- LetsGoWings.com Forums
- → Viewing Profile: Likes: Buppy
BuppyMember Since 14 Feb 2009
Offline Last Active Today, 05:33 PM
- Group Silver Booster
- Active Posts 2,307
- Profile Views 6,986
- Member Title Hall-of-Famer
- Age Age Unknown
- Birthday Birthday Unknown
Posted by Buppy on 24 June 2012 - 03:28 PM
Remember, he was also assistant GM for 3 years, and director of amatuer scouting for 7 before that. He played a significant role in building the team he "inherited". He's also made some big moves that people consider "failures" just because they didn't result in a Cup. Hossa, Hatcher, Clark/Samuelsson/Ranford, Cujo, Lang... He's also facing an uphill battle. We may need some big signing or trade, but that doesn't make doing it any easier. There's one real impact defenseman who might be available, and about 20 teams with the desire and ability to make a good offer for him. We have some assets to trade, but that doesn't mean any teams with the players we want will make those players available or be interested in what we can offer.
Fact is, if Red Wings fans judged other teams or GMs by the same standard Kenny has to live up to, they'd all be considered abject failures. We just lost the best defenseman of our generation, plus Stu, Rafi last year. Our stars are in their 30s. We haven't had any high draft picks during his tenure. We've dealt with the loss of stars and key roleplayers, like Konstantinov, Hasek, Yzerman, Hull, Fedorov, Robitaille, Shanahan, Chelios, Draper, Maltby, Osgood, Fischer, and more without needing to rebuild. And we are still talking about making moves to keep us a Cup contender rather than about rebuilding. That says alot more about Kenny than anything that might happen July 1st or afterward.
But if we don't make any big moves, and Kenny says, like last summer or the deadline, "We wanted to make some moves, but could find one that fit. But we like our team." everyone will just jump on the "we like our team" bit. As if all the best FAs offered to play here for free and every other GM offered to trade us their best players for our worst and Kenny turned them down. It's like half this board thinks the rest of the league has to get Kenny's permission before they can do anything, and the only reason we haven't done more already is because we didn't want to.
Posted by Buppy on 17 June 2012 - 11:44 AM
Wideman/Garrison in place of Nick/Stuie. Parenteau/Moen/Konopka or Prust in place of Hudler/Homer/two of Emmerton/Mursak/Miller/Eaves/Nyquist.
Sign Parenteau,Moen and one of Konopka/Prust,get both Wideman and Garrison and sign a backup goalie for cheap.
Not the best possible team on paper,but definitely much tougher and deeper than the last season roster
Tougher maybe, but certainly not deeper. If we had to settle for that, I'd be ok with it, but I think we'd need to look at our trade options. At least for help on defense.
- IllinoisRedWingsFan likes this
Posted by Buppy on 16 June 2012 - 07:01 PM
Not every player is Parise, and you can't have different rules for different players. If Parise, or anyone else, wants to know what other teams are willing to offer, then all he has to do is wait until the 1st and find out. While Parise specifically may know he'll have no shortage of offers, there are a lot of players who don't have that security. They have to choose between the security of getting a contract before there's extra competition from UFAs and possibly getting more money or a better opportunity on the open market.
On the first page I quite clearly explained why I really don't care for this to be investigated. I think it's pretty stupid that team officials are not allowed to say that if a player were to make it to market, they would make a strong push for him. ...
Under the letter of the rules, you're right: this should be investigated and something should be done about it. I just don't like the rules. I was going to respond to the rest of your post, but I don't think it'll be very productive for either one of us, so I'll leave it at that.
In my opinion, "we will not be outbid" is basically the same as throwing out a specific number. Worse even, since a specific number could be lower than what someone else offers. Now Parise knows he should talk to Minnesota after any offer, and he can use those comments to push for a higher salary from anyone who makes an offer. Things can move fast on UFA day. If the Wings want to be aggressive, they won't necessarily want to wait around while Parise gets a counter-offer from the Wild. Doing so could mean they miss out on other players.
Would it have made any difference had the story not been released? Likely no one will ever know. But it's pretty simple rule: Don't talk about players under contract to other teams. It's not hard. And there's no reason for it other than to give yourself an advantage over all the teams who follow the rules.
I agree with you in principle, but comparing this to rape makes you sound a little hysterical.
This is how the world continues to get worse. Just keep letting people get away with whatever they want.
It confounds me how much people are defeated about things that can be fixed. You know every single rape case is hearsay. Might as well not try with those. ...
I don't give a s*** if someone jaywalks. Doesn't mean I'm indifferent to every crime. Some things just aren't worth getting worked up over. This specific case, where the potential damage caused is likely somewhere between none and very little, and the potential for actually proving any wrongdoing is virtually nil, is I think one of those things. Certainly not worth the time and expense of a court proceeding. I don't think it would warrant anything more than a fine anyway, even if it was proven (as much as I would like to see Minnesota prohibited from signing Parise, I don't feel that would be justified).
- Majsheppard likes this
Posted by Buppy on 15 June 2012 - 03:15 PM
NHL By-law 15.1 C
The making or causing to be made, through any medium, public or private, any statement indicating any intention or desire of or interest in acquiring the services of any person referred to in (a) [players] or (b) [other contracted team employees, ie: coach, GM...] hereof, except when such statement is communicated to the Member Club entitled to such services in a confidential manner or is made during a period when such person remains on a Free Agent List in accordance with Section 9A.5, may, at the discretion of the Commissioner, be deemed to be a contravention of this By-Law.
If the comments reported were actually made by Leipold, then Bettman could decide it's tampering.
While we all know the needs and cap space of different teams, and can assume who they'll be interested in, saying you'll match/beat any offer goes a lot farther. Too far, IMO. Main problem is there isn't likely any way to prove he really said it, unless he was dumb enough to mention Parise's name on tape/email/etc.
- Majsheppard likes this
Posted by Buppy on 12 June 2012 - 02:23 PM
Yeah: QB, OL, RB, WR, TE, DL, LB, DB... hardly anyone.
... there are only certain positions on any football team that actually play more than a couple of plays the entire game.
Football is really probably the toughest. Takes even more good players to build a championship football team, only 6 of 32 teams make the playoffs, and then one poor game (or even a poor half/quarter/series) could end your season. Maybe easier for an underdog team to ride a hot streak to a title, but I think harder overall.
NHL though is certainly the biggest "grind", and likely the most physically demanding.
- Hockey13Playa likes this
Posted by Buppy on 11 June 2012 - 11:37 PM
I'd be surprised if that was really a quote from anyone in the Minnesota organization. That would be tampering and could result in Minnesota actually being prohibited from signing Parise, as well as forfeiting draft picks and/or a fine up to $5M.
You are seriously misinformed. First of all, this was reported by a MAN as a direct quote from the owner of the Minnesota Wild. I trust that he knows how much they will spend since it's his money. ...
In fact, if I was a GM right now, I'd already be writing up a complaint to the league, just to force someone from Minnesota to come out and deny they ever said it.
And regardless what you think of Detroit's future, they do have nearly two decades history of icing a competetive team. Minnesota has 11 years of nothing, showing they don't really know how to build or maintain a team. And every ranking I've seen has the Wings' prospect pool rated higher than the Wild's. Granlund may be a "can't miss", but it seems they don't have much beyond him. Players like Parise and Suter aren't going to look for a team that will win for them. They know they will be key players in the plans of any team. Add them to the Wings and it solves most of the issues you think the Wings have.
I know if I was Parise and worried about the future, I'd take a team that may, if our prospects don't work out, have to rebuild over a team that is already worse and in 10+ years still hasn't actually built anything in the first place. He goes to Minnesota he'll likely be traded in two years when they start their re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-build.
Posted by Buppy on 11 June 2012 - 05:29 PM
Giving up 4 firsts isn't just giving up 4 players we could protentially draft. It's also giving up the ability to trade those picks in the future. Between that and needing to significantly overpay to get him, you sacrifice a lot of flexibility. If he didn't mesh well with our system, or other holes in the lineup appear, we could still end up out of the playoffs...possibly giving up one or more top-10 picks. Maybe not likely, but it's a big risk to take for the right to overpay someone.
I'll say again, the RFA system is designed to very heaviliy favor the team owning the RFA rights. It gives a little bargaining power to the player, but little risk of the team losing its young assets. Offer sheets are very, very rarely worth making. It would have to be a team unable to match a fair offer or a player that the owning team isn't interested in keeping.
- PredsFanTheBayouState likes this
Posted by Buppy on 07 June 2012 - 01:33 AM
1. At $5 million, the compensation is a 1st, 2nd, and a 3rd.
Evander Kane is worth the cost! He won't cost us more than $5 million per year, first round and third round picks.
2. He is worth $5M, which is all the more reason Winnipeg would match. Hell, they might send us a card to thank us for not making them match $6M.
I'd trade a decent amount for his rights, but I wouldn't bother with an offer sheet. The RFA system very heavily favors the team owning a players rights (obviously, that's what it's supposed to do). Unless the team is very tight to the cap and/or isn't interested in the player it isn't worth it. Maybe if I had a crystal ball and knew for sure he'd be the next Shanny/Iginla...
- Jedi likes this
Posted by Buppy on 03 June 2012 - 09:19 PM
What exactly could have been done better? We still have a good team, a ton of cap space, and a pretty good prospect pool. What realistic moves could we have made to put us in a better position?
This is the doomsday scenario that Holland has seemed to never planned for. The writing has been on the wall for the last 4 seasons that Lidstrom would be gone, and it's become painfully obvious none of Kindl, Kronwall, or Ericsson were going to be the next top D-man they were thought to be. In the mean time Detroit has also been deficient in the natural goal scorer area. Holland took a chance on Franzen, but he seems to have chosen wrong and Franzen has been nowhere near what hes been before his contract. Now Detroit has been bounced early in the playoffs, the holes in the line up are mounting and players like Carle and Widemann/Semin and Doan will not fill the holes to make this team as competitive that a team needs to be to be real contenders.
The point of this is that Holland could have done a better job of transitioning the team so that they wouldn't be dependent on getting two top tier players thought FA in one offseason to stay where they have been the last 20 years.
Filling the void left by Nick was always going to be a huge problem. Nothing we could have done, except maybe tank a few seasons to stock up on lottery picks, would have changed that. It's not like there have been a bunch of future-HoF defensemen that we passed on as UFAs. At least now we have the cap space to offer Suter top dollar, with enough left over for other improvements.
We are not at all "dependent" on signing Parise. We may not have a top sniper, but we still have a top offense. Only 3 teams scored significantly more than the Wings this season. Even if we miss out on Parise and get someone like Jones instead, or even just re-sign Hudler and promote Nyquist, we should still be a very good offense. Figure out how to get the PP working again and "very good" becomes "elite".
The good news is we actually have the cap space to go aggressively after several of the best UFA options. And we do have a few tradeable assets if we miss out there. Realistically, for being as good as we have been for this long and still having any chance at all of still being an elite team next year speaks volumes about just how well Kenny has been preparing for this moment.
- kipwinger likes this
Posted by Buppy on 23 May 2012 - 09:54 PM
Suter is still under contract. Kenny can't say anything about him, or even hint too overtly, or it would be tampering.
Hey at least there are some folks willing to explain why they think I am in the wrong! Thank you guys!
Hey, Holland is gonna do what he is gonna do...Sure Suter may hate Detroit and will take less NOT to come here, that is fine too. I just don't see why everyone is getting excited over these guys who couldn't make it in the NHL before, didn't we learn our lesson's with Leino and Brunnstrom? I guess he could pan out to be a nice #6 or #7, I just don't hear no talk from Holland about being interested in Suter, he sure talks about guys over in Europe enough, you would think that he would say something...Hey, hopefully he signs everyone he wants to and turns this team back right...
Posted by Buppy on 22 May 2012 - 08:18 PM
4 seasons actually. Iwasn't a member here at that time, but other boards were certainly full of the same negativity.
Wait, correct me if I'm wrong: Didn't six years pass between the Cups in 2002 and 2008? ...
But that just means it's time for Kenny to prove them wrong again.
Posted by Buppy on 19 May 2012 - 06:50 PM
Even starting from a blank slate, there's only going to be so many options. If you're trying to conform to some rigid price and experience structure, you're limiting your options too far. Your approach would only work in a hypothetical world where a good option that fit your model was always available.
A general outline is fine, provided you're willing to be flexible when appropriate. Yours just goes way too far.
A young skill-player or two
A young grinder or two
A young defenseman or two
A handful of seasoned veterans
All the above on cheap contracts, allowing exceptions for exceptional players.
The rest of the roster in their 'prime' give or take a year or two. As many as possible below market value, limited long-term deals.
Strong two-way centers, at least 3, but 4-5 if possible (as long as said players can adjust to the wing), a few snipers, a few playmakers. As many versatile players as possible. Lots of speed. A few high-energy guys, very good on defense, and physical. One of them a center with very good faceoff skills. 3-4 defenseman who can score but aren't liabilities on defense. A couple physical stay-at-home guys. A good goalie.
Age/experience/cap hits to be determined by availablility, priority of need, and future options.
- number9 likes this
Posted by Buppy on 19 May 2012 - 11:05 AM
That's the thing...you make a thread titled "LA Kings as a model", then suggest the exact same changes that everyone else (including yourself in other threads) already suggested, despite the fact that those changes don't do anything at all to make the Wings more like the Kings. Why even mention the Kings?
You're getting carried away. And so are a lot of the rest of you.
1) I'm not saying that they are THE nhl's model franchise, or that we SHOULD re-build our team in their image...I'm simply saying, "Hey, look, that's the best team in hockey right now, they are playing this game very differently than us, is there anything we can learn from watching them?"
2) How does adding Parise, adding Suter, and replacing Eaves and Miller (essentially) with two bigger power forwards signify the abandonment of our style of hockey?? That's all I'm suggesting that we do here. I think it'd make us a better team. And I don't think that Holland or Babcock would disagree in the least.
Should the Wings ty to improve for next year? Of course. But the Kings have nothing to do with that.
- Frozen-Man likes this
Posted by Buppy on 18 May 2012 - 11:37 PM
Secondly, why should the Wings want to jump on the Kings bandwagon? That's something fans do, not exceptional hockey franchises. When the Kings or Rangers go a decade as a legit contender every year, then maybe we could consider them models. But not after one good year.
The Kings haven't found some secret formula for victory. There is no such thing. They're just playing very well.
This reminds of Fes from "That 70's Show" trying to grasp the Rock-Paper-Scissors concept. You need to understand that isn't one thing that beats everything. The way the Kings play isn't new. The way they are built isn't innovative. Everything they are doing has been tried before; has failed before. Nothing always works. Not one single "formula" in all of sporting history, any sport, always works. Closest to that in recent hockey history is the Wings. I have seen nothing in recent years to suggest that the puck-possession system, when executed well, is not as good or better than any other style.
Maybe our players are no longer good enough to execute our system, but until I see something to suggest the system is untenable, I'll stay on the Wings' bus and trust Kenny to tweak the roster.
Posted by Buppy on 16 May 2012 - 11:31 PM
We are no more than "playing well" away from being a serious contender. For most of the season we were near the top of the standings, near the top in GF and GA. That wasn't a fluke or luck. We have issues, as every single team in the league does every single season. It is not possible to put together a team that is too good to lose. By far the most important factor in the playoffs is just playing well. Of course you need talent, and we already have that. Build of the roster or style of play means very little. Whatever you do, you have to do well. Better than your opponent does whatever they do.
All good points around.
A little off topic, but we weren't a Zach Parise away from being serious Cup contenders.
Even if we get Parise, that doesn't solve our lack of size problem nor does it COMPLETELY solve our lack of sniper problem (if you ax me, Parise isn't a "pure sniper"). Though that point becomes moot if Franzen settles back in to his "2nd scorer" role that he had in 08 and 09 behind Hank and Hossa. He played well back then....
I have a feeling that the idiot GMs in the NHL are gonna drive up the price of free-agents like they did last year (James Wizniewski "Detroit doesn't pay market value"). Then we will be in a tough spot: Parise cannot make more than Pav....at least i don't think he can.
We could add Parise, Suter, Gaustad, Moen, bring Nick and Helm back, trade Franzen for Perry, trade Miller for Dustin Brown, add whatever goon and a couple big bruising defensemen for the third pair, and whatever else everyone says we "need"...and if we don't play well, we'll still likely lose in the first round.
Of course, we should still try to get better, both in raw talent and versatility of style. But we don't need a complete overhaul, and the season won't be over if we miss out on all the prize free agents.
- Byorski likes this