1/22 GDT - Red Wings @ Devils - 7:00 PM EST

[SwedeLundin77 460]

2 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Are we really going to turn this into another Howard v. Mrazek debate?

Howard is the starter. He earned that before the season even started because he was the better goalie. He hasn't done anything deserving of getting fewer starts. It would be unfair to do so for the sake of getting Mrazek going. Mrazek played himself into the backup role. He's not owed any more starts than what's normal for a backup. If Mrazek takes advantage of his limited starts, then great. I hope he does. But you don't take starts away from Howard and give them to Mrazek when he hasnt earned it yet in the hopes that he does.

Dude, it's about increasing Mrazek's trade value, at the very least. Let's be honest, this season isn't going anywhere, so they're going to trade assets again. As it stood, prior to the Chicago game, Mrazek's value was basically zilch given his stats this season. He has a strong game against Chicago (after Howard had a poor game the day prior) and he gets benched the next game? Makes no sense but that's Blashill for you. I don't think anyone is disputing that Howard earned the starter gig this season, but one of them should be dealt this season, if possible, so wouldn't it be wise to make sure they're both positioned to garner you a good return, at the very least? Oh, and regardless, Mrazek deserves the next start after tomorrow's game, given his performance. Don't forget, if they want to keep Mrazek, they need to qualify him at around the 4 million he currently makes, so they won't do that unless he has shown he is back on his game. They do not want to lose an asset for nothing.

[SwedeLundin77 460]

6 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Yeah but he's no "Monster". 

Is it fair to compare the 2? I recall Gustavsson having some really good games, and carrying the team at times, but his overall stats weren't great. Kinda like Mrazek. Too streaky, lacked consistency at times.

But then again, he was about as consistently healthy as Howard.

It's all about future-proofing. Can Mrazek be that guy, or has he lost his way and this is the best we'll get (inconsistent play)? Howard has done well to stay healthy, but he'll be 34 this spring, heading into his final contract year. Petruzelli probably won't be ready by then, so they'll need a stop-gap and I would be heavily concerned about going with Howard/Coreau, in case Howard get's injured long-term. It's in the team's best interest to see if they can get Mrazek back to 15/16 performance levels to see if he's worth 4 million on a short-term deal if he'd take it.

[gcom007 1,465]

2 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Are we really going to turn this into another Howard v. Mrazek debate?

Howard is the starter. He earned that before the season even started because he was the better goalie. He hasn't done anything deserving of getting fewer starts. It would be unfair to do so for the sake of getting Mrazek going. Mrazek played himself into the backup role. He's not owed any more starts than what's normal for a backup. If Mrazek takes advantage of his limited starts, then great. I hope he does. But you don't take starts away from Howard and give them to Mrazek when he hasnt earned it yet in the hopes that he does.

Blah blah blah blah Howard is old. 

It ain’t about who’s owed what, it’s about what’s smart for the team long run. You’ve got a goalie who’s shown flashes of brilliance and who strung together two consecutive solid playoff outings, a goalie who’s been working hard behind the scenes, who also happens to be heading into a tricky RFA situation.

At the same time, you’re the Detroit Red Wings, and you have s*** for assets, no one solid in the pipeline, and an injury-prone Howard on the tail end of his career who’s going to start having a harder time coming back from these injuries sooner than any of us would like. It just is what it is. 

Mrazek has a lot to prove without a doubt, tons. He brought it on himself, he lost his head, clearly. I don’t think it was an easy situation though, and I don’t believe he’s at an age where we should be giving up on him when we don’t have many good options. And we don’t have many guys in the system with the upside he could have.

Petr Mrazek has been through some s***, and he’s grown up some in the process. Blashill and whatever the new goalie coaches name is have praised his work ethic behind the scenes. He’s gotta be hungry. 

Howard’s done nothing wrong, true story. Both these guys get zero favors from the guys in front of them either. But he hasn’t been so lights out to keep this team at the top, and we are mediocre at best as a team. And for the love, Howard is getting pretty old. You don’t have to dislike Howard to understand that in a season like this under the circumstances, it is in this teams best interest to give Petr Mrazek one final shot. 

But don’t take my word for it. I think Petr Mrazek made a pretty strong statement for himself in the last couple starts. Enough said.

Oh, and by one final shot, I mean it should probably at least be Howard 2 and Mrazek 1 unless one of them s***s the bed or plays truly lights out. I don’t think that’s remotely unreasonable.

Edited January 23, 2018 by gcom007

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Where were you when Howard was kill?

I at home, drink barley pops and watching Mrazek dominate, when dad call...

"Howard is kill"

"No"

and you?

[Hockeymom1960 5,107]

7 hours ago, SwedeLundin77 said:

Dude, it's about increasing Mrazek's trade value, at the very least. Let's be honest, this season isn't going anywhere, so they're going to trade assets again. As it stood, prior to the Chicago game, Mrazek's value was basically zilch given his stats this season. He has a strong game against Chicago (after Howard had a poor game the day prior) and he gets benched the next game? Makes no sense but that's Blashill for you. I don't think anyone is disputing that Howard earned the starter gig this season, but one of them should be dealt this season, if possible, so wouldn't it be wise to make sure they're both positioned to garner you a good return, at the very least? Oh, and regardless, Mrazek deserves the next start after tomorrow's game, given his performance. Don't forget, if they want to keep Mrazek, they need to qualify him at around the 4 million he currently makes, so they won't do that unless he has shown he is back on his game. They do not want to lose an asset for nothing.

I highly doubt there going to trade Mrazek.  He's 25 and has lots of potential but a lot of you forget that.  We need a good goalie and there's nothing out there that we don't have already on this team..

10 hours ago, BigWillieStyle said:

Petr should get the next game, but, being a back-to-back, there's no doubt that Howard gets the nod. He had a great game, I hope that he gets Thursday so that he can stone The Black Hawks again.

So?  Petr's 25, I'm sure he can handle it.

Edited January 23, 2018 by Hockeymom1960

[chaps80 1,591]

12 hours ago, gcom007 said:

Blah blah blah blah Howard is old. 

It ain’t about who’s owed what, it’s about what’s smart for the team long run. You’ve got a goalie who’s shown flashes of brilliance and who strung together two consecutive solid playoff outings, a goalie who’s been working hard behind the scenes, who also happens to be heading into a tricky RFA situation.

At the same time, you’re the Detroit Red Wings, and you have s*** for assets, no one solid in the pipeline, and an injury-prone Howard on the tail end of his career who’s going to start having a harder time coming back from these injuries sooner than any of us would like. It just is what it is. 

Mrazek has a lot to prove without a doubt, tons. He brought it on himself, he lost his head, clearly. I don’t think it was an easy situation though, and I don’t believe he’s at an age where we should be giving up on him when we don’t have many good options. And we don’t have many guys in the system with the upside he could have.

Petr Mrazek has been through some s***, and he’s grown up some in the process. Blashill and whatever the new goalie coaches name is have praised his work ethic behind the scenes. He’s gotta be hungry. 

Howard’s done nothing wrong, true story. Both these guys get zero favors from the guys in front of them either. But he hasn’t been so lights out to keep this team at the top, and we are mediocre at best as a team. And for the love, Howard is getting pretty old. You don’t have to dislike Howard to understand that in a season like this under the circumstances, it is in this teams best interest to give Petr Mrazek one final shot. 

But don’t take my word for it. I think Petr Mrazek made a pretty strong statement for himself in the last couple starts. Enough said.

Oh, and by one final shot, I mean it should probably at least be Howard 2 and Mrazek 1 unless one of them s***s the bed or plays truly lights out. I don’t think that’s remotely unreasonable.

So others besides myself feel this way?  Good to see.

The whole “Jimmy earned the starting job and shouldn’t have to give up starts to Mrazek” thing is pretty senseless with the current state of the team.  Jimmy is a veteran goalie. He shouldn’t get butt hurt over the team giving their other option a look if they want to, especially heading into an off-season where that other option is an RFA and the team being sellers at the deadline. They have a decision to make in goal going forward, so starter and backup designations can go right out the window. 

I can see playing Howard and not worrying much about Mrazek right now if the team were a contender. But they aren’t. Jimmy losing a few starts is not a big deal. If it is, it’s a big deal to him and only him. 

Edited January 23, 2018 by chaps80

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

12 hours ago, SwedeLundin77 said:

Dude, it's about increasing Mrazek's trade value, at the very least. Let's be honest, this season isn't going anywhere, so they're going to trade assets again. As it stood, prior to the Chicago game, Mrazek's value was basically zilch given his stats this season. He has a strong game against Chicago (after Howard had a poor game the day prior) and he gets benched the next game? Makes no sense but that's Blashill for you. I don't think anyone is disputing that Howard earned the starter gig this season, but one of them should be dealt this season, if possible, so wouldn't it be wise to make sure they're both positioned to garner you a good return, at the very least? Oh, and regardless, Mrazek deserves the next start after tomorrow's game, given his performance. Don't forget, if they want to keep Mrazek, they need to qualify him at around the 4 million he currently makes, so they won't do that unless he has shown he is back on his game. They do not want to lose an asset for nothing.

I understand the argument that giving Mrazek more starts potentially increases his trade value. But I would counter that by saying that its actually more likely that doing so DECREASES his value. Look at his history. Great for awhile, then dookie sheets. He's been that way for 2 seasons? now. 2 games doesn't change that. I would rather play him in limited starts, hope that he continues to play well in those starts, and hope that teams buy into the whole "potential" thing. I want the most value for Mrazek in a possible trade as much as anyone else. Why wouldn't I? But to play on an old adage: I would rather teams "believe" he has potential, rather than play him more and remove all doubt. Could playing Mrazek more increase his value? Sure, the last 2 games say so. But could playing him more hurt his trade value. Yes, the last 2 years say so. To quote the Rolling Stones: "Tiiiiime is on my side, yes it is."

Also, the fact that the team chose to expose Mrazek over Howard in the expansion draft tells me that they've already made their choice as to who they're going with as their goalie (at least for the near future). Playing Mrazek more doesn't change that. Howard is the better goalie now. You know what you're getting from Howard, a good starter. Its more likely that Howard remains the better goalie too. Could Mrazek end up better than Howard? Yes. Unlikely IMO, but yes. Howard is just the safer bet.

If you're worried about getting the best return, then you trade Mrazek this season and Howard next season. That would get you the bigger return.

12 hours ago, gcom007 said:

Blah blah blah blah Howard is old. 

It ain’t about who’s owed what, it’s about what’s smart for the team long run. You’ve got a goalie who’s shown flashes of brilliance and who strung together two consecutive solid playoff outings, a goalie who’s been working hard behind the scenes, who also happens to be heading into a tricky RFA situation.

At the same time, you’re the Detroit Red Wings, and you have s*** for assets, no one solid in the pipeline, and an injury-prone Howard on the tail end of his career who’s going to start having a harder time coming back from these injuries sooner than any of us would like. It just is what it is. 

Mrazek has a lot to prove without a doubt, tons. He brought it on himself, he lost his head, clearly. I don’t think it was an easy situation though, and I don’t believe he’s at an age where we should be giving up on him when we don’t have many good options. And we don’t have many guys in the system with the upside he could have.

Petr Mrazek has been through some s***, and he’s grown up some in the process. Blashill and whatever the new goalie coaches name is have praised his work ethic behind the scenes. He’s gotta be hungry. 

Howard’s done nothing wrong, true story. Both these guys get zero favors from the guys in front of them either. But he hasn’t been so lights out to keep this team at the top, and we are mediocre at best as a team. And for the love, Howard is getting pretty old. You don’t have to dislike Howard to understand that in a season like this under the circumstances, it is in this teams best interest to give Petr Mrazek one final shot. 

But don’t take my word for it. I think Petr Mrazek made a pretty strong statement for himself in the last couple starts. Enough said.

Oh, and by one final shot, I mean it should probably at least be Howard 2 and Mrazek 1 unless one of them s***s the bed or plays truly lights out. I don’t think that’s remotely unreasonable.

1st bold: That's the problem. Flashes of brilliance. That's another word for inconsistent. Everybody knows it. But for one to be inconsistent, they must play more. Therefore, playing Mrazek more = more inconsistency = less value. Playing Mrazek less doesn't allow him to become inconsistent. Flashes of brilliance = potential = more value.

2nd bold: He may only be 25, but he's playing in his 4th NHL season, two of which he played 50 or more games. What more do we need to see here? Howard was around the same age when he finally got it, that's true. But he hadn't spent 4 years in the league prior to that either. At some point, you have to cut bait.

3rd bold: We agree on that. But if they're both playing in front of the same D, how do you explain Jimmy's superior numbers? And it's not Howard's fault this team is where it is. I would argue he's the reason this team hasn't bottomed out.

4th bold: 2 seasons > 2 games

5th bold: Which one do you think is more likely to do that?

 

[brett 1,029]

Mrazek is Czech for trade bait

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Who is gonna trade for Petr Mrazek?

He had a horrible season last year. Then teams had the opportunity to trade for him on the cheap when he was exposed at the expansion. No one wanted him.

Now he's having another horrible season and suddenly teams are gonna trade for him?

lulz

[krsmith17 7,191]

34 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Who is gonna trade for Petr Mrazek?

He had a horrible season last year. Then teams had the opportunity to trade for him on the cheap when he was exposed at the expansion. No one wanted him.

Now he's having another horrible season and suddenly teams are gonna trade for him?

lulz

I hope you're right...

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

25 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Who is gonna trade for Petr Mrazek?

He had a horrible season last year. Then teams had the opportunity to trade for him on the cheap when he was exposed at the expansion. No one wanted him.

Now he's having another horrible season and suddenly teams are gonna trade for him?

lulz

As long as people believe he has "potential" there will be a market. Trade him now before everyone else figures it out. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

6 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

As long as people believe he has "potential" there will be a market. Trade him now before everyone else figures it out. 

He could potentially be HC Vitkovice's starting netminder next year.

[chaps80 1,591]

Just saw Mrazek’s save on Boyle last night. Unreal. Haha deja vu for that guy. Open net sure goal stopped by a stick. 

 

[kickazz 5,459]

4 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Who is gonna trade for Petr Mrazek?

He had a horrible season last year. Then teams had the opportunity to trade for him on the cheap when he was exposed at the expansion. No one wanted him.

Now he's having another horrible season and suddenly teams are gonna trade for him?

lulz

Thought you didn't watch GoT.