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

[marcaractac 3,963]

32 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Just checked Google.com says you're incorrect, resorting to passive aggressiveness and annoyed 

Look, say whatever you want, you can think the earth us flat for all I care. Doesn't make it true. And that's my point. If that bothers you, or makes you annoyed that someone like me wants substantial evidence and won't agree until that evidence is provided, then get over it. A message board certainly is a place for people to question others and challenge each other. 

I find it hilarious that the same people who give frank etc. crap for his opinions are getting so defensive about their opinions being challenged, and told that it doesn't mean anything.

So you need substantial evidence on what someone's interpretation of an offensive defenseman is? Like I said. You start arguments for the sake of it because you have an "Always gotta be right" complex. The world ain't black and white, no matter how badly you want it to be. 

[kickazz 5,459]

1 hour ago, marcaractac said:

So you need substantial evidence on what someone's interpretation of an offensive defenseman is? Like I said. You start arguments for the sake of it because you have an "Always gotta be right" complex. The world ain't black and white, no matter how badly you want it to be. 

No. Substantial evidence on a legit definition not a made up one to cop out of an argument as "opinion". You can keep attempting to spin this any way you want lol. I've already said I'm interested in evidence-based theories. And this is common practice. And "always gotta be right complex"? Captain obvious, that's exactly who I am lol.  Who on this board isn't? Go look at the last 3 pages, you will see 3 people arguing and neither one backing down and think they're right. And looking at your post history, you don't either. 

You (and a few others here) may benefit from the following read. Interesting perspective from a philosophy professor. Of course you'll predictably probably shoot it down or say "it's stupid". 

http://theconversation.com/no-youre-not-entitled-to-your-opinion-9978

Edited July 7, 2017 by kickazz

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

Sproul is referred to as an offensive defensman pretty much everywhere:

Kultan: "Ryan Sproul has been an exciting offensive defenseman in junior hockey and for the last three seasons in Grand Rapids."

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/nhl/red-wings/2016/10/21/red-wings-defenseman-sproul-gets-shot-vs-predators/92517238/

St. James: "Sproul has tried to shore up his defensive game, but being an offensive defenseman always has held appeal..."

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/nhl/red-wings/2016/09/23/detroit-red-wings-ryan-sproul/90943562/

Himself: "That's me as a hockey player, an offensive defenseman," Sproul said. "You'll see me on the power play and you'll see me shooting the puck and seeing the puck."

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2013/09/prospect_ryan_sproul_likes_tho.html

http://forecaster.ca/sportsnet/hockey/player.php?9068

dobberprospects: "...as one of the OHL's top offensive defensemen."

http://www.dobberprospects.com/ryan-sproul/

He hasn't been able to make a mark offensively in the NHL, but with only 28 NHL games to his name, these labels would be based mostly on his play in the lower leagues and his potential. 

He does have NHL stats that show his style of play. For instance, he has 49 shots in his 28 NHL games. You wouldn't get that from a stay-at-home defenseman.

Edited July 7, 2017 by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

[kliq 3,755]

Can we just all agree that Sproul has the style of an offensive defenseman who struggles to put up point at the NHL level?

Come on guys, this civil war needs to end.

[kickazz 5,459]

24 minutes ago, kliq said:

Can we just all agree that Sproul has the style of an offensive defenseman who struggles to put up point at the NHL level?

That's basically what it is. At least in some part of his career and could be in the future.

Edited July 7, 2017 by kickazz

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

19 minutes ago, kliq said:

Can we just all agree that Sproul has the style of an offensive defenseman who struggles to put up point at the NHL level?

Come on guys, this civil war needs to end.

Let me tell you why you're wrong...

Style of play = Offensive defenseman

Role on this team = Not offensive defenseman (yet anyway)

Not opinion. FACT. Conform to this fact or I will debate you vigorously.

[kickazz 5,459]

4 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Let me tell you why you're wrong...

Style of play = Offensive defenseman

Role on this team = Not offensive defenseman (yet anyway)

Not opinion. FACT. Conform to this fact or convince me otherwise and prove me wrong. 

Fixed. You are my Mike Pence. And I am your Donald

Duck.

Edited July 7, 2017 by kickazz

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 minute ago, kickazz said:

Fixed

You couldn't just let it go... you had to be right... facts aren't always true ya know

[kickazz 5,459]

2 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

You couldn't just let it go... you had to be right... facts aren't always true ya know

Your opinion is meaningless, I had to fix it with facts Mike.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

8 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Your opinion is meaningless, I had to fix it with facts Mike.

MRW

[kickazz 5,459]

Edited July 7, 2017 by kickazz

[Buppy 1,720]

When I first brought up the "don't call Sproul an offensive defenseman" thing, it was nothing more than an offhand comment made to point out that Sproul's offensive production this year was poor. And that was part of a larger point comparing him to Ouellet, in response to krsmith saying Sproul was better offensively.

I accept part of the blame for sparking the debate, and for allowing myself to be distracted at times by the semantics. I'll try to get things back on track:

Xavier Ouellet is better than Ryan Sproul. Better both offensively and defensively. For the majority of their junior/minor league careers, he has scored just as well as Sproul. He had a more positive impact on the offense this year in the NHL. I believe due to superior instincts and defensive play, he was and will continue to be a more effective possession player, which will lead to greater positive offensive impact.

Sproul has potential, and with his shot can be a PP asset, which Ouellet will likely never be. That could skew the stats, but I don't believe that would actually make Sproul "better" offensively.

I also believe Daley, Green, Dekeyser, Kronwall, Ericsson, and Jensen are better than Sproul. I hope he's able to pass some of them this coming season, but I'm not too optimistic. I would expect his offense to at least pass Ericsson, and possibly Kronwall. None of Ouellet, Jensen, Dekeyser, or Daley should be out of reach offensively either (especially if the "real" Dekeyser is anything like we saw this year), though I wouldn't say I expect it next year.

So there's my Sproul take, sans semantics. 

Edited July 7, 2017 by Buppy

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

12 minutes ago, Buppy said:

When I first brought up the "don't call Sproul and offensive defenseman" thing, it was nothing more than an offhand comment made to point out that Sproul's offensive production this year was poor. And that was part of a larger point comparing him to Ouellet, in response to krsmith saying Sproul was better offensively.

I accept part of the blame for sparking the debate, and for allowing myself to be distracted at times by the semantics. I'll try to get things back on track:

Xavier Ouellet is better than Ryan Sproul. Better both offensively and defensively. For the majority of their junior/minor league careers, he has scored just as well as Sproul. He had a more positive impact on the offense this year in the NHL. I believe due to superior instincts and defensive play, he was and will continue to be a more effective possession player, which will lead to greater positive offensive impact.

Sproul has potential, and with his shot can be a PP asset, which Ouellet will likely never be. That could skew the stats, but I don't believe that would actually make Sproul "better" offensively.

I also believe Daley, Green, Dekeyser, Kronwall, Ericsson, and Jensen are better than Sproul. I hope he's able to pass some of them this coming season, but I'm not too optimistic. I would expect his offense to at least pass Ericsson, and possibly Kronwall. None of Ouellet, Jensen, Dekeyser, or Daley should be out of reach offensively either (especially if the "real" Dekeyser is anything like we saw this year), though I wouldn't say I expect it next year.

So there's my Sproul take, sans semantics. 

Ryan Sproul sucks confirmed

[kliq 3,755]

4 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Let me tell you why you're wrong...

Style of play = Offensive defenseman

Role on this team = Not offensive defenseman (yet anyway)

Not opinion. FACT. Conform to this fact or I will debate you vigorously.

I have two words for you.........Toews sucks.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

31 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

The plastics are in your dome, dude.  Just let it go.  

That is so fetch!

[kickazz 5,459]

1 hour ago, kliq said:

I have two words for you.........Toews sucks.

Fact.

Confirmed by my opinion.

[Never_Retire_Steve 35]

13 hours ago, Dabura said:

I mean, define "smart." If an NTC is the difference between signing Daley and not signing Daley, I'm ok with giving him the NTC and having a top three of Green, Daley, DeKeyser instead of a top three of Green, DeKeyser, Ouellet/Jensen/Ericsson. It won't make moving him impossible, it'll just make it a bit harder.

I think bigger obstacles to trades are, in our case, questionable contracts -- in terms of money and term -- and the fact that Holland just isn't big on trading roster players.

I don't think it's smart to have your top 5 d men all with NTCs who are all making $3M+. Makes it incredibly hard to make roster moves based on that. If we're going for it then maybe but I don't think we're in the "win now" mode.

[Buppy 1,720]

2 hours ago, Never_Retire_Steve said:

I don't think it's smart to have your top 5 d men all with NTCs who are all making $3M+. Makes it incredibly hard to make roster moves based on that. If we're going for it then maybe but I don't think we're in the "win now" mode.

NTCs aren't as big a deal as people think. I researched it a while back and found that players with NTCs are traded roughly as often as players without. They mostly seem to serve as a way for the player to have some level of control over where they play.

Generally, if you have a player you want to get rid of, whatever it is about him that makes you want to get rid of him is likely to be more of a problem than a NTC.

Unrelated musing, not directed toward you specifically: Am I the only one annoyed that CapFriendly often cites themselves as a source for their contract information? Probably, but sorry, that's just unprofessional. "Because we said so" is only a valid source for parents.

[Dabura 12,207]

2 hours ago, Never_Retire_Steve said:

I don't think it's smart to have your top 5 d men all with NTCs who are all making $3M+. Makes it incredibly hard to make roster moves based on that. If we're going for it then maybe but I don't think we're in the "win now" mode.

We should look at those defensemen on a case-by-case basis.

• DALEY -- Was he given an NTC? As others have pointed out, CapFriendly says no...
• GREEN -- One year left on his deal. I see him being traded this season and I see us getting a decent return for him.
• DEKEYSER -- Holland has no appetite for moving him + he's coming off an awful season + the money and term of his contract will only become really attractive to other teams if he establishes himself as a Real Good top-four defenseman. Of course, if he establishes himself as a Real Good top-four defenseman, Holland will be that much more uninterested in moving him. He's probably a Red Wing for life. He's probably being groomed for a leadership role.
• KRONWALL -- Two years left on his deal, will probably spend most of that time in LTIRetirement. Will retire a Red Wing.
• ERICSSON -- meh, whatevz

[marcaractac 3,963]

9 hours ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

The plastics are in your dome, dude.  Just let it go.  

That is so fetch!

1

This is pretty hilarious coming from Bill

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Cholowski Stronger, Eager To Assert Himself

Seems like Shawn Horcoff is working closely with Cholowski. He compares himself to Trevor Daley, and appears to be dedicated to growing in size and strength to make the NHL.

In regards to what he's working on:

“I think being more assertive on the ice, imposing my will more, skating with the puck more, creating more offense" - Cholowski

From his college play at St Cloud and from Horcoff  it sounds like Cholowski is elite at positioning, but needs to work on imposing his will in the O-zon , as well as getting bigger and stronger.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Listening to Horcoff talk on the Red and White podcast, sounds like he's big on character. A point that was made at this years draft. His philosophy: "90% of what happens on the ice comes from what happens off the ice." Sounds like the team is interested in obtaining high character players. The days of hooker friendly Hudlers and alcohol savy Callahans is over. 

 

Shawn also mentions what a great guy that Daley is to have in the lockerroom 

Edited July 8, 2017 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[kickazz 5,459]

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Listening to Horcoff talk on the Red and White podcast, sounds like he's big on character. A point that was made at this years draft. His philosophy: "90% of what happens on the ice comes from what happens off the ice." Sounds like the team is interested in obtaining high character players. The days of hooker friendly Hudlers and alcohol savy Callahans is over. 

 

Shawn also mentions what a great guy that Daley is to have in the lockerroom 

I agree, a lot of times in sports (I'm sure most of us here probably played in high school teams or maybe even college), the best or the hardest working players were often the ones that had high chracter, usually ended up becoming the captains too. Of course character can only get you so far if you don't have talent to start with. 

I was the "always gotta be right" ****** on the team that only flexed my muscles to get laid. Quit sports and never looked back once I got what was coming. (Herpes).

Oh the good old days. 

Edited July 8, 2017 by kickazz

[kliq 3,755]

11 hours ago, marcaractac said:

This is pretty hilarious coming from Bill

Oh I know lol, it's like Biff Tannen calling George McFly a bully.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

On 7/1/2017 at 8:16 AM, DickieDunn said:

dumb

 

On 7/1/2017 at 8:34 AM, Dominator2005 said:

Stupid

 

On 7/1/2017 at 8:40 AM, krsmith17 said:

Only way this deal makes any sense is if one or both of Kronwall / Ericsson are done. Still shouldn't have been anything more than one year, two max.

 

On 7/1/2017 at 10:45 AM, shocky2002 said:

I JUST SAW SOMEONE ON TWITTER TOUT HIS CUP EXPERIENCE AS A GOOD REASON TO SIGN HIM. AAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

On 7/1/2017 at 1:54 PM, ShanahanMan said:

At least Stevie was smart enough to only give two years to Girardi.

another awful ntc multi year contract handed out to a vet with injury issues, courtesy of Mr. Holland.

Anyone stop and think, once Green is gone, Daley will probably be the best Dman on this team?