Detroit's cap hit on both goalie and defense is top 3 in the league

[Wingnut1989 165]

seen this on another board figured i'd share

Second among defense with 26.604

Third among goalie with 9.292

Last season GA position was 26th

source http://nhlnumbers.com/teams

Edited August 23, 2017 by Wingnut1989

[ShanahanMan 473]

Gag. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

52 minutes ago, Wingnut1989 said:

seen this on another board figured i'd share

Second among defense with 26.604

Third among goalie with 9.292

Last season GA position was 26th

source http://nhlnumbers.com/teams

We're also the second oldest team with an average age of 29.269.

Imagine how different all three of those numbers would look if we replaced Kronwall, Ericsson and Howard with Ouellet, Sproul and Coreau. We would probably be a slightly worse team (not much), which would be a good thing anyway. We also wouldn't have those veterans for Blashill to needlessly lean on, and it would give the kids more of an opportunity to sink or swim...

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

35 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

We're also the second oldest team with an average age of 29.269.

Imagine how different all three of those numbers would look if we replaced Kronwall, Ericsson and Howard with Ouellet, Sproul and Coreau. We would probably be a slightly worse team (not much), which would be a good thing anyway. We also wouldn't have those veterans for Blashill to needlessly lean on, and it would give the kids more of an opportunity to sink or swim...

That number's not correct, though. I just added the ages of the 22 players we expect and it's an average age of 26.86. If you click on the red wing's link it lists Miller and Vitale. Maybe including those guys and Franzen is how they got that number?

Edited August 23, 2017 by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

[kickazz 5,459]

7 minutes ago, PavelValerievichDatsyuk said:

That number's not correct, though. I just added the ages of the 22 players we expect and it's an average age of 26.86. If you click on the red wing's link it lists Miller and Vitale. Maybe including those guys and Franzen is how they got that number?

Do they do that with other teams too tho? Would have to remove other teams injured players too. 

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

25 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Do they do that with other teams too tho? Would have to remove other teams injured players too. 

True, but Vitale and Miller aren't even on the team anymore in any capacity so they definitely shouldn't be included. 

I'm not going to recalculated it including Franzen, though, since it took more time than it was worth to do it once, haha.

We were 11th oldest last year:

http://www.quanthockey.com/TS/TS_AverageAge.php

I'd imagine we're about the same since we got rid of Miller, and got Daley(I know they're not the same position) who is Miller's age (33) and Wit(27) for Ott (35), And ? in for Vanek.

Edited August 24, 2017 by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

[krsmith17 7,191]

31 minutes ago, PavelValerievichDatsyuk said:

That number's not correct, though. I just added the ages of the 22 players we expect and it's an average age of 26.86. If you click on the red wing's link it lists Miller and Vitale. Maybe including those guys and Franzen is how they got that number?

Good catch. Nonetheless, we'd be much younger if we swapped out two or three of the players I mentioned previously.

[kylee 727]

5 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Good catch. Nonetheless, we'd be much younger if we swapped out two or three of the players I mentioned previously.

What difference does it make if we're bad with veteran players as opposed to bad with younger players with little to no upside? 

[kliq 3,755]

2 hours ago, kylee said:

What difference does it make if we're bad with veteran players as opposed to bad with younger players with little to no upside? 

Cap space and the ability to add to your roster if the right UFA comes along, and the ability to sign RFA's that are due for pay raises.

[krsmith17 7,191]

5 hours ago, kylee said:

What difference does it make if we're bad with veteran players as opposed to bad with younger players with little to no upside? 

Which young players are you referring to that are "bad with little to no upside"?

[AtlantaHotWings 973]

Well thank God I have my Kenny punching bag in the office. Get out my frustrations over silly things like this by beating that thing black and blue

[kylee 727]

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Which young players are you referring to that are "bad with little to no upside"?

the guys you mentioned 

[krsmith17 7,191]

14 minutes ago, kylee said:

the guys you mentioned 

Ouellet, Sproul and Mrazek? You think they're all bad players with no upside? I disagree.

[DickieDunn 2,571]

XO and sproul have limited upside.  At best they might develop into OK 2nd par D who would be 3rd pair on a good team.  Mrazek is either going to be a stud or a dud, probably not much room in the middle.

Spends a crap ton of money and D and goaltending are the two major flaws on the team.  GENIUS!

[krsmith17 7,191]

18 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

XO and sproul have limited upside.  At best they might develop into OK 2nd par D who would be 3rd pair on a good team.  Mrazek is either going to be a stud or a dud, probably not much room in the middle.

Spends a crap ton of money and D and goaltending are the two major flaws on the team.  GENIUS!

My point wasn't that I think any will be elite or even high end, it's that none of them are bad, and all of them have upside. I think there's a huge difference between riding the same old guys and giving the younger guys a shot. I'd rather go with Ouellet, Sproul and Mrazek over Kronwall, Ericsson and Howard, at a fraction of the price.

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

14 hours ago, kylee said:

What difference does it make if we're bad with veteran players as opposed to bad with younger players with little to no upside? 

We're a rebuilding team that should be transitioning to younger players that could be around for the future that we're building. You may not think XO or Sproul have a bright future, but 33-35 year olds will likely be retired when this team is competing in a few years. Being bad with young players can be the product of growing pains while being bad with veteran players can be pains with the opposite trajectory.

[Krayzie_Bone 58]

Man that is nuts considering they have one of the worst defenses in the league. Everyone can say what they want about Dekeyser and Abdelkader contracts (yes they are too high) But Ericcson's deal is by far the worst.

[kickazz 5,459]

44 minutes ago, Krayzie_Bone said:

Man that is nuts considering they have one of the worst defenses in the league. Everyone can say what they want about Dekeyser and Abdelkader contracts (yes they are too high) But Ericcson's deal is by far the worst.

Except it was good when it was done

[krsmith17 7,191]

7 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Except it was good when it was done

I've seen this quite a bit lately, and I don't really get it. Of course it wasn't bad when it was signed. Very few contracts are bad as soon as they are signed, even if some fans feel they are. However, when they do turn out to be bad contracts, that's when a good GM is able to trade them. He may have to retain some salary or give up a little in the way of draft picks, to get rid of it, but that's the cost of trading such contracts. There are always teams out there willing to take on (partial) bad contract to gain future assets.

Ericsson's contract wasn't that bad when he signed it, but the problem is, either Holland still doesn't think it's bad, or he's just not actively trying to trade it. He should be, and if he were, I'm sure some team would be interested.

[GMRwings1983 8,793]

A team with suspect goaltending and talentless jobbers on defense has one of the highest cap hits in the league.  Does Kenny Holland need to embezzle money from the Ilitch family and set their house on fire before his ass is canned?  

[barabbas16 499]

On 8/24/2017 at 10:55 AM, krsmith17 said:

Ouellet, Sproul and Mrazek? You think they're all bad players with no upside? I disagree.

You mentioned Coreau, not Mrazek.

[barabbas16 499]

21 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

My point wasn't that I think any will be elite or even high end, it's that none of them are bad, and all of them have upside. I think there's a huge difference between riding the same old guys and giving the younger guys a shot. I'd rather go with Ouellet, Sproul and Mrazek over Kronwall, Ericsson and Howard, at a fraction of the price.

Sproul might have upside, but he's hardly been anything but bad during his NHL chances.  Coreau has also been bad and saying he has upside of any note is debatable.  Ouellet, I'll give you... even though he's always the slowest guy on the ice.

[kickazz 5,459]

40 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

I've seen this quite a bit lately, and I don't really get it. Of course it wasn't bad when it was signed. Very few contracts are bad as soon as they are signed, even if some fans feel they are. However, when they do turn out to be bad contracts, that's when a good GM is able to trade them. He may have to retain some salary or give up a little in the way of draft picks, to get rid of it, but that's the cost of trading such contracts. There are always teams out there willing to take on (partial) bad contract to gain future assets.

Ericsson's contract wasn't that bad when he signed it, but the problem is, either Holland still doesn't think it's bad, or he's just not actively trying to trade it. He should be, and if he were, I'm sure some team would be interested.

The Red Wings fan base thinks Ericsson is bad. The Red Wings themselves do not. I thought you knew this.

[krsmith17 7,191]

15 minutes ago, barabbas16 said:

You mentioned Coreau, not Mrazek.

You're right. My bad.

9 minutes ago, barabbas16 said:

Sproul might have upside, but he's hardly been anything but bad during his NHL chances.  Coreau has also been bad and saying he has upside of any note is debatable.  Ouellet, I'll give you... even though he's always the slowest guy on the ice.

I pretty much agree with this. The point wasn't really that they're all good players with high upside though. It was more that Ouellet, Sproul and Coreau (as backup), is better than Kronwall, Ericsson and Howard, in addition to having the extra $12M in cap space.

14 minutes ago, kickazz said:

The Red Wings fan base thinks Ericsson is bad. The Red Wings themselves do not. I thought you knew this.

I do know this. And I'm with the Red Wings in thinking Ericsson is not "bad", I just think the contract is bad. My question is, do the Red Wings think the contract is bad? If so, they should move it. If not, they're wrong...

[Buppy 1,720]

Though of course, Ouellet and Sproul are already on the team (or at least Sproul was; might have been bad enough that he no longer will be, we'll see). I guess change it to Russo and Lashoff?

But whatevs, an extra bunch of cap space would be awesome. We could totally sign Tavares and maybe become the new Islanders. I gots goosebumps just thinking about it.