• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Jonas Mahonas

2018-19

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

1st bold: A very logical, well thought out idea that I hadn't even considered. I like it. Really thought that we would be stuck with him for 3 more years, but you've proven that it can be done without a buyout, including picks/prospects to trade him away, or eating cap space. Well done.

2nd bold: Its supposed to be a deep draft this year, so if another team in that 2-4 range sees a couple guys they like left on the board I think they would do it. But would Holland?

Bold: No.

That's why, in my opinion, Holland needs to go. He doesn't seem willing or able to do what it takes to get this team back on track. Some bold moves and tough decisions need to be made. Holland seems content to just ride it out...

Share this post


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

1st bold: A very logical, well thought out idea that I hadn't even considered. I like it. Really thought that we would be stuck with him for 3 more years, but you've proven that it can be done without a buyout, including picks/prospects to trade him away, or eating cap space. Well done.

2nd bold: Its supposed to be a deep draft this year, so if another team in that 2-4 range sees a couple guys they like left on the board I think they would do it. But would Holland?

While an Ericsson trade is somewhat feasible, it's very unlikely that it could happen without including a pick or prospect, even while retaining significant salary. Teams that might actually want him for his play would not want the three year (or two if we're talking a summer move) commitment, and teams that don't want him would obviously need some incentive.

We are not so desperate for cap space as people like to think. What little improvement we might be able to make with an extra $1-2M isn't likely to be worth a middling pick or prospect. Sure, if we could get away with some prospect who isn't likely to make it here anyway, and we have some need for the space beyond making a few petulant fans feel slightly better for a week, it might be worthwhile. More likely is we'll be better off just living with the remainder of the deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/redwings

As ridiculous as it gets.

We have to trade Green just for the fact that we don't have any money to resign our RFAs next summer. And those will be Larkin, AA, Mantha and Mrazek - the only guys with more than average potential on this team. Yikes.

it will take at least 3 years before we can even think about being competitive again and having room to sign good FAs (if we can get them..) because off all this crap on that roster..

I don't get this ownership, at all. Holland should be long gone for signing those contracts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, The Datsyukian Deke said:

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/redwings

As ridiculous as it gets.

We have to trade Green just for the fact that we don't have any money to resign our RFAs next summer. And those will be Larkin, AA, Mantha and Mrazek - the only guys with more than average potential on this team. Yikes.

it will take at least 3 years before we can even think about being competitive again and having room to sign good FAs (if we can get them..) because off all this crap on that roster..

I don't get this ownership, at all. Holland should be long gone for signing those contracts.

Why is that a problem? We trade Green and could potentially get a 1st round pick and enough money to re-sign our RFAs. Isn't that a good thing? Whats the point of having Green on this team when we're nowhere close to a Stanley Cup? He probably would prefer to go to a cup contending team in the offseason anyways. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a problem when you have to trade someone just to generate cap space, because you have none, because everything is wasted on mediocre players. If we had no cap space because we pay a contending roster, hey, no problem. ;)

Sure, even if we had space, i'd still trade Green for a 1st, i just wanted to stress how handcuffed we are.

Plus, trading away Greens salary won't cut it on all 4. Or what do you intend to pay them? We get 900,000 relief because the amount for Weiss goes down, but that's it.

We should try hard to trade Nyquist at the deadline, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, The Datsyukian Deke said:

It is a problem when you have to trade someone just to generate cap space, because you have none, because everything is wasted on mediocre players. If we had no cap space because we pay a contending roster, hey, no problem. ;)

Sure, even if we had space, i'd still trade Green for a 1st, i just wanted to stress how handcuffed we are.

Plus, trading away Greens salary won't cut it on all 4. Or what do you intend to pay them? We get 900,000 relief because the amount for Weiss goes down, but that's it.

We should try hard to trade Nyquist at the deadline, too.

I don't think we're trading Green to relieve cap space. If we trade him it's for the pick. I would not at all be surprised if Holland tries to re-sign Green first thing on July first and then tries to re-sign the RFAs. 

He did the same 2 summers ago with Nielsen, Helm etc. And then resigned Mrazek etc. 

Also looking at the website, I don't think it's counting the $4 million we get from putting Franzen on LTIR. If it isn't then we should have $17 million to work with. 

Re-signing Mantha, AA, Larkin should be a max of $6-7 million. Re-signing Mrazek should be around $4-5 million and whatever is left  Green can be offered. 

Unless Larkin, Mantha or AA end up scoring 80 points each, I'm fairly certain Holland will keep them around for cheap. AA will go to arbitration but they'll get him for cheap. 

The other thing is, I don't even know if this team is going to re-sign Mrazek. They're not that high on him, left the guy exposed in the draft for free. 

Then there's Frk. Not worth more than $800 k probably. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


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

I don't think we're trading Green to relieve cap space. If we trade him it's for the pick. I would not at all be surprised if Holland tries to re-sign Green first thing on July first and then tries to re-sign the RFAs. 

He did the same 2 summers ago with Nielsen, Helm etc. And then resigned Mrazek etc. 

Also looking at the website, I don't think it's counting the $4 million we get from putting Franzen on LTIR. If it isn't then we should have $17 million to work with. 

Re-signing Mantha, AA, Larkin should be a max of $6-7 million. Re-signing Mrazek should be around $4-5 million and whatever is left  Green can be offered. 

Unless Larkin, Mantha or AA end up scoring 80 points each, I'm fairly certain Holland will keep them around for cheap. AA will go to arbitration but they'll get him for cheap. 

The other thing is, I don't even know if this team is going to re-sign Mrazek. They're not that high on him, left the guy exposed in the draft for free. 

Then there's Frk. Not worth more than $800 k probably. 

Franzen LTIR isn't counted. Plus there'll probably be at least a modest cap raise. $18M is probably a decent estimate. ~15.5 after filling out the bottom of the forward roster (3 of Frk, Wilson, Bert, Svech; maybe the 4th replacing Witkowski for about the same price). 

But I think you're a bit optimistic on the kids. All will have more experience than what AA had this year, plus Mantha and Larkin having higher point seasons and more responsibility. That, and looking at Tatar a few years ago, I'd think 2 years at around $3M for each would be a reasonable estimate (presuming they don't decline significantly or have a big breakout), little more for a three year deal. Three years would be ideal for each, as they would all still be RFAs at the end.

It's probably doubtful that we'll be able to afford them, plus Green and Mrazek, without additional moves. I don't think that's really a bad thing though.

Looking beyond Green's point totals, he leans more toward detriment than asset (though to be fair, so do all of our defensemen). While I wouldn't expect a kid to be better, I don't see any compelling reason to bring him back. Should just be happy with getting rid of a big contract without having to pay someone to take it.

Mrazek I'd reserve judgement until we see how this year plays out. Another poor year and we can cut him loose (and maybe then bring Green back, or another D), and if he bounces back give him a one year "prove it's not a fluke" deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for Mrazek, if he was an UFA, unless he can be traded for more picks, I would say let him walk and sign a reasonably priced backup. Keep Howard as the starter and pray that Petruzzelli pans out. Since he's RFA, I would try to resign him to a SHORT term, cost-effective deal and let him prove he is Howard's heir. If he is, re-sign him before he hits UFA, if not, let him go.

With Green, I would try to re-sign him in free agency. He was willing to sign with the Wings before, so why not again? He's 32 now, so preferably a 2 year deal, but will probably be three to get lower salary each year.

The reason I like having guys like Green and Daley on this team is that they are experienced top 4 dmen. I know people hate the idea of signing vets instead of bringing up kids. I get it. But there are not going to be 1st pair D available via free agency. There are none on this team, and probably none in the pipeline, except maybe Cholowski. That means you are going to have to play some of your D on your 1st pair against elite talent. Guys like Green, Daley, Ericsson, and Dekeyser will get exposed and outplayed. But these are guys who have already matured, and they understand their limitations. They know what their abilities are, and that they are being used beyond them. They aren't going to have their development stunted or their confidence destroyed because they are outclassed every night. They'll just go out there every game and do what they always do. Putting younglings in a situation to fail, does not help them grow as a player. If anything, it can ruin them before they have a chance to develop. Sproul, Ouellet, Jensen, Marchenko, etc. were never going to be top pair guys or even good 2nd pair guys. Accordingly, they were given fewer minutes and lesser roles. That's why when it's time for the next wave (Saarajarvi, Hronek, Hicketts, Cholowski) you're still gonna need guys like Green around to mentor and keep the kids from being asked to do more than they are able to.

Share this post


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

Looking beyond Green's point totals, he leans more toward detriment than asset (though to be fair, so do all of our defensemen). While I wouldn't expect a kid to be better, I don't see any compelling reason to bring him back. Should just be happy with getting rid of a big contract without having to pay someone to take it.

Who replaces Green's offensive contributions? Assuming we don't bring in any high-end talent (because the UFA pool will be a wasteland and "Trades are hard") and we don't draft a kid who's ready to step right into the lineup and be a top-four impact player, we're gonna be left with Daley, DeKeyser, Ericsson, Jensen (?), Ouellet (?), maybe Hicketts/Hronek (???), maybe the ghost of Kronwall (???). That's bad.

Don't get me wrong, I think we should be looking to move on from Green and free up that big chunk of cap space. But our D situation is so rough that I don't think we can afford to lose Green and not replace him with an equally talented player, and I'm not sure where we'd find that player. I'd assume Holland would be compelled to make a trade, but...yeah. The Caps will likely find a way to keep John Carlson, and even if they don't, I'm not sure I'd want him on what would surely be a massive long-term contract.

Share this post


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

Who replaces Green's offensive contributions? Assuming we don't bring in any high-end talent (because the UFA pool will be a wasteland and "Trades are hard") and we don't draft a kid who's ready to step right into the lineup and be a top-four impact player, we're gonna be left with Daley, DeKeyser, Ericsson, Jensen (?), Ouellet (?), maybe Hicketts/Hronek (???), maybe the ghost of Kronwall (???). That's bad.

Don't get me wrong, I think we should be looking to move on from Green and free up that big chunk of cap space. But our D situation is so rough that I don't think we can afford to lose Green and not replace him with an equally talented player, and I'm not sure where we'd find that player. I'd assume Holland would be compelled to make a trade, but...yeah. The Caps will likely find a way to keep John Carlson, and even if they don't, I'm not sure I'd want him on what would surely be a massive long-term contract.

I know I keep mentioning him, but I really like the idea of Jared Spurgeon as our stopgap top-pairing offensive defenseman.

In a "perfect" world, Nyquist (+ sweetener) gets us Spurgeon.

No one. And so what? If we're already bad with Green, I don't see why we should be so concerned over how bad we'll be without him. Bad is bad. And if you're already going to be bad, in some ways worse is better.

I like Spurgeon, and depending on what you're adding it might be an ok move. In general though, I don't like the idea of trading for any of these 2nd/3rd tier defensemen in their mid/late-20s. We don't have that much in the way of trade assets, I'd rather reserve them for someone younger who may still blossom into a true elite player, or just draft picks. I don't have a lot of confidence that some other teams 2nd or 3rd D is going to come here as our #1 and make any real difference. I wouldn't hate it (assuming a decent deal), just wouldn't be my first choice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/24/2017 at 9:26 PM, kliq said:

If that is true then, pretend I said retain 50% rather then 75%.

Remember, you are watching him on a mediocre team playing in the top 4 against top level guys. Lets say he was on Nashville playing on their bottom pairing against 3rd/4th lines, he would appear to be much better.

I hate buyouts because then there is a cap hit for 6 years, so when it matters we are going to be hindered. Who cares right now.

If the Wings were to buy out Ericsson next summer, there would be a 4-year cap hit of $1,416,667 per year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until Holland is retired or grows a pair every year is going to be a crap shoot. We are maxed out-Hollands fault. Until we lose a good young player like Larkin or Mantha due to a lack of cap, he is safe.

We cant bring back Green even if we want to-no cap space. If you all think we are going to get Larkin, Mantha, and AA signed for less than 10 million combined you are crazy. We are at 58.2 million thanks to the Weiss buyout and 15 players. Those 3 add 10 million + leaving us with about 7-8 million and we need 5 more to fill out the roster.

We have to make some tough moves. Kronwall has to be LTIRed, Ericsson bought out, and we have to make a trade or 2-ideally Nyquist and Helm. Those moves would free up another 16+ million and not cause the team any real damage. Nyquist and Helm can easily be replaced by Svechnikov and Rasmussen-for less than 2 million per, leaving us with 3 open roster spots and 14+ million to spend. Now we can make some rel moves like going after JT or Carlson. The later should be our main focus IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Buppy said:

No one. And so what? If we're already bad with Green, I don't see why we should be so concerned over how bad we'll be without him. Bad is bad. And if you're already going to be bad, in some ways worse is better.

I mean, sure. I guess. But Green is at least putting up some points in a top-four role and helping our forwards score some goals. Take that away from this group without replacing it and we're pretty much in "outright tanking" territory. Which might not be the worst thing, true.

Probably moot, as I doubt Green will want to re-sign with us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, joshy207 said:

If the Wings were to buy out Ericsson next summer, there would be a 4-year cap hit of $1,416,667 per year.

IMO not worth it unless we have to do it. We don't NEED cap space now, but in a few years when we could be good, it will just hinder us. I only do it if we need to do it to keep one of our 3 big RFA's or if it means we could sign a guy like JT.

Share this post


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

IMO not worth it unless we have to do it. We don't NEED cap space now, but in a few years when we could be good, it will just hinder us. I only do it if we need to do it to keep one of our 3 big RFA's or if it means we could sign a guy like JT.

I agree. If we keep E's contract now, it runs out in 2019/20. If we buy him out, it extends it until 22/23 which means we'll still be dealing with all 3 of Abby, Helm and now E's cap hits until 20/21, and E and Abby in 21/22 and 22/23. No thanks. Too many young'uns will need to be re-signed during those years. So even if buying E out frees up a couple mil this summer to re-sign Mantha, Larkin, AA, Mrazek, it still handicaps the team again when their bridge deals expire, when they'll need even more money/cap space.

What I would do is trade Green at the deadline (for a 1st hopefully). If Dahlin and Svech are gone when Wings pick, trade their first 1st along with E to a team that wants to trade up and their 1st along with a 2nd rounder coming back. This is assuming that its to a team that is not on E's no trade list and there are enough of the good dmen left to still get one after trading down. I would prefer to include Abby or Helm in that trade but there NTC's are still airtight this summer. Draft best  player available (hopefully a C) with the second 1st round pick. Then re-sign Green or a similar player in free agency to replace E.

Edited by Neomaxizoomdweebie

Share this post


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

I mean, sure. I guess. But Green is at least putting up some points in a top-four role and helping our forwards score some goals. Take that away from this group without replacing it and we're pretty much in "outright tanking" territory. Which might not be the worst thing, true.

Probably moot, as I doubt Green will want to re-sign with us.

On paper, I agree. But you never know how things will work out once players actually hit the ice. 

But even if it did, I think it's a better option than using buyouts or giving up picks/prospects to get rid of other contracts, just so we can bring back Green and suck slightly less.

And it may also be moot in the sense that it's possible we could afford to bring him back regardless. Mrazek has another bad year and we decide to move on, or Kronwall goes on LTIR, or a larger cap increase. I just hope that if we do bring him back, it's another short term deal. 

Share this post


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

On paper, I agree. But you never know how things will work out once players actually hit the ice. 

But even if it did, I think it's a better option than using buyouts or giving up picks/prospects to get rid of other contracts, just so we can bring back Green and suck slightly less.

And it may also be moot in the sense that it's possible we could afford to bring him back regardless. Mrazek has another bad year and we decide to move on, or Kronwall goes on LTIR, or a larger cap increase. I just hope that if we do bring him back, it's another short term deal. 

I hear ya. I get where you're coming from and I don't really disagree. I'm just frustrated that our D situation is so rough that losing Green might cripple our attack.

If the bottom really falls out this season, I could see Holland or his successor settling for a tanktastic 2018-19 season. But if we prove to be reasonably competitive this season despite our obvious fundamental shortcomings, I think Holland or his successor will try to give us a respectable, somewhat well-balanced top-four next season. Whether that top-four would include Green or a player brought in from outside, I don't know. But I could see Holland or his successor making a move for a high-end defenseman.

Edited by Dabura

Share this post


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

I hear ya. I get where you're coming from and I don't really disagree. I'm just frustrated that our D situation is so rough that losing Green might cripple our attack.

If the bottom really falls out this season, I could see Holland or his successor settling for a tanktastic 2018-19 season. But if we prove to be reasonably competitive this season despite our obvious fundamental shortcomings, I think Holland or his successor will try to give us a respectable, somewhat well-balanced top-four next season. Whether that top-four would include Green or a player brought in from outside, I don't know. But I could see Holland or his successor making a move for a high-end defenseman.

All depends on who "Holland or his successor" ends up being...

Share this post


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

All depends on who "Holland or his successor" ends up being...

Unless Yzerman jumps ship which I highly doubt, I would be shocked if Holland is not renewed or if he decides he does not want to renew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, kliq said:

IMO not worth it unless we have to do it. We don't NEED cap space now, but in a few years when we could be good, it will just hinder us. I only do it if we need to do it to keep one of our 3 big RFA's or if it means we could sign a guy like JT.

It's as much about the roster spot as it is about the cap space.  Hicketts can't stay in GR for long.  Guys like Russo and Renouf need some experience so the Wings can truly decide what they are.  If Ericsson is truly tradeable, that's great, pull the trigger, but I don't believe he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, joshy207 said:

It's as much about the roster spot as it is about the cap space.  Hicketts can't stay in GR for long.  Guys like Russo and Renouf need some experience so the Wings can truly decide what they are.  If Ericsson is truly tradeable, that's great, pull the trigger, but I don't believe he is.

If its not just cap space and you want the spot, send him to the minors. You don't need to buy him out to free up a roster spot.

I would like to see Hicketts up sooner then later on the big club, I'm not too worried about Russo and Renouf, I dont watch the AHL but I'm pretty sure I've read that they project to be 3rd pairing guys at best. @krsmith17 do either of these two have a chance at being top 4 guys?

Edited by kliq

Share this post


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

If its not just cap space and you want the spot, send him to the minors. You don't need to buy him out to free up a roster spot.

I would like to see Hicketts up sooner then later on the big club, I'm not too worried about Russo and Renouf, I dont watch the AHL but I'm pretty sure I've read that they project to be 3rd pairing guys at best. @krsmith17 do either of these two have a chance at being top 4 guys?

I agree. The last thing we should be doing is buying out players. Either let their contracts run out, or trade them, assuming the cost to trade isn't too high. Better to retain salary on a contract than buy a player out. Trade = $X for Y years. Buy out = $X for Y(2) years. It makes no sense to buy out players, unless it's an absolute necessity. I don't see that being the case.

I want Hicketts up too. I'd never wish injury on a player, but I'm assuming Kronwall won't play all season, and with DeKeyser likely out for another 2-3 weeks, we could see Hicketts up sooner than later. I just hope they don't opt to play Witkowski over calling him up...

Russo or Renouf, top 4? I don't see it. To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if both are career AHLers. Neither are better than fringe NHLers in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/30/2017 at 5:27 PM, krsmith17 said:

All depends on who "Holland or his successor" ends up being...

I was thinking that it may not matter who it is. If Holland, Devellano, etc are still involved with the team, they may hinder what the new GM wants to do anyway. Especially if they promote in house, like Draper. I don't know how high up player personnel decisions go tho. But I fear a GM change will be in name only.

Share this post


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

I was thinking that it may not matter who it is. If Holland, Devellano, etc are still involved with the team, they may hinder what the new GM wants to do anyway. Especially if they promote in house, like Draper. I don't know how high up player personnel decisions go tho. But I fear a GM change will be in name only.

Me too...

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