• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

daniel1

Johnson, Killorn, and a 1st?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Wait&Sneed said:

Ah and there it is. More ad hominems. The crutch of the man with no argument.

Anyone with an adult opinion wanna talk Johnson and Killorn?

No argument? You're the only one saying that a late 1st round pick would be enough compensation to take on both Johnson and Killorn. I've laid out a very valid argument as to why that's not enough. If it were enough, and this rumor were actually legit (it's not), then the trade would have already happened. It hasn't...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wait&Sneed said:

I said adult, not European

One thing everyone seems to be forgetting is that Killorn and Johnson have NTCs. Not sure what BriseBois plan is too get around this. We may not even be an option for all I kno.

Id always be up for eating 50% off a year to flip a killorn lets say for a bigger return . Detroit’s one of a few teams that can take on contracts, if its not us oh well we’ll move on to vegas,islanders or whomever else but i do expect us to make a move

16 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

No argument? You're the only one saying that a late 1st round pick would be enough compensation to take on both Johnson and Killorn. I've laid out a very valid argument as to why that's not enough. If it were enough, and this rumor were actually legit (it's not), then the trade would have already happened. It hasn't...

If were taking both its a 1st,foote,alnefelt,finley

If im yzerman its no? Thats cool , talk to me when your willing to move one to us for a 1st + ciao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, nyqvististhefuture said:

If were taking both its a 1st,foote,alnefelt,finley

If im yzerman its no? Thats cool , talk to me when your willing to move one to us for a 1st + ciao

This may be a little rich, but yeah, imagine thinking a 1st round pick would suffice taking those two contracts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wait&Sneed said:

>We get a good player on a good contract in Killorn
>In exchange we accept a good player on a bad contract in Johnson
>Bonus 2nd round pick

What's not to like?

So basically we're taking a 3 year contract in Killorn and a 4 year contract in Johnson for a measly 2nd round pick. Yet received a 2nd round pick for 1 year worth of Staal. So ask yourself this question why Yzerman would make such a dumb trade like that? You're basically taking on long term assets for little to no compensation in a flat cap world that's totally ludicrous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both of those players are well regarded around the league I'd assume, and both will fetch the initial return the Wings get for them, but another return in a few years when they're traded. In the mean time their value will be A) that they both played big parts on a dominant, Cup winning team, and B) are better than any depth player currently playing for the Wings (most of whom will be leaving in the next two years).

Finally, neither of those two guys played much with Stamkos, Kucherov, or Point. So their numbers aren't inflated by playing with a star the way Artemi Panarin blew up Ryan Strome's numbers this past season in NY. Killorn and Johnson's most frequent linemates were each other and Cirelli and that line actually played MORE in the playoffs than the elite guys did, suggesting maybe they're better than people are giving them credit for.

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Wait&Sneed said:

Comparing this to Staal is an awful comparison.

Staal was the Rangers equivalent of Jon Ericsson. A Pure salary dump. He can barely skate anymore and isn't a good player. We got a 2nd in exchange for a pretty much useless garbage player.

Johnson and Killorn are not in the same category in the slightest. Killorn is a good player on a good contract. Johnson is a good player on an inflated contract. Staal was a bad player on a bad contract.

But yet you're willing to take on $9,450,000 between Johnson and Killorn for the next 3 years for only a measly 2nd round pick, That's pretty much giving Tampa a free get out of cap hell pick right there. Why would any sane GM give them a break?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Both of those players are well regarded around the league I'd assume, and both will fetch the initial return the Wings get for them, but another return in a few years when they're traded. In the mean time their value will be A) that they both played big parts on a dominant, Cup winning team, and B) are better than any depth player currently playing for the Wings (most of whom will be leaving in the next two years).

That's assuming they still have value in a few years. A lot of players tend to fall off quite a bit into their 30's. Johnson passed through waivers a couple months ago. Tampa are trying to dump him now and no team wants him. He's not going to gain value. He would probably end up being a buyout candidate before the contract is up, assuming Seattle doesn't take him in the expansion draft.

Killorn may have value at the trade deadline in a few years, but I doubt it would be for anything more than a 2nd round pick.

I have no interest in taking on two huge contracts, to improve the team in the short term, but likely hurt the team in the long term. This team is not in a position to be adding Johnson and Killorn, unless we're being heavily compensated.

I don't think a single person is opposed to taking on one or both of Johnson / Killorn. The debate isn't whether or not we should take them, but rather, what is a fair return. Would you take a late 2nd round pick? A late 1st? Or are you in agreement with pretty much everyone else and think it would cost (a lot) more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Wait&Sneed said:

Comparing this to Staal is an awful comparison.

Staal was the Rangers equivalent of Jon Ericsson. A Pure salary dump. He can barely skate anymore and isn't a good player. We got a 2nd in exchange for a pretty much useless garbage player.

Johnson and Killorn are not in the same category in the slightest. Killorn is a good player on a good contract. Johnson is a good player on an inflated contract. Staal was a bad player on a bad contract.

Comparing this situation to what we received for Staal is fair, because that's exactly the type of trade Yzerman should be pursuing. We don't need the team to improve in the short term with Johnson and Killorn. We need the team to improve in the long term with future assets.

BriseBois isn't willing to pay up a 1st, plus, plus, to get out of cap hell? Fine, move onto the next team that needs to shed cap space. There are many other options out there. Again, we don't have to make a move. Tampa does. As much as you like to mock, Yzerman does have full control.

Edited by krsmith17

Share this post


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

That's assuming they still have value in a few years. A lot of players tend to fall off quite a bit into their 30's. Johnson passed through waivers a couple months ago. Tampa are trying to dump him now and no team wants him. He's not going to gain value. He would probably end up being a buyout candidate before the contract is up, assuming Seattle doesn't take him in the expansion draft.

Killorn may have value at the trade deadline in a few years, but I doubt it would be for anything more than a 2nd round pick.

I have no interest in taking on two huge contracts, to improve the team in the short term, but likely hurt the team in the long term. This team is not in a position to be adding Johnson and Killorn, unless we're being heavily compensated.

I don't think a single person is opposed to taking on one or both of Johnson / Killorn. The debate isn't whether or not we should take them, but rather, what is a fair return. Would you take a late 2nd round pick? A late 1st? Or are you in agreement with pretty much everyone else and think it would cost (a lot) more?

1. 30+ year old players get traded all the time. Dont see why this would be different.

2. Their contracts aren't "huge". I agree they may be marginally overpaid, but you're being hyperbolic.

3. The contracts won't hurt the team in the slightest. We will have MORE salary cap space at the ends of their deals than we do now because we'll be replacing big money contracts (Dekeyser, Helm, Glendening, Filppula, Nemeth, Staal, etc. etc. etc.) with ELCs (Veleno, Ras, Seider).

To answer your question, I think Yzerman WILL get more in a trade for these two because Tampa is in a tight spot. But in a hypothetical sense, if it was either take a late first for Killorn and Johnson or else take nothing I'd take the 1st. You'd be getting a valuable draft pick that might help you move up at the 2021 draft, you'd be getting two good players to help guide the lockroom and hold young players accountable, and both of those guys will be tradeable later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

1. 30+ year old players get traded all the time. Dont see why this would be different.

2. Their contracts aren't "huge". I agree they may be marginally overpaid, but you're being hyperbolic.

3. The contracts won't hurt the team in the slightest. We will have MORE salary cap space at the ends of their deals than we do now because we'll be replacing big money contracts (Dekeyser, Helm, Glendening, Filppula, Nemeth, Staal, etc. etc. etc.) with ELCs (Veleno, Ras, Seider).

I never said they would be untradeable in a few years. I question their value at that time. If it's low now, what makes you think it will be any better in a few years, going from the best team in the league to the worst team in the league?

I think everyone would agree that if we signed Johnson and Killorn to their current contracts today, they would be overpaid, and pretty bad signings. No, they're not huge compared to other contracts around the league, but they are huge compared to the contracts that Yzerman has been willing to sign so far in the rebuild.

I'm aware we have some bad contracts falling off. That doesn't mean we should sign more bad contracts (unless we're being heavily compensated).

45 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

To answer your question, I think Yzerman WILL get more in a trade for these two because Tampa is in a tight spot. But in a hypothetical sense, if it was either take a late first for Killorn and Johnson or else take nothing I'd take the 1st. You'd be getting a valuable draft pick that might help you move up at the 2021 draft, you'd be getting two good players to help guide the lockroom and hold young players accountable, and both of those guys will be tradeable later.

OR don't take the deal from Tampa, let the Stanley Cup champs, divisional rivals remain in cap hell, and call up another GM, and take on an actual cap dump. We still get the future assets (maybe even more), we don't improve our team (aside from how much it has already improved this offseason), hurting our draft odds, and we don't have to worry about whether or not Johnson and Killorn will transition / age well...

48 minutes ago, Wait&Sneed said:

Not sure why you're so concerned with capspace. We have plenty of it, and should maximize using it to our advantage.

We have $9.5 million in space this year (enough to afford both players)

We gain another $7 million next year when Helm and Fil come off the books

We also gain another $9 million next year when Nemeth and Staal come off the books

Then the following season we gain another $10 million with Nielsen and DK coming off the books

We are literally swimming with cap space. And with the amount of ELC level players we will have joining the roster over the next 3-4 years, Killorn and Johnson wouldn't only not be a problem, they'd be quite affordable.

Let's swap out our old bad contracts with new bad contracts. Smart.

Share this post


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

I never said they would be untradeable in a few years. I question their value at that time. If it's low now, what makes you think it will be any better in a few years, going from the best team in the league to the worst team in the league?

I think everyone would agree that if we signed Johnson and Killorn to their current contracts today, they would be overpaid, and pretty bad signings. No, they're not huge compared to other contracts around the league, but they are huge compared to the contracts that Yzerman has been willing to sign so far in the rebuild.

I'm aware we have some bad contracts falling off. That doesn't mean we should sign more bad contracts (unless we're being heavily compensated).

OR don't take the deal from Tampa, let the Stanley Cup champs, divisional rivals remain in cap hell, and call up another GM, and take on an actual cap dump. We still get the future assets (maybe even more), we don't improve our team (aside from how much it has already improved this offseason), hurting our draft odds, and we don't have to worry about whether or not Johnson and Killorn will transition / age well...

Let's swap out our old bad contracts with new bad contracts. Smart.

1. As you've pointed out many times there is a pandemic and flat cap. That means that prices are depressed because teams are not generating revenue and are more reluctant to spend. In a few years, when things are more normal, teams may be willing to acquire bigger contracts for their Cup runs.

2. Again, I've said they're probably marginally overpaid but I don't think by much. You've gone on and on over the years about how a good contract awards players a million dollars for every ten points they score. By your own standard Killorn is basically not overpaid at all, and Johnson is slightly overpaid now but wasn't when his contract was signed. Assuming more minutes for Johnson means he'd score another 15-20 pts. a season he wouldn't be over paid either.

3. The value of dealing with Tampa is that you're getting picks/prospects AND useful players. Any other "cap dump" is probably not going to end with the Wings getting good players and certainly not players of Killorn or Johnson's caliber. If Yzerman made three separate trades and got a 2nd round pick, a depth center capable of bouncing around the middle six, and a 2nd line winger that would have led our team in goals last year, all while giving up NOTHING, people would have licked his balls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

1. As you've pointed out many times there is a pandemic and flat cap. That means that prices are depressed because teams are not generating revenue and are more reluctant to spend. In a few years, when things are more normal, teams may be willing to acquire bigger contracts for their Cup runs.

2. Again, I've said they're probably marginally overpaid but I don't think by much. You've gone on and on over the years about how a good contract awards players a million dollars for every ten points they score. By your own standard Killorn is basically not overpaid at all, and Johnson is slightly overpaid now but wasn't when his contract was signed. Assuming more minutes for Johnson means he'd score another 15-20 pts. a season he wouldn't be over paid either.

3. The value of dealing with Tampa is that you're getting picks/prospects AND useful players. Any other "cap dump" is probably not going to end with the Wings getting good players and certainly not players of Killorn or Johnson's caliber. If Yzerman made three separate trades and got a 2nd round pick, a depth center capable of bouncing around the middle six, and a 2nd line winger that would have led our team in goals last year, all while giving up NOTHING, people would have licked his balls.

You're assuming these players are still going to be good in a few years. They will regress, it's just a matter of how much. It's very unlikely that they're both 40-50 point players on a much worse team in 3-4 years time.

Why does it matter when their contracts were signed? They were both decent to good contracts at the time they were signed. Bad to decent now, and likely really bad to bad in a few years.

I don't think it's fair to assume an extra 15-20 points going from one of the best teams in the league to the worst. Sure they're going to get more ice time, but they're also going to have less support around them.

That's the difference I guess. I don't necessarily want useful players for this season. I want useful players 2-3 years from now. I'd rather take on 1-2 years of a bad player, getting better assets in return, than take on 3-4 years of a good player, that will likely be bad (or at least worse) in 2-3 years, and get lesser assets.

18 minutes ago, Wait&Sneed said:

Johnson and Killorn and their contracts are not at all similar to Helm and Nielsen and their contracts, and if you don't understand that their is no helping you.

If Johnson and Killorn can join this team and help it, plus we get future assets on top, that's a good deal.

I've never brought up Nielsen or Helm, but now that you have, they could be that bad in 2-3 years from now. Nielsen was a very solid 2C for many years, until all of a sudden he wasn't. It happens. Age catches up to every player, and it's going to eventually hit Johnson and Killorn.

The future assets have to be worth the gamble, as well as the favor we're granting Tampa. Their are higher 1st and 2nd round picks to be had, without taking on $9.5M in cap space over the next 3-4 years. Bad deal.

Share this post


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

You're assuming these players are still going to be good in a few years. They will regress, it's just a matter of how much. It's very unlikely that they're both 40-50 point players on a much worse team in 3-4 years time.

Why does it matter when their contracts were signed? They were both decent to good contracts at the time they were signed. Bad to decent now, and likely really bad to bad in a few years.

I don't think it's fair to assume an extra 15-20 points going from one of the best teams in the league to the worst. Sure they're going to get more ice time, but they're also going to have less support around them.

That's the difference I guess. I don't necessarily want useful players for this season. I want useful players 2-3 years from now. I'd rather take on 1-2 years of a bad player, getting better assets in return, than take on 3-4 years of a good player, that will likely be bad (or at least worse) in 2-3 years, and get lesser assets.

You have to fill out your roster with actual NHL players who don't suck. Buffalo has shown time and again how filling your team with losers and young guys isn't going to get you anywhere. We can't afford to be abysmal every single year of the rebuild. It kills an organization. Replacing the likes of Helm, Filppula, Nielsen, Ryan, with Namestnikov, Johnson, and Killorn will still mean Detroit's a lottery team, but at least they won't be getting BLOWN OUT every single night. And that's a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

You have to fill out your roster with actual NHL players who don't suck. Buffalo has shown time and again how filling your team with losers and young guys isn't going to get you anywhere. We can't afford to be abysmal every single year of the rebuild. It kills an organization. Replacing the likes of Helm, Filppula, Nielsen, Ryan, with Namestnikov, Johnson, and Killorn will still mean Detroit's a lottery team, but at least they won't be getting BLOWN OUT every single night. And that's a good thing.

I think we're a MUCH improved team as is. I don't see us getting blown out, and losing games in the fashion we did last season. You mentioned Namestnikov as one of the positive replacements. I agree. Those are the types of low risk, high reward moves Yzerman is making. This particular trade, is high risk, low reward. It's not going to happen, so we're wasting a whole lot of time discussing it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wait&Sneed said:

Well you might also be adding x2 50pt-ish players... that is useful to us considering we only has one player breach 50 last season

And do a favour to tampa?And f*** up our rebuild? Lets finish 8-10 bottom spot instead of last 1-4? And get no sweetners in the process? No thanks 

tampa’s f***ed if teams were willing to just take those guys for free it would have happened already ... you just won a cup thanks to the gm your trying to make a move with , stfu and pay yzerman or move along and convince melnyk to somehow pay more money out of his pocket

1 hour ago, Wait&Sneed said:

Johnson and Killorn and their contracts are not at all similar to Helm and Nielsen and their contracts, and if you don't understand that their is no helping you.

If Johnson and Killorn can join this team and help it, plus we get future assets on top, that's a good deal.

Future assets that will be ready in 7-8 yrs if they even make it? We’re rebuilding now 

44 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

You have to fill out your roster with actual NHL players who don't suck. Buffalo has shown time and again how filling your team with losers and young guys isn't going to get you anywhere. We can't afford to be abysmal every single year of the rebuild. It kills an organization. Replacing the likes of Helm, Filppula, Nielsen, Ryan, with Namestnikov, Johnson, and Killorn will still mean Detroit's a lottery team, but at least they won't be getting BLOWN OUT every single night. And that's a good thing.

We can go sign hoffman right now 5-7mill x1 yr if we really wanted to get players who dont suck so bad and it would be a better move and probably fetch us a 1st at the deadline 

We shouldnt be taking anyone with 3-4 yrs attached to their contracts unless we get a nice return back 

Edited by nyqvististhefuture

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Wait&Sneed said:

You said swapping out our current bad contracts for new bad contracts. They're not comparable. Current Nielsen and Helm are awful compared to current Killorn and Johnson. Not to mention Killorn isn't even on a bad contract and Johnson is only slightly overpaid.

I'm willing to take good players for free + assets. We have more than enough cap room to do it.

If we don't start improving quick we might as well kiss the generation of Larkin/Mantha/Bertuzzi/Fabbri/Hronek goodbye. Only Covid19 saved them from being the worst team of all time in their young primes. I agree that if there isn't some injection of talent or turnaround quick we risk becoming a deadwings joke franchise like Buffalo.

I totally disagree that we are a MUCH improved team.

OUT
Green
Daley
Ericsson
Athanasiou
Abdelkader
Howard
Bowey
Ehn

IN
Namestnikov
Ryan
Staal
Gagner
Stecher
Merrill
Greiss

Stecher ---> 2018 Green
Namestnikov ---> 2018 Athanasiou
Staal ---> 2018 Ericsson
Ryan ---> 2018 Abdelkader
Merrill ---> 2018 Daley
Greiss ---> 2018 Howard
Gagner ---> 2018 Frk

We're not really improved in any meaningful way. We've simply rolled back the clock to a year where we still sucked. Sure these new players are better than their aged out replacements, but that's all we've done... traded an old s***ty roster for a slightly less old s***ty roster. This is going to be a terrible season again. And I for one would welcome an injection of talent that pushes guys like Filppula, Ryan, and Glendening down the depth chart.

Johnson and Killorn won't push us into the bottom 8-10 spot. They'd just help us not get our peepees slapped night in and night out.

And yes I'm advocating for sweetners. Follow the convo.

You're rebuilding and you don't want future assets?

Okay. Right. Okay.

If we took on killorn and johnson and considered the assets they would fetch us at the deadline as our future assets they wouldnt be nhl ready (if they even make it) until 6-7 yrs 

we need to be drafting in 2021/2022 and adding 19-20 yr old kids to our pipeline now not in 2024

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Wait&Sneed said:

You said swapping out our current bad contracts for new bad contracts. They're not comparable. Current Nielsen and Helm are awful compared to current Killorn and Johnson. Not to mention Killorn isn't even on a bad contract and Johnson is only slightly overpaid.

Are current Nielsen and Helm awful compared to future (2-3 years) Killorn and Johnson though? Maybe. Maybe not. I don't see Johnson or that contract aging well at all, and I have no interest in trading for him, unless he comes with significant pieces to help the rebuild.

31 minutes ago, Wait&Sneed said:

I'm willing to take good players for free + assets. We have more than enough cap room to do it.

OR we could better utilize the cap space, and make smarter moves...

We could do like @nyqvististhefuture said and sign Hoffman (or other UFA), who is much better, and would garner a much better return at the trade deadline. We could also trade for another bad contract and get a much better return now. It's not Johnson and Killorn or bust. There are many other ways to use the cap space, and take full advantage of the current situation.

37 minutes ago, Wait&Sneed said:

If we don't start improving quick we might as well kiss the generation of Larkin/Mantha/Bertuzzi/Fabbri/Hronek goodbye. Only Covid19 saved them from being the worst team of all time in their young primes. I agree that if there isn't some injection of talent or turnaround quick we risk becoming a deadwings joke franchise like Buffalo.

I totally disagree that we are a MUCH improved team.

We are improving, but no need to make rash decisions that could negatively impact the future. You build a team through the draft. You build around a team through trade and free agency.

We've added some low key good players. We've also gotten rid of some very bad players (addition by subtraction). We've upgraded every single position. Greiss over Howard alone should give the team an extra 5+ wins on the season. We should also see growth from some of the young players. You can never count on health, but I'll assume we see more of DeKeyser and Mantha this season. All of this combined, in my opinion, should translate to a MUCH improved team. I'm not saying we'll be a playoff team by any stretch, but we won't see as many blowouts, a lot less losing, and a little more winning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You keep saying there's "risk" in this. I don't see it. Having two good albeit overpaid players on your team in 3 years when you've got LOADS of cap space zero risk. You have still failed to adequately explain what having these two guys on the roster instead of Helm, Filppula, Nielsen, Erne, or Glendening is going to hurt. In what way does it negatively impact the roster?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

You keep saying there's "risk" in this. I don't see it. Having two good albeit overpaid players on your team in 3 years when you've got LOADS of cap space zero risk. You have still failed to adequately explain what having these two guys on the roster instead of Helm, Filppula, Nielsen, Erne, or Glendening is going to hurt. In what way does it negatively impact the roster?

You dont take on two 30ish forwards for 10 million cap space for no compensation ... this isnt someone giving barzal for free

Taking johnson and killorn does nothing to help build our future team

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