Official 2018 Off Season *Rebuild* Thread

[kickazz 5,459]

1 minute ago, krsmith17 said:

 

If we were to sign him, and flip him at next year's deadline, the most we'd get would probably be a 4th round pick. To me, that's not worth keeping a younger player down in GR.

Exactly

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

29 minutes ago, kickazz said:

I’m not saying Vanek actually legitimately sucks. I’m just saying his trade deadline value is bad and just bringing him once for PP as a right handed shooter like Neo wants is a bad idea. Vanek can score but that would only be useful for us if we were making a run. We have younger players who can score and will.

Besides, Vanek isn’t a player that makes the younger players better. He’s more the type that utilizes other good playmakers. If anything he would probably benefit from Larkin than the other way around. 

If we want vets to help the kids, should sign Joe Thornton. Otherwise stand pat with what we have in Zetterberg, Kronwall, Nielsen.

I wholly disagree. Vanek spent the majority of his time on our third line. The time he had with our best playmakers was mostly limited to the PP.

I do think his ability in the offensive zone benefits those around him. Vanek thinks the game (at least offensively) better than most. It's that hockey sense that makes him dangerous and which benefits his teammates, as he's not the best skater, elite dangler, or ambitious forechecker.

When I think of wingers that NEED good playmakers next to them, I think Hudler... he's the exact opposite of Vanek IMO. Has all the tools but no brain. Ol Vanny's definitely got the brain to play high level hockey.

Also, I definitely don't rule out a playoff run next year. I wouldn't bet on in it happening, but I do believe it could, and I think the team should put some effort toward reaching that goal. With that in mind, Vanek is the type of low risk investment that would be ok with me. A heavy investment like a Nielsen is what I would avoid right now.

29 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Playing his off-wing is what makes him even more dangerous. Most snipers prefer their off-wing. Ovechkin plays the left side, Kucherov and Tarasenko play the right side, Mantha and Zadina both prefer the right side. Laine is the only sniper I can think of off the top of my head who usually plays his "correct" side.

Vanek is certainly still useful, but I think top 6 is a bit of a stretch. He's a solid top 9 scoring winger / power-play weapon. He should probably be looking to sign with a contender at this point in his career though.

I'd be open to signing Vanek if we trade one or two forwards for help on D. Otherwise, I think we have more than enough depth up front without signing any free agents.

If we were to sign him, and flip him at next year's deadline, the most we'd get would probably be a 4th round pick. To me, that's not worth keeping a younger player down in GR.

We certainly played him as a top 9/PP specialist, however the Canucks this season used him quite a bit in the top 6. Was he spectacular for them? No, but he was firmly a solid contributor. I'm not suggesting we should or must play him in our top 6.... just saying he's a player cable of doing so when called upon.

I only make the point about his off-hand because IMO we should be obtaining more RHers (at forward and D) who play the strong side or "correct side". Those players can then slot over to the offside on the PP when needed. That's why I think his handedness is being overstated in this thread. The real root of the issue here is more kids vs. more Vanek, as you so pointed out.

I really don't care about what return he may or may not get at the deadline, that wouldn't be my priority in regards to signing him.

Edited June 25, 2018 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[Dabura 12,207]

The vibe I'm getting is the Wings really want to see how good they can be if they can get the power play working. The power play is clearly a major point of emphasis. If Vanek can maybe help with that, on a no-risk contract, I'm ok with that.

Larkin, Zetterberg, Nielsen, Nyquist, Mantha, Zadina (?), Rasmussen (?), Vanek (?), Green (?), Hronek (?), Hicketts (?)...that's a lot of potential weapons. Lot of pieces for Bylsma to play around with.

[kickazz 5,459]

3 minutes ago, Dabura said:

The vibe I'm getting is the Wings really want to see how good they can be if they can get the power play working. The power play is clearly a major point of emphasis. If Vanek can maybe help with that, on a no-risk contract, I'm ok with that.

Larkin, Zetterberg, Nielsen, Nyquist, Mantha, Zadina (?), Rasmussen (?), Vanek (?), Green (?), Hronek (?), Hicketts (?)...that's a lot of potential weapons. Lot of pieces for Bylsma to play around with.

They probably think they are playoff ready and go after Vanek

Edited June 25, 2018 by kickazz

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 minute ago, Dabura said:

The vibe I'm getting is the Wings really want to see how good they can be if they can get the power play working. The power play is clearly a major point of emphasis. If Vanek can maybe help with that, on a no-risk contract, I'm ok with that.

Larkin, Zetterberg, Nielsen, Nyquist, Mantha, Zadina (?), Rasmussen (?), Vanek (?), Green (?), Hronek (?), Hicketts (?)...that's a lot of potential weapons. Lot of pieces for Bylsma to play around with.

Right, and who're the weapons we have for the left-side? Green (might be gone), Hronek (might not make the roster) and Frk (not that good). Vanek is a pretty nice solution.

[krsmith17 7,191]

16 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

We certainly played him as a top 9/PP specialist, however the Canucks this season used him quite a bit in the top 6. Was he spectacular for them? No, but he was firmly a solid contributor. I'm not suggesting we should or must play him in our top 6.... just saying he's a player cable of doing so when called upon.

I only make the point about his off-hand because IMO we should be obtaining more RHers (at forward and D) who play the strong side or "correct side". Those players can then slot over to the offside on the PP when needed. That's why I think his handedness is being overstated in this thread. The real root of the issue here is more kids vs. more Vanek, as you so pointed out.

I really don't care about what return he may or may not get at the deadline, that wouldn't be my priority in regards to signing him.

The reason for wanting right-handed wingers, at least for me, is to set them up on their off wing though, in particular, on the power-play. We already have two top six left-handed right wingers in Mantha and Zadina. I'd like to see us add one or two top six right-handed left wingers. I mean, sure, if you want all wingers playing their strong side at 5-on-5, I'd be okay with that too I guess. But in the offensive zone, I want a couple righties on the left side of the ice.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 minute ago, krsmith17 said:

The reason for wanting right-handed wingers, at least for me, is to set them up on their off wing though, in particular, on the power-play. We already have two top six left-handed right wingers in Mantha and Zadina. I'd like to see us add one or two top six right-handed left wingers. I mean, sure, if you want all wingers playing their strong side at 5-on-5, I'd be okay with that too I guess. But in the offensive zone, I want a couple righties on the left side of the ice.

I want the same things, which is why I said they can slot over to the left side when needed.

Perhaps it's not being talked about enough, but I definitely prefer to have RHers on the RW during 5 on 5 play. I know Babcock wanted that too during his time here. It makes entering the zone and protecting the puck MUCH easier.

[matt198913 932]

The RH argument doesn't make sense to me. Datsyuk Zetterberg Homer Lidstrom and Rafalski was our top unit when they won their last cup. 

I like a RH shot on the point to help distribute and for one timers. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

6 minutes ago, matt198913 said:

The RH argument doesn't make sense to me. Datsyuk Zetterberg Homer Lidstrom and Rafalski was our top unit when they won their last cup. 

I like a RH shot on the point to help distribute and for one timers. 

This is the argument that doesn't make sense. We won a Cup with a top power-play unit that consisted of 4 lefties and 1 righty. Therefore handedness doesn't matter...?

One time we scored goals on back-to-back power-plays with 5 lefties. Therefore we should banish all righties...?

Using the 1-3-1 on the power-play, which we do, makes the handedness of the point man completely irrelevant. The only two players on the ice that matters as far as handedness goes, are the two triggermen on each half-board. You want a lefty on the right side and a righty on the left side.

[BinMucker94 302]

3 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

This is the argument that doesn't make sense. We won a Cup with a top power-play unit that consisted of 4 lefties and 1 righty. Therefore handedness doesn't matter...?

One time we scored goals on back-to-back power-plays with 5 lefties. Therefore we should banish all righties...?

Using the 1-3-1 on the power-play, which we do, makes the handedness of the point man completely irrelevant. The only two players on the ice that matters as far as handedness goes, are the two triggermen on each half-board. You want a lefty on the right side and a righty on the left side.

 

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, Dabura said:

The vibe I'm getting is the Wings really want to see how good they can be if they can get the power play working. The power play is clearly a major point of emphasis. If Vanek can maybe help with that, on a no-risk contract, I'm ok with that.

Larkin, Zetterberg, Nielsen, Nyquist, Mantha, Zadina (?), Rasmussen (?), Vanek (?), Green (?), Hronek (?), Hicketts (?)...that's a lot of potential weapons. Lot of pieces for Bylsma to play around with.

Correct. Apparently hiring an Asst. Coach to improve the PP makes sense, but not a cheap, short term, RH offensive minded forward.

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/nhl/red-wings/2018/06/22/detroit-red-wing-dan-bylsma-help-power-play/726201002/

Chief among the reasons Blashill hired Bylsma as an assistant coach: helping the Detroit Red Wings’ power play.

“I also wanted somebody that would help our power play and add value to our team." - Blashill

The Wings had one of the worst power plays in the NHL the last two years, operating at 15.1 percent in 2016-17 and at 17.5 percent this past season.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I want the same things, which is why I said they can slot over to the left side when needed.

Perhaps it's not being talked about enough, but I definitely prefer to have RHers on the RW during 5 on 5 play. I know Babcock wanted that too during his time here. It makes entering the zone and protecting the puck MUCH easier.

It would have to be on the 3rd line tho. Mantha and Nyquist play the off wing I believe, and I could see Zadina playing there as well although he is listed as a LW.

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

On 6/24/2018 at 6:21 PM, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Never said he was. I have him on the 3rd line. Zadina and Rass are still getting their ice time even with Vanek on the team.

As for Svech...Vanek>Svech at this point in time.

Wait a minute. You are advocating for bringing in Kovy? He would play in the top 6 and push one of the kids down the ineup. I thought you had a problem with that? If Holland re-signed Vanek it would also be on a 1 or 2 year deal, just like you are saying for Kovy. And Vanek would be FAR cheaper. Your reasons for not wanting Vanek are actually made worse by signing Kovalchuk.

Not true.

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/canucks-trade-forward-thomas-vanek-blue-jackets/

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/nhl/red-wings/2017/03/01/thomas-vanek-trade/98522768/

https://www.nhl.com/news/sabres-trade-vanek-to-islanders-for-moulson-first-and-second-round-picks/c-689001

Fixed. Seriously tho. You and I agree this team needs more RH shots. There is no one in the system forward wise to  fill that need. Even if you draft one next year, they are still a couple years away. Why not bring in Vanek on a reasonable 1 or 2 year deal to play RW and on the PP. It checks all of the boxes for me.

kovalchuk with one year high cap would have got us w great return ... vanek would get us a bag of peanut m and m's

Edited June 26, 2018 by nyqvististhefuture

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

23 minutes ago, nyqvististhefuture said:

kovalchuk with one year high cap would have got us w great return ... vanek would get us a bag of peanut m and m's

In other words...You were wrong.

[kickazz 5,459]

4 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Right, and who're the weapons we have for the left-side? Green (might be gone), Hronek (might not make the roster) and Frk (not that good). Vanek is a pretty nice solution.

That's a dumb solution if we already have Frk. What's the point of having "weapons on the left-side" in 2018 for a team that will likely end up picking top 10 in the draft again anyways.

I know ya'll high on Vanek, I like him too. And I'm pretty sure he was well liked around the lockerroom, but he's not really helping us in our present day.

Edited June 26, 2018 by kickazz

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 hour ago, kickazz said:

That's a dumb solution if we already have Frk. What's the point of having "weapons on the left-side" in 2018 for a team that will likely end up picking top 10 in the draft again anyways.

I know ya'll high on Vanek, I like him too. And I'm pretty sure he was well liked around the lockerroom, but he's not really helping us in our present day.

You missed my last post, I'll quote it.

6 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Also, I definitely don't rule out a playoff run next year. I wouldn't bet on in it happening, but I do believe it could, and I think the team should put some effort toward reaching that goal. With that in mind, Vanek is the type of low risk investment that would be ok with me. A heavy investment like a Nielsen is what I would avoid right now.

Frk is trash garbage. Vanek is ten fold more of an athlete than he'll ever be. Frk is like the crappier czech version of Samuelson.

Edited June 26, 2018 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[kickazz 5,459]

6 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

You missed my last post, I'll quote it.

Frk is trash garbage. Vanek is ten fold more of an athlete than he'll ever be. Frk is like the crappier czech version of Samuelson.

No I want 2019 top 5 pick. Even with all the players we have right now it’s still not enough to be a cup contender. We lack heavily on defense. We don’t even have a 1D and Holland’s track record shows he is not into trading for it because the 1D  market for trades is atrocious. 

Edited June 26, 2018 by kickazz

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 minute ago, kickazz said:

No I want 2019 top 5 pick. Even with all the players we have right now it’s still not enough to be a cup contender. We lack heavily on defense. We don’t even have a 1D and Holland’s track record shows he is not into trading for it because the 1D  market for trades is atrocious. 

If management won't even try low cost solutions, what's the point of even keeping Zetterberg? If you want to turn tail and run then trade him and Kronwall, and Howard. Why not?

Personally, I will never be in favor of stripping this team to the bones and throwing it's culture by the way-side. It's one of the few things that makes us better than the Calgarys and Ottawas and all the other s*** teams. We still have championship culture in our lineup.

If we're going to see this thing through with the Zbergs and Kronwall's and other leaders in the lineup we have to at least try. You keep these men around to preserve the culture. Build on that culture.

Sign a Vanek, sign an Alfredsson, I think they help our young ones reach max potential more than they hurt it.

 

 

[kickazz 5,459]

5 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

If management won't even try low cost solutions, what's the point of even keeping Zetterberg? If you want to turn tail and run then trade him and Kronwall, and Howard. Why not?

Personally, I will never be in favor of stripping this team to the bones and throwing it's culture by the way-side. It's one of the few things that makes us better than the Calgarys and Ottawas and all the other s*** teams. We still have championship culture in our lineup.

If we're going to see this thing through with the Zbergs and Kronwall's and other leaders in the lineup we have to at least try. You keep these men around to preserve the culture. Build on that culture.

Sign a Vanek, sign an Alfredsson, I think they help our young ones reach max potential more than they hurt it.

 

 

Don’t trade them because they’re on the books and want to simply play hockey and enjoy playing with the team. 

Holland has called this a rebuild, its not like the veterans don’t know this. They could demand a trade tomorrow for a contender but chose to stay. 

Quick fixes is exactly what delayed our rebuild from 2014-2017. All it did was delay the inevitable. 

Vanek and Alfredsson signings were both failures. 

High draft picks (Larkin) were success.

The assistant GM, Kris Draper himself mentioned last season in an interview with Helene and the free press that he WANTED us to lose to get a high draft pick. He also mentioned that he wants the kids to take the spots, so signing a Vanek directly contradicts that.

—-

HSJ: “You were such a competitive player. Is it tough to want the team to miss the playoffs in order to get into the draft lottery? 

KD: “Listen, I know they are going to play hard and do everything they can to make the playoffs. They basically want to screw up our draft. Here we are talking about Rasmus Dahlin, a kid that potentially is going to be a franchise defenseman — they don’t care about that. They want to win. But in the end, for us to get better, we have to draft really well and then we have to find some gems. Dan Cleary is out west right now watching Michael Rasmussen and Dennis Cholowski. Those guys have really made some big strides. We hope they can continue in their development, that they have a big summer. We need to expedite this process. We need to get these kids bigger and faster and stronger, quicker, to come in and start challenging for spots. That’s how you get better. We have to draft well. We have to find players.”

HSJ: “So you’re rooting for them to play well but come up a goal short?

KD: “Ha, I’m not touching that one. I still have friends in that locker room. I know that Henrik Zetterberg is one of the most ultimate competitors that I’ve ever played with. We know what he is going to do. But it’s a tough league.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.freep.com/amp/323124002

Edited June 26, 2018 by kickazz

[krsmith17 7,191]

6 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

If management won't even try low cost solutions, what's the point of even keeping Zetterberg? If you want to turn tail and run then trade him and Kronwall, and Howard. Why not?

Personally, I will never be in favor of stripping this team to the bones and throwing it's culture by the way-side. It's one of the few things that makes us better than the Calgarys and Ottawas and all the other s*** teams. We still have championship culture in our lineup.

If we're going to see this thing through with the Zbergs and Kronwall's and other leaders in the lineup we have to at least try. You keep these men around to preserve the culture. Build on that culture.

Sign a Vanek, sign an Alfredsson, I think they help our young ones reach max potential more than they hurt it.

No one is suggesting we "strip the team to the bones and throw culture by the way-side". That's why we'd never trade Zetterberg and Kronwall. These guys are the true leaders of this group. But soon there will come a time when these guys will hang 'em up, and pass the torch to the next waive of leaders. One of those guys will be Larkin. And even at the age of 21, he has emerged as one of the true leaders on this team. He'll be named captain by the age of 24 or 25, depending on how much longer Zetterberg holds on...

I just don't agree that we need a Vanek or Alfredsson to come in and help lead this team. We already have a slew of veterans (Zetterberg, Nielsen, Nyquist, Abdelkader, Helm, Glendening, Kronwall, Ericsson, Daley, DeKeyser, maybe Green and Howard) that are more than capable of leading. I just don't understand the desire to bring in any old, washed up players (even if it's short term), to a rebuilding team that is already one of the oldest teams in the league...

I think Zetterberg and Kronwall, being the great leaders they are, are embracing the opportunity to mentor the new waive of kids coming into Detroit. They're the definition of "team players", and have and will continue to do whatever they can to help mold these kids into great players. Like kickazz said, if they wanted to be traded to a contender, they would have been traded by now. They have their '08 Cup. I'm sure they'd be okay if we went for one last run this year, but understand that wouldn't be the best thing for the team long term.

[kickazz 5,459]

@krsmith17 Do you know how the 2019 draft looking for defenseman anyway?

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 minute ago, kickazz said:

@krsmith17 Do you know how the 2019 draft looking for defenseman anyway?

Not good at all... Way too early to know for sure, but I've already seen some rankings and there are a ton of top centers, and wingers, but very little in top defensemen...

I'm really high on Dylan Cozens and of course Jack Hughes, and also Alex Newhook (fellow Newfie). The top defense prospect (as of now) is some kid Bowen Byram...

[kickazz 5,459]

1 minute ago, krsmith17 said:

Not good at all...

f*** it add Vanek then. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

Holland still saying all the right things...

He stressed, again, that any conversations he’s having now would be about building for the future. He wants a competitive team to open training camp, in large part to have a healthy environment to develop young players. But he also said he won’t be moving any future assets to bolster his roster.

What he didn’t rule out is a trade that would bring back a young player who could help now and help in the future, someone in the 23-to-25-year-old range.

“Yeah, that’s a good range. I think if you’re under 25,” Holland said. “It’s about the future, any trade talks I might be involved in.”

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

20 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Holland still saying all the right things...

He stressed, again, that any conversations he’s having now would be about building for the future. He wants a competitive team to open training camp, in large part to have a healthy environment to develop young players. But he also said he won’t be moving any future assets to bolster his roster.

What he didn’t rule out is a trade that would bring back a young player who could help now and help in the future, someone in the 23-to-25-year-old range.

“Yeah, that’s a good range. I think if you’re under 25,” Holland said. “It’s about the future, any trade talks I might be involved in.”

Says right things

*signs Dan Hamhuis and Rick Nash on July 1st*