• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
kliq

2017 Opening Day Roster

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

They honestly should. Holland would be backed into a corner choosing between AA and others. Could honestly see him taking the picks unfortunately. 

Yeah, you'd hope he would be forced to trade a player like Ericsson, but we know that isn't going to happen. I'd be pissed if all we got was a 2nd round pick for Athanasiou. Holland really has f***ed this team, and it's just further proof that the Daley signing (among others) were terrible moves for a team up against the cap...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, HadThomasVokounOnFortSt said:

I thought I read awhile back the Wings have given him offers?

for what little cap room they have, not what he should be getting.  Would you take a job that pays you 2/3 of what you should be making based on your qualifications?

8 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Yeah, you'd hope he would be forced to trade a player like Ericsson, but we know that isn't going to happen. I'd be pissed if all we got was a 2nd round pick for Athanasiou. Holland really has f***ed this team, and it's just further proof that the Daley signing (among others) were terrible moves for a team up against the cap...

dave-hester-1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/23/2017 at 6:00 AM, krsmith17 said:

Yeah, you'd hope he would be forced to trade a player like Ericsson, but we know that isn't going to happen. I'd be pissed if all we got was a 2nd round pick for Athanasiou. Holland really has f***ed this team, and it's just further proof that the Daley signing (among others) were terrible moves for a team up against the cap...

No one wants Ericsson. AA for a 2nd is probably fair value. 

Share this post


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

No one wants Ericsson. AA for a 2nd is probably fair value. 

Ericsson is a solid bottom pair defenseman, and if he can be had for a late round draft pick for around $2.75M (retaining $1.5M), there are teams (e.g. New Jersey, Buffalo) that would want him at that price. Or are you one of those that believes that trades are hard....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My ideal roster is two scoring lines (SL1, SL2), a grind line (GL) and a development/prospect line (PL) for forwards; Defense is similar but less complicated, and I'm not including them since our offense is what really needs adjustment. In a general sense the below lineup assumes that I would trade Glendening, which I talked about in a different thread. I also think Larkin needs more development before he's ready to center his own line, just like Hank needed. The lineup also takes advantage of some players ability to play different positions.

SL1: Mantha / Zetterberg / Larkin

SL2: AA / Nielsen / Tatar

GL: Abdelkader / Sheahan / Helm

PL: Bertuzzi / Nyquist / Svechnikov

On reserve: Frk, Sproul (D), Witkowski (D or O)

THE WHY: Abdelkader and Sheahan aren't skillful enough for the top two lines, but if they specialized in agitating and grinding they could be good at it, and every now and then they'd score but they'd be under no pressure to do so, Helmer is also a good agitator, but can obviously also score so the other teams would occasionally get caught with their pants down by him. It's a good place to put the three of them since you can't trade them. Larkin still needs some development and Hank is the guy to do that; so with Larkin on the wing he could spend more time learner how to be a balanced playmaking/scoring center from one of the best. AA was really good with Nielsen last year and is ready to prove himself. I personally think we should have dropped Tatar and resigned Vanek; so if AA needs to have a big-body in front of the net then maybe move Svechnikov up to SL2 and let him hang out down on the PL until Larkin is ready to Center a line of himself, Tatar and Svechnikov. Nyquist is currently a wing... but can definitely play Center. I'd put him down on the PL to both polish his center play and allow him to develop the two new scorers. I personally think Bertuzzi would actually end up swapping with Helm within this concept, but that's a decision we can only make after letting Bert prove himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎8‎/‎13‎/‎2017 at 5:28 PM, LeftWinger said:

With our roster (AA included) here's a lineup id like to see: (channeling my inner blueadams)

Tatar - Z - Mantha 

Nyquist - Larkin - AA 

Abby - Nielsen - Helm

Witkowski - Glenny - Sheahan 

Daley - Green

DD - Jensen

XO - Sproul

Witkowski might play if we have injuries, so I'm very skeptical of that choice. Bertuzzi is definitely jumping up this year and I'm also betting on Svechnikov since he's been featured in marketing packages. If you assume that, then we were planning on trading someone pretty early on this summer -- which comes down to them keeping either Glenny or Sheahan (Based on size I bet they chuck Glendening). Nielsen isn't moving from the second center position, based on play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Ericsson is a solid bottom pair defenseman, and if he can be had for a late round draft pick for around $2.75M (retaining $1.5M), there are teams (e.g. New Jersey, Buffalo) that would want him at that price. Or are you one of those that believes that trades are hard....

Why would rebuilding teams give up any picks for a #6 dman making close to 3 million? Whats the logic?

Even a contender at the deadline would have a hard time adding a slow non physical non offensive bottom pair Dman at 2.75. Theres way better options at way better prices.

Share this post


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

No one wants Ericsson. AA for a 2nd is probably fair value. 

AA scored the second most goals on the team, but with only 13 minutes play time. His shot percentage was 15%. For perspective here are the other scorers: Hank at about 9%, Tatar also at 15%, Nielsen at 10%, Mantha at 13%. AA is a future top line wing (or maybe even a center). So, to say he's worth a 2nd round pick is ridiculous.

Share this post


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

Why would rebuilding teams give up any picks for a #6 dman making close to 3 million? Whats the logic?

Even a contender at the deadline would have a hard time adding a slow non physical non offensive bottom pair Dman at 2.75. Theres way better options at way better prices.

$2.75M isn't much for a bottom pair defenseman, and even rebuilding teams need veteran leadership. The Leafs who were / are a rebuilding team, acquired Roman Polak (who is a somewhat similar player, making similar money), for Gunnarsson and a 4th round pick. 

I believe that there are teams that would have interest in a defenseman like Ericsson. He's not nearly as bad as some (most) Wings fans try to make him out to be.

Way better options at better prices? Like who? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/25/2017 at 2:11 PM, Cry_Havoc said:

AA scored the second most goals on the team, but with only 13 minutes play time. His shot percentage was 15%. For perspective here are the other scorers: Hank at about 9%, Tatar also at 15%, Nielsen at 10%, Mantha at 13%. AA is a future top line wing (or maybe even a center). So, to say he's worth a 2nd round pick is ridiculous.

Lol shooting % is an absolutely ridiculous stat to base anything on. Guess who had much better shooting % than AA... Paul Byron, Anders Lee, Jason Chimera, Mark Stone, Patrick Eaves, Mike Fisher, Troy Brouwer, Patrick Maroon, and the list goes on lol. Would you give up a first for any of these players? You know how to get an inflated shooting %? Don't shoot a lot during 5 v 5 play, and score on breakaways AKA the entirety of AA's game. Congratulations, you've overvalued a prospect.  

On 8/25/2017 at 7:42 PM, krsmith17 said:

$2.75M isn't much for a bottom pair defenseman, and even rebuilding teams need veteran leadership. The Leafs who were / are a rebuilding team, acquired Roman Polak (who is a somewhat similar player, making similar money), for Gunnarsson and a 4th round pick. 

I believe that there are teams that would have interest in a defenseman like Ericsson. He's not nearly as bad as some (most) Wings fans try to make him out to be.

Way better options at better prices? Like who? 

Yes it is.

Polak is an extremely physical RH D-man. Not exactly from the same mold as Ericsson. His contract also did not have the ridiculous term that Ericsson has. If you haven't noticed, Polak is a UFA at the moment (nobody wants him).

Nobody in this league voluntarily wants 3 more years of Ericsson at that price. 

You're going to give me the same old "aNyoNE cAn bE TRaDEd" "even Gretzky and guys with NTCs get traded" and yeah Ericsson could be traded. It's not outside the realm of possibility. But it's not even in the realm of likely, and if it does happen were probably going to have to eat a significant portion of the contract and give up assets. I mean do you honestly think it's likely he's going to be moved? I think most Wings fans would bet a nut that he runs out his contract here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Polak is an extremely physical RH D-man. Not exactly from the same mold as Ericsson. His contract also did not have the ridiculous term that Ericsson has. If you haven't noticed, Polak is a UFA at the moment (nobody wants him).

Nobody in this league voluntarily wants 3 more years of Ericsson at that price. 

You're going to give me the same old "aNyoNE cAn bE TRaDEd" "even Gretzky and guys with NTCs get traded" and yeah Ericsson could be traded. It's not outside the realm of possibility. But it's not even in the realm of likely, and if it does happen were probably going to have to eat a significant portion of the contract and give up assets. I mean do you honestly think it's likely he's going to be moved? I think most Wings fans would bet a nut that he runs out his contract here.

Yes, anybody can be traded. This is a fact.

You're right, no team is voluntarily going to want Ericsson. No GM's are calling Holland asking for Ericsson. But guess what? That's when a good GM gets creative, and calls other GM's to make a trade...

As for the bolded, no I don't think Ericsson will get traded. Not with Ken Holland in charge anyway. However, if Holland were to get fired (never going to happen), or retire (my hope) and a new GM took over, there's not a question in my mind that priority number one would be to get rid of some of the terrible contracts on the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Yes, anybody can be traded. This is a fact.

You're right, no team is voluntarily going to want Ericsson. No GM's are calling Holland asking for Ericsson. But guess what? That's when a good GM gets creative, and calls other GM's to make a trade...

As for the bolded, no I don't think Ericsson will get traded. Not with Ken Holland in charge anyway. However, if Holland were to get fired (never going to happen), or retire (my hope) and a new GM took over, there's not a question in my mind that priority number one would be to get rid of some of the terrible contracts on the books.

Lol so then you agree? Ericsson is highly unlikely to be moved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

You stated he can be moved for a late draft pick, but now you're agreeing with me that no one will voluntarily want him. So I don't know where you're at. 

Do you think Columbus called Toronto asking if they could have Clarkson? Probably not... Can Ericsson be traded? Yes. Should Ericsson be traded? Yes. Will Ericsson be traded while Ken Holland is GM? Not a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Do you think Columbus called Toronto asking if they could have Clarkson? Probably not... Can Ericsson be traded? Yes. Should Ericsson be traded? Yes. Will Ericsson be traded while Ken Holland is GM? Not a chance.

Then why are you constantly bringing up trading players like Ericsson and Nielsen? You agree with me they're not going anywhere, so what's the point? We all know the contracts are bad, that horse has been beaten to death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

Yes, anybody can be traded. This is a fact.

You're right, no team is voluntarily going to want Ericsson. No GM's are calling Holland asking for Ericsson. But guess what? That's when a good GM gets creative, and calls other GM's to make a trade...

As for the bolded, no I don't think Ericsson will get traded. Not with Ken Holland in charge anyway. However, if Holland were to get fired (never going to happen), or retire (my hope) and a new GM took over, there's not a question in my mind that priority number one would be to get rid of some of the terrible contracts on the books.

16 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Do you think Columbus called Toronto asking if they could have Clarkson? Probably not... Can Ericsson be traded? Yes. Should Ericsson be traded? Yes. Will Ericsson be traded while Ken Holland is GM? Not a chance.

Ericsson should not be traded if we have to take back something just as bad or worse, or retain much salary, or give up anything more than a scrub prospect we already know won't amount to anything.

I happen to think E is a lot better than he gets credit for, even from you. Decent middle-pair if he's healthy. But he makes too much for that role, he's never been particularly durable, plus coming off a significant injury, plus has a known chronic hip condition, plus 3 years left. Too much term to appeal to contenders looking for depth, too much risk to appeal to building teams looking for experience, too much money for anyone...

We'd have to pay to move him, or take something back that would negate any benefit. About the only thing I could see being feasible that would really help us would be trading him to Toronto for Horton, but they're also tight to the cap and have quite a few raises to give out in the next few years.

I think there are many better options for us. Better to just eat the rest of E's contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Then why are you constantly bringing up trading players like Ericsson and Nielsen? You agree with me they're not going anywhere, so what's the point? We all know the contracts are bad, that horse has been beaten to death.

Because this is a discussion board and I'm discussing what "I" would like to see done with this team. People discuss potential trades on here all the time. Trading for Trouba, Fowler, Duchene, etc. or trading away Nyquist, Tatar, Helm, Abdelkader, Nielsen, etc. None of those are any more likely to happen then what I'm suggesting. I know Ericsson isn't getting traded, but in my opinion, he should be.

19 minutes ago, Buppy said:

Ericsson should not be traded if we have to take back something just as bad or worse, or retain much salary, or give up anything more than a scrub prospect we already know won't amount to anything.

I happen to think E is a lot better than he gets credit for, even from you. Decent middle-pair if he's healthy. But he makes too much for that role, he's never been particularly durable, plus coming off a significant injury, plus has a known chronic hip condition, plus 3 years left. Too much term to appeal to contenders looking for depth, too much risk to appeal to building teams looking for experience, too much money for anyone...

We'd have to pay to move him, or take something back that would negate any benefit. About the only thing I could see being feasible that would really help us would be trading him to Toronto for Horton, but they're also tight to the cap and have quite a few raises to give out in the next few years.

I think there are many better options for us. Better to just eat the rest of E's contract.

Matter of opinion I guess. To me, the value of that roster spot is just as, or more important to this team than the value of the cap space it would free up. If we could trade Ericsson (retaining $1.5M), along with a mid round pick / mid tier prospect, and fill that spot with Ouellet or Sproul (let's not get into this again), I think it's a net gain.

I agree that Ericsson is better than people here give him credit for, but I don't think he's close to being a top 4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Because this is a discussion board and I'm discussing what "I" would like to see done with this team. People discuss potential trades on here all the time. Trading for Trouba, Fowler, Duchene, etc. or trading away Nyquist, Tatar, Helm, Abdelkader, Nielsen, etc. None of those are any more likely to happen then what I'm suggesting. I know Ericsson isn't getting traded, but in my opinion, he should be.

Matter of opinion I guess. To me, the value of that roster spot is just as, or more important to this team than the value of the cap space it would free up. If we could trade Ericsson (retaining $1.5M), along with a mid round pick / mid tier prospect, and fill that spot with Ouellet or Sproul (let's not get into this again), I think it's a net gain.

I agree that Ericsson is better than people here give him credit for, but I don't think he's close to being a top 4.

It's not just your opinion. 99% of everyone agrees and want him gone somehow. But, as you agree, it's not going to happen. It's just beating a dead horse over and over and over. It's like discussing trading Zetterberg. Sure you can do it, but it's not in the realm of reality so what's the point? Believe it or not, topics vary in merit.

Bringing up trading for Seguin (or whoever) is at least something new. Trading Ericsson has become discussed ad nauseam, and no one disagrees... so my apologies, I just find it annoying when the same lame topic leaks into every thread with nothing new to talk about.

This has gone too far into discussing "how" people post so I'll leave it at that.

Share this post


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

It's not just your opinion. 99% of everyone agrees and want him gone somehow. But, as you agree, it's not going to happen. It's just beating a dead horse over and over and over. It's like discussing trading Zetterberg. Sure you can do it, but it's not in the realm of reality so what's the point? Believe it or not, topics vary in merit.

Bringing up trading for Seguin (or whoever) is at least something new. Trading Ericsson has become discussed ad nauseam, and no one disagrees... so my apologies, I just find it annoying when the same lame topic leaks into every thread with nothing new to talk about.

This has gone too far into discussing "how" people post so I'll leave it at that.

Fair enough. My apologies for beating the dead horse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a little puzzled as to why Wings/GR still haven't inked Russo ? The guy has been tremendous for Griffins in his first 2 seasons and had a tidy stint with the Wings when called up. With both the rosters currently having signed 17/18 D between them I'm hoping he isn't surplus to requirements as this would be a bad non signing in my view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Andy Pred 48 said:

So are we trading Ericsson then? 

Maybe if we retain $1.5 million for the next 3 years on Ericsson, Maybe we'll get a 7th round pick for him.

51 minutes ago, Andy Pred 48 said:

I'm a little puzzled as to why Wings/GR still haven't inked Russo ? The guy has been tremendous for Griffins in his first 2 seasons and had a tidy stint with the Wings when called up. With both the rosters currently having signed 17/18 D between them I'm hoping he isn't surplus to requirements as this would be a bad non signing in my view.

I'm too because Khan said about two weeks ago that Russo's signing was imminent.

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

Sign in to follow this