• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

puckbags

Sheahan and a 5th for Wilson and a 3rd

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I know it's been 5 years since Lidstrom, but in those initial years since he left we looked promising overall. D, Z and Howard seemed to be carrying. Which probably made the management complacent. I think the reality set in around the 2015-16 season when Tampa just outclassed the hell out of us and then it kept sinking in the following two seasons. Probably because the players I mentioned could no longer carry the team. 

 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


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

I know it's been 5 years since Lidstrom, but in those initial years since he left we looked promising overall.

Eh, debatable. Howard got us into the playoffs in the lockout-shortened season. Nyquist overachieved for us the following season. DeKeyser was an ok pickup, Kronwall was an ok stopgap 1D, but we needed to do something to seriously address the loss of Lidstrom and Rafalski. I guess Ryan Suter was Plan A. I'm not sure there was a Plan B. We should've acquired Brent Burns in 2011, but we didn't.

Share this post


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

Eh, debatable. Howard got us into the playoffs in the lockout-shortened season. Nyquist overachieved for us the following season. DeKeyser was an ok pickup, Kronwall was an ok stopgap 1D, but we needed to do something to seriously address the loss of Lidstrom and Rafalski. I guess Ryan Suter was Plan A. I'm not sure there was a Plan B. We should've acquired Brent Burns in 2011, but we didn't.

There wasn't. Kronwall did fairly well in that 2014 season. We got complacent imo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of the "trades are hard" is just sarcasm. I know I've joked about it. High end trades like Shanny, Chelios, Hasek are a thing of the past. Wings were a contender then, picks and prospects were expendable. Now that a rebuild is on (hopefully) they just can't afford to make a lot of those kinds of deals anymore. I don't think those are the kinds of deals people are expecting (or at least they shouldn't be).

 That doesn't mean that they should hoard all of their picks/prospects either. Most of them won't pan out anyway. I do think they have the assets to acquire a young 2nd pairing defenseman with 1st pairing potential. That's the kind of trade l think most are looking for. Not easy, but I think there is the belief that Holland is too gunshy to pull the trigger on a deal like that even if one was on the table. Therefore...Trades are hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing with hypotheticals is there's never any end to them. There's always something different that you could have done. So if you base your criticisms off of them, coupled with the assumption that whatever scenario you have imagined would be better than what we have, you're creating an unrealistic standard. 

Pretending for a moment that the lack of a big trade is actually what's bothering people, we shouldn't assume that it is only a matter of Holland being unwilling to make a trade. While it may be safe to assume that we could have made "a" trade, even a trade that people would consider "big", that doesn't mean that whatever specific trades you might have in mind are or would have been possible. 

Furthermore, we shouldn't act like making whatever trade is so certain to produce better results. As much as we like to think so, hockey teams are not the sum of their parts. At least not in any way we can really understand. Big moves sometimes have little to no impact, or even negative impact, and small changes sometimes result in big differences. Burns, on an individual level, was as successful as you could possibly hope when making a trade, but San Jose as a team became worse. Dallas, apart from the one season, hasn't been notably better since getting Seguin, Hamilton hasn't made a big difference in his two years in Calgary. 

But of course it isn't actually the lack of trades that has people upset; it's the decline of the team. Even though most people will acknowledge that it was inevitable, "what-if" is just too easy an argument to make. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More than anything, it's the inaction on the trade front, in the face of a slow and dispiriting decline, that has soured people. Swinging a trade for a really good defenseman doesn't necessarily fix the team and it probably doesn't stave off the overall decline, and maybe the trade backfires and blows up in the organization's collective face. But, personally, I feel we've reached the point of ridiculousness re: not adequately addressing the elephant in the room. "DO SOMETHING!" is not an intellectualy compelling demand, but at this point I think Wings fans are justified in voicing it, even if they don't all grasp the complexity of the Wings' situation and the pros and cons of trading x package for x defenseman.

The Detroit Red Wings are in a hole. Maybe we were always going to end up in this hole, regardless of how many trades Holland did(n't) make. But I think we could've at least prevented the hole from getting as deep as it is. That's in the past, though. In the here and now, I think we have enough forward assets that we can acquire a player or two that could immediately improve our situation in a significant way without dealing a huge blow to our forward depth.

We need help on D. If Holland is genuinely aiming to pull of a successful rebuild-on-the-fly, something's gonna have to give. One of Hronek, Cholowski, Saarijarvi could become a cornerstone defenseman, but I wouldn't count on it. We could get lucky and land Dahlin, but I wouldn't count on it. We're not getting Doughty or Karlsson in 2019, just like we didn't get Suter in 2012 and just like we didn't get Stamkos last year and just like we won't get Tavares next year. Maybe it's time for a significant trade or two. There are worse things Holland could do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should add that I'm ok with waiting it out and letting things play out for the next few years. I've kind of accepted that that's likely how it's gonna be. If it means stockpiling assets to the ceiling, including a handful of sexy first-round selections (assuming we're a basement team for the next few years), then, sure, let it happen.

I'd still like a trade or two, though.

Share this post


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

It's both; the two aren't mutually exclusive.

1 hour ago, Dabura said:

More than anything, it's the inaction on the trade front, in the face of a slow and dispiriting decline, that has soured people. Swinging a trade for a really good defenseman doesn't necessarily fix the team and it probably doesn't stave off the overall decline, and maybe the trade backfires and blows up in the organization's collective face. But, personally, I feel we've reached the point of ridiculousness re: not adequately addressing the elephant in the room. "DO SOMETHING!" is not an intellectualy compelling demand, but at this point I think Wings fans are justified in voicing it, even if they don't all grasp the complexity of the Wings' situation and the pros and cons of trading x package for x defenseman.

The Detroit Red Wings are in a hole. Maybe we were always going to end up in this hole, regardless of how many trades Holland did(n't) make. But I think we could've at least prevented the hole from getting as deep as it is. That's in the past, though. In the here and now, I think we have enough forward assets that we can acquire a player or two that could immediately improve our situation in a significant way without dealing a huge blow to our forward depth.

We need help on D. If Holland is genuinely aiming to pull of a successful rebuild-on-the-fly, something's gonna have to give. One of Hronek, Cholowski, Saarijarvi could become a cornerstone defenseman, but I wouldn't count on it. We could get lucky and land Dahlin, but I wouldn't count on it. We're not getting Doughty or Karlsson in 2019, just like we didn't get Suter in 2012 and just like we didn't get Stamkos last year and just like we won't get Tavares next year. Maybe it's time for a significant trade or two. There are worse things Holland could do.

Lack of trades only in the context of the team has declined and trading is something you can easily point at and say could have been done differently. If Smith had become the next Rafalski and Sproul had developed into a stud #1 and we we're coming off a Cup win instead of missing the playoffs, no one would be making lame "Trades are hard" jokes or wanting Holland out and someone else to come in and shake things up. Conversely, if we had gotten Green, Daley, and Dekeyser via trade people would still be complaining, just with slightly different complaints.

I don't believe "DO SOMETHING!" is at all justified. One, because it doesn't really mean anything. Like saying "AAARGHH!!!" is a valid complaint. It's nothing more than an expression of frustration. Secondly, we have done things, they just haven't worked very well. That people are so dismissive of that says to me that people would be equally dismissive of anything that didn't work. 

You can say it's ridiculous, but the fact is that going several years without "adequately addressing" a need is incredibly commonplace. I would venture to say that at any given time, at least half the league could make a similar complaint, and over the last 20 years or so I'd say every team has. I'd say the only thing that's ridiculous is our expectations.

This is not to say that trades won't work, or that we shouldn't consider that option. Just that trade speculation should be considered in the same way as everything else. It belongs in your last paragraph with all the other possible, but uncertain, solutions.

Share this post


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

Holland: "my philosophy is to build through draft"

Fans: "where are the big trades???"

The guy vocalized his philosophy on how to build a hockey team in the cap era a long time ago. The fact that he doesnt make big trades should come as a surprise to no one.

I don't think a single person expects a trade, nor do I think anyone is surprised that Holland won't make a big trade. That doesn't mean we can't b**** and complain that he won't make a trade... :lol:

I personally believe teams need to be good at drafting and developing, signing free agents (RFA's / UFA's) AND making trades to be successful. We've been above average at drafting and developing, great at signing RFA's, not so great at signing UFA's, and inadequate at making trades. We have a ton of high end talent up front, and very little on the back end. Common sense says to trade from an area of strength to fill an area of weakness. Of course, nothing will happen, but THAT is the biggest reason I don't think Ken Holland is the right man to get this sinking ship back on course...

Share this post


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

I don't think a single person expects a trade, nor do I think anyone is surprised that Holland won't make a big trade. That doesn't mean we can't b**** and complain that he won't make a trade... :lol:

I personally believe teams need to be good at drafting and developing, signing free agents (RFA's / UFA's) AND making trades to be successful. We've been above average at drafting and developing, great at signing RFA's, not so great at signing UFA's, and inadequate at making trades. We have a ton of high end talent up front, and very little on the back end. Common sense says to trade from an area of strength to fill an area of weakness. Of course, nothing will happen, but THAT is the biggest reason I don't think Ken Holland is the right man to get this sinking ship back on course...

You're in for a huge disappointed if Holland leaves and one of the available ones come here. Going along the Buppy "hypotheticals" theme, you're coming up with an ideal scenario for yourself which none of the available GMs might actually fit into. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


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

You're in for a huge disappointed if Holland leaves and one of the available ones come here. Going along the Buppy "hypotheticals" theme, you're coming up with an ideal scenario for yourself which none of the available GMs might actually fit into. 

The first thing a new GM generally does when coming to an organization, is make his mark on the team. That would include shaking things up by making trades and likely even hiring a new coaching staff. Assuming of course that they don't hire from within... But of course they will. Draper will be the next GM and things will remain status quo... I'd like to see them hire from outside the organization, but I highly doubt that will happen. So you're probably right. I'll likely be in for a huge disappointment...

Share this post


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

Holland: "my philosophy is to build through draft"

Fans: "where are the big trades???"

The guy vocalized his philosophy on how to build a hockey team in the cap era a long time ago. The fact that he doesnt make big trades should come as a surprise to no one.

I feel like the guy shakes his head a million times to himself everyday. Takes a deep breath and then screams out:

"HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO TELL THESE f***TARD FANS THAT I'M BUILDING THROUGH THE DRAFT" 

Then walks out into the fresh air and runs into a fan who asks him "Where are the big trades???"

Holland stares at the fan. The fan looks right back at him.

Ken-Holland-before-season-opener-png_853

maxresdefault.jpg

635970194204119311-AP-Maple-Leafs-Babcoc

 

maxresdefault.jpg

 

"You've ruined it. you've ruined it and I'm leaving" says Holland.

Holland goes back into his den, wondering if anyone will understand the English he speaks in the interviews. A message he's been saying for months, nay for years that he indeed will build through the draft. 

ken-holland-the-gm-of-the-detroit-red-wi

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


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

I don't think a single person expects a trade, nor do I think anyone is surprised that Holland won't make a big trade. That doesn't mean we can't b**** and complain that he won't make a trade... :lol:

I personally believe teams need to be good at drafting and developing, signing free agents (RFA's / UFA's) AND making trades to be successful. We've been above average at drafting and developing, great at signing RFA's, not so great at signing UFA's, and inadequate at making trades. We have a ton of high end talent up front, and very little on the back end. Common sense says to trade from an area of strength to fill an area of weakness. Of course, nothing will happen, but THAT is the biggest reason I don't think Ken Holland is the right man to get this sinking ship back on course...

I mean I just find it silly that when the guys says "I'm doing X" everyone complains "HE'S DOING X!" just like he said he would. But to each their own I guess.

Share this post


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

I mean I just find it silly that when the guys says "I'm doing X" everyone complains "HE'S DOING X!" just like he said he would. But to each their own I guess.

I find it silly that people believe that just because Holland said that he's building through the draft, he's ONLY building through the draft. To my knowledge, Holland has never said "I will not make any big trades", "the only way we're going to acquire a top pair defenseman is through the draft"... GM's say a lot of things. Just this past week Holland was asked if Sproul was traded to make room in Grand Rapids for Saarijarvi. Holland said "I think Saarijarvi will stay there (Toledo) for a bit. I don't know if it's all bad in Toledo. It's a good league for a young player. Probably leave him there for a bit and let him play." He then proceeded to recall Saarijarvi up from Toledo two days later... Point is, everything a GM says should be taken with a grain of salt. Do I think Holland will make a trade to acquire a top defenseman? No. Do I think he should? Absolutely. Will I voice my opinion. Yes, yes I will.

Share this post


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

I find it silly that people believe that just because Holland said that he's building through the draft, he's ONLY building through the draft. To my knowledge, Holland has never said "I will not make any big trades", "the only way we're going to acquire a top pair defenseman is through the draft"... GM's say a lot of things. Just this past week Holland was asked if Sproul was traded to make room in Grand Rapids for Saarijarvi. Holland said "I think Saarijarvi will stay there (Toledo) for a bit. I don't know if it's all bad in Toledo. It's a good league for a young player. Probably leave him there for a bit and let him play." He then proceeded to recall Saarijarvi up from Toledo two days later... Point is, everything a GM says should be taken with a grain of salt. Do I think Holland will make a trade to acquire a top defenseman? No. Do I think he should? Absolutely. Will I voice my opinion. Yes, yes I will.

What's even more silly is your attempt to grossly exaggerate my point.

Of course he doesn't ONLY build through draft, don't be silly, he just made 2 trades. But the overall philosophy of this team is building through the draft, and you know that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

What's even more silly is your attempt to grossly exaggerate my point.

Of course he doesn't ONLY build through draft, don't be silly, he just made 2 trades. But the overall philosophy of this team is building through the draft, and you know that.

So what exactly was your point? Has he ever said that he won't make any big trades?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are trades to be had that can improve this team, and they don't need to be major moves.  He just proved it with the Sheahan trade, but he only makes those moves if he absolutely has to.  You can build through the draft and still make some moves.  In fact, that's how a winner is built.  You can't go almost exclusively either way.  Too many draft picks don't amount to much, and trading too much catches up to you eventually.

His biggest failing is over valuing middle of the road players and giving them deals that are at or near the top market value of what they'd get on the market, instead of looking for value.  I don't mind Abdelkader Helm, and Glendening on the team, you need those types of players to win.  But they shouldn't be on those contracts.  They're all at least 2 years too long, and pay $500k+ too much.  If you lose them, you replace them with a cheap vet or a rookie.  Yeah, the guy you lose might be a little better, but not that much compared to the contracts.  Nielsen wasn't needed with where the team was.  You sign a guy like that when you have a contender and need center depth.  Ditto for Daley on D.  

 

7 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

What's even more silly is your attempt to grossly exaggerate my point.

Of course he doesn't ONLY build through draft, don't be silly, he just made 2 trades. But the overall philosophy of this team is building through the draft, and you know that.

he made two trades because he had to in order to get AA on the team.  Both of those moves could have been made earlier.

Share this post


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

There are trades to be had that can improve this team, and they don't need to be major moves.  He just proved it with the Sheahan trade, but he only makes those moves if he absolutely has to.  You can build through the draft and still make some moves.  In fact, that's how a winner is built.  You can't go almost exclusively either way.  Too many draft picks don't amount to much, and trading too much catches up to you eventually.

His biggest failing is over valuing middle of the road players and giving them deals that are at or near the top market value of what they'd get on the market, instead of looking for value.  I don't mind Abdelkader Helm, and Glendening on the team, you need those types of players to win.  But they shouldn't be on those contracts.  They're all at least 2 years too long, and pay $500k+ too much.  If you lose them, you replace them with a cheap vet or a rookie.  Yeah, the guy you lose might be a little better, but not that much compared to the contracts.  Nielsen wasn't needed with where the team was.  You sign a guy like that when you have a contender and need center depth.  Ditto for Daley on D.  

he made two trades because he had to in order to get AA on the team.  Both of those moves could have been made earlier.

I couldn't agree more with all of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

....that he builds through the draft, not through big trades, what're you missing?

Why? Because that's all he's done in the past 10 years? Or because he's specifically said that he won't make big trades? I don't think he's ever said that... Again, I don't think he will make a big trade, but I do think he should. What's the issue with that?

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