Jump to content

Buppy's Photo


Member Since 14 Feb 2009
Offline Last Active Today, 07:30 PM

#2664431 Fixing this mess....

Posted by Buppy on 04 April 2016 - 03:52 PM

... Both can be moved without hurting us at F...

No. They can't.

Maybe we could move one for some improvement on D, then hope to offset that loss via UFA. Even that is unlikely. No chance in hell for both.

But this is getting a bit far afield from my original point. Schenn isn't good, and would be a waste of money.

#2664421 Fixing this mess....

Posted by Buppy on 04 April 2016 - 02:55 PM

now you are just assuming things. I have not at any point said that in any way shape or form. I have been very clear about making trades and signing UFA's and that this team needs at least 2 F

's and 3 Dmen between now and the start of the 17/18 season. That is on top of what we already have.

Wasn't assuming anything. The list of players you gave in your hypothetical $24M in free cap scenario did not include Nyquist or Tatar.


Even in the unlikely event that the cap rises more than expected and we get rid of Howard without retaining anything and we fill the backup G and scrub spots for ~$4M, then spend $10-13M on defense, you're looking at replacing Nyquist and Tatar for $7-10M. You're not going to get anything better than them in that price range, and even if you get something about as good, we still haven't actually improved at forward.


So again, signing Schenn as well someone that's actually good on defense is not only extremely unlikely, but also comes at the expense of upgrading at forward.


But affordability aside, Schenn is just not that good. Even if we were struggling to hit the cap floor I wouldn't want him. 

#2664405 Fixing this mess....

Posted by Buppy on 04 April 2016 - 01:27 PM

do the math. Z 6.1, larkin >1, Abby 4.25, mantha >1, datsyuk 7.5, AA >1, Sheahan 2, Jurco >1, Glendening >1, DD 6, Kronwall 4.75, Ericsson 4.25, Oullett>1, Green 6, Marchenko >1, Mrazek 3. That is about 50 million. We have another 1.1 on Weiss's buyout. cap will be around 75 million. That leaves us with about 24 million to spend. 7 open roster spots.

So your perfect world is getting rid of Nyquist and Tatar. For Schenn.


#2664345 Fixing this mess....

Posted by Buppy on 03 April 2016 - 10:09 PM

I am done with Smith and it looks like Blashill is as well. Smith turns 28 soon and is a UFA after next season. Now is the time to move him in a deal to give him a fresh start. Schenn is 26-younger than Smith and KFQ. it still bugs me to now end that KFQ and Smith make a combined 7 million per year!!!!!!!!

As for the young guys yes some will have to be moved our we will lose them for nothing. None are waiver protected anymore. Keep 8 Dmen next season.







That frees up Smith, and 2 of the marcheko/Sproul/Jensen group for moves. Summer of 2017 we could then move Kronwall-not that I think it will happen-just could. Summer of 2018 Green is gone. At that point we are down to 1 bad contract on D in Ericsson.

Schenn is not better than Quincey, Smith, or Ericsson. There's also no way we could ever afford a #1D and Schenn without getting rid of Ericsson at least, and even that probably wouldn't be enough.

#2664334 Goalie Battle

Posted by Buppy on 03 April 2016 - 08:34 PM

6 weeks of bad hockey is more than a few bad games.

Hasn't been 6 weeks. A few bad games. And most of the bad games, for both goalies, have been equally bad or worse defense.

All goalies have bad games, and games where the defense makes them look bad. Mrazek has had less than most, and comparable to the top goalies this year.

#2663609 2016 Playoffs % chances (part II)

Posted by Buppy on 31 March 2016 - 02:42 PM

They wouldn't have the tie breaker though. The first tie breaker if I'm not mistaken would be ROW, and the Wings would have 41 and the Bruins would have 40...

That's assuming all the wins are in regulation or OT. 

#2662475 Fixing this mess....

Posted by Buppy on 28 March 2016 - 01:56 AM


Of course it's simplistic; I said myself that it was one crude measure.  The point is that the Wings don't even have 3 below average first line level players.  They have only 1.  Relying on depth is a myth; if you look at Cup-winning Wings teams, they all had top-level first line players (I only glanced at total points and not PPG).  If a team doesn't have top-level players, depth doesn't truly exist.  I think this season is bearing that out; without primary scoring, secondary scoring doesn't matter.


There isn't much of a difference goals v. points.  If players are putting up points, it means someone's getting goals.  If someone is scoring goals, it means others are getting points.  Detroit's 3 best at PPG average a rank of 88 in the NHL (Datsyuk is 43, Z 108, and Larkin 113).  Detroit's 3 best at GPG average a rank of about 82 (Larkin is 71, Datsyuk 86, and Tatar 88).  


I think the Wings have shown a good propensity to find 2nd line level players.  I would be very willing to give up some of those for higher-end talent.  With extra playing and power play time, the Wings have guys that would probably step up to produce sufficiently at the 2nd and 3rd line levels, especially next season.  But of course, it is easier said that done, as there has to be a team willing to give up higher-end talent for more depth.


The thing to keep in mind is that it isn't just looking at goals by 1 new player v 2 others.  Chances are there will be another player or two that come up with more goals now that they get more ice and PP time with the other 2 secondary scorers away.

Yeah, I wasn't all that clear. Not having top performing players is a problem. What I mean is that having below average top players wouldn't be much better, and potentially worse if we lose too much depth.


Relying on depth, "myth" or not, is simply reality. There are very few true impact players in the league, and they are almost never available. Stamkos may become available, and if he does I'm sure we'll make a pitch like we did with Suter. But odds are it's not going to happen. Odds are there will be no one available through trade that is so much better than Nyquist, Tatar, or Abby to justify trading two of them. Nyquist has 43 goals the last two years, Tatar has 49. There are 22 and 11 forwards (respectively) who have scored 10 or more above that. That's only 5 more per year, hardly a big difference even if someone steps up to equal the production of the 2nd player. 6 and 9 respectively that have averaged 10 more per year. Most likely none of them are available through trade. Fortunately, that also means that no one available would actually cost Nyquist + Tatar either, so this is kind of a moot point. 


Point is, despite all the contempt familiarity has bred for our roster, there are just not that many players in the league that are that much better than the secondary players we already have. The few that are we aren't going to get. The best thing we can do then is add without subtracting. While we may have some kids who could step up, it's not an unlimited supply and it's not a sure thing. Worth the risk to trade one, I'd say, but not two. And better to use the one for a defense upgrade IMO. 


And goals are more important than points. Even more so if we're giving up any of our better goal scorers. Someone has to finish, and actually put pucks in the net, or no one gets points.

#2662470 Fixing this mess....

Posted by Buppy on 27 March 2016 - 10:44 PM

Buppy, Green juts got 6 mill per year last summer. Yandle is younger and another year of inflation gets added on, I would be shocked if he is under 7 million. If 2-3 teams get into a bidding war he could be 8+ easily.

Trouba is not a great Dman today, but he is also 22 and there is plenty of talent there. I think a pair of Trouba and Dekeyser could be very good in about 2 years. But of course this would require Holland to make a trade or 2.....

And Green had produced at a slightly better rate the year before. 10g, 45p in 71 games to 5g, 44p in 75 games so far this year for Yandle. Green also signed a 3 year deal. I'd assume Yandle will be looking for more. He's the same age Green was when we signed him last year.


I like Trouba and I'm sure that would be a very good pair. I'm just saying he's over-valued by some people around here. 


Just an example man. Tatar and Nyquist haven't scored 40 yet this year either. They might be just short. But the bigger point in this is guys that score 40 goals or 35 each year are the superstars that make other around them better by drawing all the attention. Guys like Nyquist and Tatar don't.

Yes, and if we don't figure out why they're down this year, the same thing likely turns your 35 goal scorer into a 25 goal scorer. And making others around them better means nothing if there's no one around them that's good in the first place.


Bottom line is this. We are not going to trade/replace half the team. It's not possible. (At least not replace with something better.) No matter what we do, no matter who we add, any significant improvement has to come from players that are already here. With what we added this year, we should already be better. Instead we're just as bad 5v5, and our PP is much worse. We have added a ton to the team in the last few years, but we're losing just as much. We need to stop taking steps back. That means trying to make additions while subtracting as little as possible. That means not trading two of our best young players. 

#2662468 Fixing this mess....

Posted by Buppy on 27 March 2016 - 09:47 PM

Of course nothing is that cut and dried, but I understand your point. On that you are correct. Not enough top line guys. There is always a debate on are you better off with 2 good players or 1 great player? If you have 2 guys (Nyquist and tatar) that combined score 40-45 goals and make 8-9 million per year is that better than having 1 guy that scores 40+ and makes the same money? The hard part is the answer changes based on your team. If your team has 3 super stars then moving one for better depth makes sense. But that isn't us atm. We lack the stars so we need to trade/sign/develop some.

There were 3 players who scored 40 goals last year. Probably around the same this year, give or take. For the most part, those guys just aren't available. Stamkos may be (though he'll cost more than $9M I'd bet). With the young guys we have, it's worth looking into trading one of Nyquist and Tatar, but not both. At least until more of the kids actually prove something.

#2662465 Fixing this mess....

Posted by Buppy on 27 March 2016 - 09:28 PM

This is where Holland needs to go out and DO something. I like Yandle as a second pair guy. The trouble is he is a UFA and is going to get paid like a top pair guy. Is Yandle really worth 8million per year? That is the area I think he will be signed at. I would much rather make strong runs at Fowler and Trouba. If Holland landed both I might drive to Detroit and kiss him! I think I am safe on that front however.....LOL

But those are the type of guys we should be going after. Guys that are close to being stars that we can control at a reasonable rate. Then come the summer of 2017 try to find another 1 or 2 Dmen. We need 3 over the next 2 summers, be it from trade, UFA or youth developing.

I agree that Yandle may get over-valued by some around here (though the Trouba hype from some is far worse), but I doubt he will get $8M. I would guess around $6M depending on the cap and term.


We don't need 3 defensemen either. Might seem that way because we lack a real top defenseman, so we judge everyone as being not good enough. We may want to replace some for cap reasons, but I think we'd be alright without doing so. We may not even want to add more than one this summer, with expansion looming.


As far as trade targets, Vatanen or Lindholm are the most realistic options. Could be the perfect storm there, as I think they are also two of the best options rumored to be available.


The problem with the offense isn't 2nd liners playing like 2nd liners.  Guys like Nyquist, Abby and Tatar are fine as 2nd liners.  It's the lack of 1st line forwards.  I just took at look at players by points per game.  It's crude, but I think illustrative.  Figure that essentially the top 90 forwards in PPG in the NHL are "1st liners".  If so, then the Wings have just 1 1st liner (Datsyuk, ranked 43rd).  Forwards from 91-180 would be "2nd liners".  The Wings have 5 of them (Z, Larkin, Tatar, Abby, Nyquist).  There are 4 "3rd liners" (Richards, AA, Helm, Pulks) and 2 "4th liners" (Sheahan, Glendening).


Again, this is a super rough look at things, but the big problem is having too many 2nd fiddles and not enough guys carrying play and scoring.  The solution is probably something along the lines of packaging 2 of the 2nd liners, plus other pieces, to get a "1st liner"... then hope Larkin steps up production in his 2nd year and Mantha/AA can step up to "2nd liners".  Easier said than done, but if Holland can't get creative enough to do it, then the org. needs to find someone that can.

I think that's a bit too simplistic.


First, the goal is to be a good team, so we want our 1st-liners to be above average. If you have 3 guys ranked in the 50s or 60s for your 1st line, odds are you aren't going to be very good unless your depth is exceptional. That isn't likely to be true if we trade too much of what we have. Finding top talent is difficult, and expensive. Most likely, there just isn't a deal out there. We probably need to rely on depth more than power at the top, as well as the kids taking a step forward. That means trying to figure out why most of our team took a step back this year. 


Secondly, we need to concentrate on goal-scoring rather than just points. One major problem this year is that in terms of goal-scoring, Datsyuk and Zetterberg are very poor relative to the top forwards on other teams. The rest of the team, even having a poor year, is average or slightly above.

#2662445 Looking ahead at expansion draft

Posted by Buppy on 27 March 2016 - 04:48 PM


Ok, so then all the pending RFA and UFA will have to be protected or exposed....including Datsyuk.

This just made me realize that Datsyuk and his NMC will still be on the roster at the likely time of the expansion draft. May be forced to protect him.


Kind of sucks if true. We may not know if he even wants to play the following year. Even if he did, I'm not sure an expansion team would take a chance on a guy who'd be an UFA a week later. Hopefully, any potential forced protection of NMC players wouldn't include players whose contracts (or clauses) expire that year.

#2662392 Forward Line Combos/Discussion

Posted by Buppy on 27 March 2016 - 12:06 AM


Tatar is second on the team in goals. Richards is the top point getter for our bottom two lines - which is where he plays. For a team that is lacking offense, maybe getting rid of those guys isn't a great idea.

I'd agree with you on Tatar. He's been one of our best players this year. But he and Nyquist have both spent much of the year in the bottom 6, and they're outperforming Richards by a lot. Richards 5v5 scoring rate is the worst on the team besides Miller and a few guys that only played a few games. He's been doing well lately, so I wouldn't expect replacing him to do much, but probably wouldn't hurt. Glendening has also been playing well lately, but I'd take him out as well. 

#2662002 Looking ahead at expansion draft

Posted by Buppy on 25 March 2016 - 07:22 PM

Chipman seems to be running the jets like a small market team so I doubt they'll buy out Enstrom.

I mean, that team didn't even want to pay to captain so I'll doubt they are willing to pay a potential future Norris winner in trouba.

An offer sheet at around 8 x 8 with 20 mill signing bonus should be enough to get this guy too bad Holland doesn't do offer sheets :(

Many things wrong with this.


One: Can't offer 8 years. 7 years is the max.

Two: Can't offer $20M signing bonus (unless spanning multiple years). Max is about 14 million, depends on the cap.

Three: Trouba being a potential Norris winner is a stretch. Offensive skills seem only decent at best.

Four: Trouba right now is not worth close to $8M. That'd make him the 2nd highest paid defenseman in the NHL.

Five: Compensation for that would be 4 1st-round picks. Trouba is not worth close to that.

Six: That would create some serious cap problems for us.

Seven: Offer sheets are stupid. There is a reason why almost no one makes them.

#2661673 The Holiday tradition: 2016 Draft thoughts.....

Posted by Buppy on 23 March 2016 - 01:41 PM

Like I've said before, I don't know a ton about any of these guys, other than articles, youtube clips, stats, so I don't have anything against Fabbro really, other than not like drafting out of the Canadian Junior A Leagues. The BCHL is a lower tier league and not known for a great development program. The only noteworthy defenseman I know that has come out of that league is Justin Schultz (there likely are others). In saying that, I wouldn't be disappointed with the pick, just would love to see one of the other three fall to us (don't see it happening)...

Both Fabbro and teammate Tyson Jost (who I think would be another good pick) are committed to college. They can't play CHL or they'd lose eligibility.

#2661228 Fixing this mess....

Posted by Buppy on 21 March 2016 - 12:23 AM


You land Stamkos by making a hockey trade, trade whatever you have to.  A combo of Tatar, Gus, Mantha, Picks, Prospects. Whatever you have to do. Larkin and Stamkos going forward would be scary.  Mrazek in net. Shore up the D and it would be unstoppable I think.  

Stamkos has missed the playoffs 4 times, and swept in the first round once. The two decent runs TB has had he was 5th and tied for 3rd in team scoring. He's a good player, and worth pursuing, but not to the point of giving up anything ridiculous for him. Conditional pick or some prospect who's not going to get a chance here is all his rights are worth. 

Where my math freaks at ?

Datsyuk regular season stats:

	        5G/60	AG/60	5P/60	AP/60	T5G/60	TAG/60	AGM	A5G/Y	AAG/Y	A5P/Y	AAP/Y
05-06 to 11-12	0.96	1.11	2.59	3.32	3.48	4.61	7.71	15.86	26.86	42.57	80.14
11-12 to 15-16	0.67	1.06	1.87	2.76	2.62	4.02	18.25	8.25	18.50	24.25	48.00
This season	0.42	0.86	1.40	2.21	2.23	3.45	16	6	16	20	41
Rel. last 4	69.79%	95.50%	72.20%	83.13%	75.29%	87.20%	236.57%	52.03%	68.88%	56.96%	59.89%
Rel. this year	43.75%	77.48%	54.05%	66.57%	64.08%	74.84%	207.41%	37.84%	59.57%	46.98%	51.16%

5G/60-5P/60 = Individual 5v5 Goals/Points scored / 60 minutes

AG/60-AP/60 = Individual Goals/Points scored / 60 minutes, all situations

T5G/60-TAG/60 = Team 5v5/All situations Goals scored / 60 minutes

AGM = average games missed, per year

A5G/Y-A5P/Y = Average individual 5v5 Goals/Points per year

AAG/Y-AAP/Y = Average individual Goals/Points per year, all situations

Rel. last 4/Rel. this year = Performance the last 4 years/this year relative to performance from 05-06 to 11-12


The decline is there. He had a good year last year, but 4 of the last 5 years were down fairly significantly from where he was in his prime. Combined with the increase in injuries, it's a major difference.