing defenseman that MIGHT become a top 4 and risking it for possible playoff contention would be the worst managing strategy. Especially when you're expected to bring revenue through ticket sales and playoff contention not only for the franchise but also for the city of Detroit. 

The second highlighted sentence, Daley was one of primary penalty killers for the Pittsburgh Penguins. He also quaterbacks the PP and plays top 2/3 defenseman minutes. Sproul isn't a Pker, he can play on the PP and he definitely is not even in the top 2 minutes range. It's apples and oranges. Daley is way more versatile, brings more to the team than Sproul does. If you honestly think Daley doesn't make this team better then you must not know Daley.. He's easily about to be one of our main penalty killers (something we definitely need with the possible Kronwall injury) and that is something Sproul CAN'T bring; like ever. 

The third higlighted sentence. We're not rebuilding. I think you're in denial bro lol. We're retooling. A team with 8+ long term contracts isn't a team that's rebuilding. They're looking to make playoffs in April 2018. 

 

Edited July 3, 2017 by kickazz

[DickieDunn 2,571]

With where the Wings are I'd rather take the chance that Sproul takes a step forward than sign a soon to be 34 year old to a 3 year deal. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

25 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Well I'm glad you're not the GM then... Being worried about some possible career AHLer or bottom pairing defenseman that MIGHT become a top 4 and risking it for possible playoff contention would be the worst managing strategy. Especially when you're expected to bring revenue through ticket sales and playoff contention not only for the franchise but also for the city of Detroit. 

The second highlighted sentence, Daley was one of primary penalty killers for the Pittsburgh Penguins. He also quaterbacks the PP and plays top 2/3 defenseman minutes. Sproul isn't a Pker, he can play on the PP and he definitely is not even in the top 2 minutes range. It's apples and oranges. Daley is way more versatile, brings more to the team than Sproul does. If you honestly think Daley doesn't make this team better then you must not know Daley.. He's easily about to be one of our main penalty killers (something we definitely need with the possible Kronwall injury) and that is something Sproul CAN'T bring; like ever. 

The third higlighted sentence. We're not rebuilding. I think you're in denial bro lol. We're retooling. A team with 8+ long term contracts isn't a team that's rebuilding. They're looking to make playoffs in April 2018. 

 

You really think having Daley In the lineup over Sproul moves the needle that much? I completely disagree. I'm also glad you aren't the GM, and wish Kenny weren't any longer either. This team needs a GM that isn't afraid to shake things up, and someone that looks beyond this season. Squeezing into the playoffs again does not help this organization. Unless Holland is able to pull off some magic (he's not), playoffs shouldn't even be a thought with this team.

[kickazz 5,459]

4 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

You really think having Daley In the lineup over Sproul moves the needle that much? I completely disagree. I'm also glad you aren't the GM, and wish Kenny weren't any longer either. This team needs a GM that isn't afraid to shake things up, and someone that looks beyond this season. Squeezing into the playoffs again does not help this organization. Unless Holland is able to pull off some magic (he's not), playoffs shouldn't even be a thought with this team.

Yes I do think having a defenseman that can kill penalties is better than having one that can't. I do think a defenseman that can play a top 2 role is better than one that can't. That's common sense. 

Making the playoffs does help the organization. It's called money. 

Edited July 3, 2017 by kickazz

[krsmith17 7,191]

15 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Yes I do think having a defenseman that can kill penalties is better than having one that can't. I do think a defenseman that can play a top 2 role is better than one that can't. That's common sense. 

Making the playoffs does help the organization. It's called money. 

Comprehension is hard. Never once said that Sproul is as good or better than Daley. What I'm saying is that Sproul isn't that much worse than Daley that we go from basement to playoff team. I would say Nyquist and Tatar are better than Svechnikov as well, but once again, replacing either with Svechnikov "would not move the needle that much". Common sense.

Great! Let's continue making the playoffs and getting bounced first round. You know what makes more money? Stanley Cups. The goal should always be the Stanley Cup, and when winning it all is no longer within reach, you SHOULD start trying to build it back up again. 

[kickazz 5,459]

6 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Comprehension is hard. Never once said that Sproul is as good or better than Daley. What I'm saying is that Sproul isn't that much worse than Daley that we go from basement to playoff team. I would say Nyquist and Tatar are better than Svechnikov as well, but once again, replacing either with Svechnikov "would not move the needle that much". Common sense.

Great! Let's continue making the playoffs and getting bounced first round. You know what makes more money? Stanley Cups. The goal should always be the Stanley Cup, and when winning it all is no longer within reach, you SHOULD start trying to build it back up again. 

I don't think you are comprehending what I'm saying so I'll say it again for the third time. Trevor Daley, can kill penalties, play on the PP, play top 2 minutes. He brings more to the team than Sproul does. And he's more versatile. Having someone who can do all those things generally goes a long way. 

Secondly, there's 30 whatever teams in the NHL and only one wins the Stanley Cup. But 16 teams get to make the playoffs. The odds of making the playoffs and making a crap ton of money FAR higher. Have you never gambled? You always play your best odds if you want to win your money. Holland is obviously going with the better odds, which believe it or not, is what a smart GM would do. 

You don't tank for 10 years and hope someday you might have the 1/30 chance of winning the Stanely Cup (MAYBE). 

Edited July 3, 2017 by kickazz

[krsmith17 7,191]

5 minutes ago, kickazz said:

I don't think you are comprehending what I'm saying so I'll say it again for the third time. Trevor Daley, can kill penalties, play on the PP, play top 2 minutes. He brings more to the team than Sproul does. And he's more versatile. Having someone who can do all those things generally goes a long way. 

Secondly, there's 30 whatever teams in the NHL and only one wins the Stanley Cup. But 16 teams get to make the playoffs. The odds of making the playoffs and making a crap ton of money FAR higher. Have you never gambled? You always play your best odds if you want to win your money. Holland is obviously going with the better odds, which believe it or not, is what a smart GM would do. 

You don't tank for 10 years and hope someday you might have the 1/30 chance of winning the Stanely Cup (MAYBE). 

So you do think one player can move the needle that much. In this case, I disagree. 

Since you brought up betting, according to Vegas, this team has an 80/1 (1.23%) chance to win the 2018 Stanley Cup as the team sits right now. Do you like those odds? Would you bet on those odds? Or would you rather do something to improve those odds before throwing all your chips in? 

Never mentioned a thing about tanking. I'm completely against actively tanking from the start of a season. What I am in favour of though is going through a proper rebuild. It is extremely difficult to retool on the fly without striking gold in the draft, landing a stud in the later rounds. I'm not convinced we have one of those this time around. Therefore, we should continue with the youth movement, get another top 10 pick or two, and make a couple trades to benefit the team now and in the future. Bringing in a veteran like Daley makes no sense to me, unless Kronwall or Ericsson weren't ready to go, which it appears they are now. Not a great signing for this team in my opinion.

[kickazz 5,459]

The odds of winning cup are terrible, but odds of making playoffs (which also nets revenue) is better. From a managerial perspective, I'd rather make the playoffs. From a fan perspective, obviously I'd want to win the cup. But Holland is a hired man, and I'm just a fan, and we both have different perspectives. 

And yeah, I think Daley makes this team better. Maybe enough to make the playoffs. But not him soley, with the right pairings he could provide DK or Green a good partner. I think he'll also be good for the younger D-men to learn from. Don't think this signing hurts the team at all. It's low cost and possibly high reward. We just got a top 2/ top 4 defenseman for 3 million something, that's a good deal. 

Edited July 3, 2017 by kickazz

[krsmith17 7,191]

17 minutes ago, kickazz said:

The odds of winning cup are terrible, but odds of making playoffs (which also nets revenue) is better. From a managerial perspective, I'd rather make the playoffs. From a fan perspective, obviously I'd want to win the cup. But Holland is a hired man, and I'm just a fan, and we both have different perspectives. 

And yeah, I think Daley makes this team better. Maybe enough to make the playoffs. But not him soley, with the right pairings he could provide DK or Green a good partner. I think he'll also be good for the younger D-men to learn from. Don't think this signing hurts the team at all. It's low cost and possibly high reward. We just got a top 2/ top 4 defenseman for 3 million something, that's a good deal. 

Great deal for the right team. I don't think we're the right team. Agree to disagree. I don't doubt Daley's ability, and I'm sure as long as he can stay healthy, he will be a solid defenseman. My issue is if he invertently takes a spot from one of Ouellet or Sproul. But whatever, it is what it is...

[DickieDunn 2,571]

Without Daley they probably miss the playoffs, have a better shot at a top 3 pick, and a guarantee of not falling too far back even if the lottery goes against them, and it ensures the younger D have more of a chance to play for a team that needs a rebuild.

With Daley they might make the playoffs, where they will probably be unceremoniously bounced in 5 games, costing them a shot at a top 3 pick and guaranteeing them a mid round pick which likely won't turn into the type of star they need, and the young D won't have time to develop.

And yes, players do develop at the NHL level.  There is a point where playing against lesser competition stagnates development and they need to learn how to perform against better players.  There's a difference between "we just drafted this kid and we think he'll be good so let's throw him into the deep end and see if he sinks or swims," and "this kid has been in the AHL for a season or two, let's see what he can do."

[xtrememachine1 795]

4 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

So you do think one player can move the needle that much. In this case, I disagree. 

Since you brought up betting, according to Vegas, this team has an 80/1 (1.23%) chance to win the 2018 Stanley Cup as the team sits right now. Do you like those odds? Would you bet on those odds? Or would you rather do something to improve those odds before throwing all your chips in? 

Never mentioned a thing about tanking. I'm completely against actively tanking from the start of a season. What I am in favour of though is going through a proper rebuild. It is extremely difficult to retool on the fly without striking gold in the draft, landing a stud in the later rounds. I'm not convinced we have one of those this time around. Therefore, we should continue with the youth movement, get another top 10 pick or two, and make a couple trades to benefit the team now and in the future. Bringing in a veteran like Daley makes no sense to me, unless Kronwall or Ericsson weren't ready to go, which it appears they are now. Not a great signing for this team in my opinion.

The SJ Sharks opened the 2015-2016 season as 80-1 odds too and then finished two wins away from a Stanley Cup.  The 16th seeded Preds just made it to the Finals themselves.  Just saying.  Get into the playoffs and anything can happen.  I know its cliche, but it kind of happened these past couple seasons.

You're against tanking, but you're all for a proper rebuild which includes giving out opportunities to defensemen that have shown little to no promise to this point and basically give your team next to no shot of winning anything.  I mean, I'm not trying to put words in your mouth here, but you don't want to tank, yet you want to put out players that increase your chances of not winning.  We are continuing with a youth movement, which is why we didn't get Vanek back.  The young forwards have shown potential and have won their roster spots.  DK is a defenseman that showed potential and is rightfully being given a chance.  The others have not, which is why we need a Trevor Daley right now.  He's not the answer, but he gives our club a better chance of succeeding.  I mean, think about this, what if Larkin, AA and Mantha are ready to light the world on fire this season, but they don't get that chance to shine because we've decided that we need to look at all these young unproven defensemen, so instead of filling their opponents net with pucks, those three are fishing pucks out of our own instead. 

[DickieDunn 2,571]

No, not any team can go on a run.  Preds have Rinne and one of the best d corps in the NHL, if not the best.  When the Habs went on a run they had Price and a good D corps.  When the Kings did it they were an under-performing team in the regular season that got hot for the playoffs, and had a good group of D led by Doughty.  The Sharks had a better D group AND forwards, plus had a young goalie come in and play great.

 

See the difference between them and Detroit?  

[kickazz 5,459]

51 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

Without Daley they probably miss the playoffs, have a better shot at a top 3 pick, and a guarantee of not falling too far back even if the lottery goes against them, and it ensures the younger D have more of a chance to play for a team that needs a rebuild.

With Daley they might make the playoffs, where they will probably be unceremoniously bounced in 5 games, costing them a shot at a top 3 pick and guaranteeing them a mid round pick which likely won't turn into the type of star they need, and the young D won't have time to develop.

And yes, players do develop at the NHL level.  There is a point where playing against lesser competition stagnates development and they need to learn how to perform against better players.  There's a difference between "we just drafted this kid and we think he'll be good so let's throw him into the deep end and see if he sinks or swims," and "this kid has been in the AHL for a season or two, let's see what he can do."

They are not tanking. When will you start living with that fact? Has frankgrimes taken over your account? 

Please do tell me how many of the worse 3 teams ended up with the top 3 picks last year? 

Edited July 4, 2017 by kickazz

[DickieDunn 2,571]

There's a difference between tanking, meaning intentionally losing, and going with younger players instead of vets on the back end of their careers.  What Holland is doing is stupid.

[kickazz 5,459]

5 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

There's a difference between tanking, meaning intentionally losing, and going with younger players instead of vets on the back end of their careers.  What Holland is doing is stupid.

That's the same thing. Call it whatever you want, they are not going to set themselves up for failure whether it is refusing to skate on ice or shooting at their own goalie and losing games or if it's icing a roster that would be inferior to the opposing team and lose. 

It is tanking. A different style of tanking but tanking nontheless. 

You basically want them to end up having the top 3 pick. A means to an end. They're not doing what you want them to. You're setting yourself up for a lot of disappointment if you want to continue to be a fan of this team. 

Edited July 4, 2017 by kickazz

[joesuffP 1,746]

Lmao we don't even have young defensemen to play for us. Literally nobody in the system is being held back because of this signing. This conversation just goes in circles with people bashing Holland for what he may hypothetically do.

The rebuild on the fly is happening whether you like it or not. Complaining about a stop gap defensmen that's cheap is such a minuscule problem in the grand scheme of things it's ridiculous this can cause such outrage for so long

Edited July 4, 2017 by joesuffP