Jump to content


Jesusberg's Photo

Jesusberg

Member Since 14 Mar 2009
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 10:09 PM
**---

#2558082 Rank our griffins d prospects

Posted by Jesusberg on 20 December 2014 - 01:17 PM

 

So he should have earned his playing time, but he should have been given playing time even if he wasn't earning it, while Evans, who despite his lack of an NHL future who has been doing his job, should have been benched.

 

The bottom line is that Backman didn't do enough to prove he was good enough to play in the AHL.  End of story.

So Evans' job in the AHL > Backman's job in the AHL + his potential job at the NHL level.

Perhaps I'm underestimating the importance of a plug, who's scored zero points at the AHL. It's fantastic that Blashill feels he's got more intangibles, or brings leadership to the team, or whatever... but I think it's a very short-sighted strategy. Grand Rapids is what... 10th or 11th in the West? What exactly are they winning, and how is Brennan Evans helping? How does Backman playing in his spot hinder their "success" this season?

I admit, Backman leaving is a short-sighted move on his part. As much as he's responsible for his development, management is just as responsible, if not more. He's a suck for leaving, but I truly believe this is an example of mismanagement as well. To say that the onus is on a 22 year-old kid for leaving, what he feels to be a situation that is hindering his potential, is kind of ridiculous, IMO.

Backman's playing in the SEL and likely not coming back - that's partially on him, but there's more to it in my view. This team can't or won't move Kindl, and won't sit Brennan Evans. Both contributed to this situation.




#2558069 Rank our griffins d prospects

Posted by Jesusberg on 20 December 2014 - 11:30 AM

But at the same time you need to EARN it.


Let's say that Backman wasn't performing up to snuff in practices, and the 13 games he played in. That's fine - he wasn't doing enough to stay in the line-up on a consistent basis. My issue with the situation right now is that Evans has played in 20 games, and has contributed nothing on offense. I understand his role on the team, but Backman was essentially sitting while Evans has been racking up PIM's.

Earning it or not, I just can't understand the logic behind letting a player who could potentially contribute to your team in the future sit over an AHL veteran who's got zero points and no future in the organization.

I'm sure Backman played his role in the situation - perhaps a poor attitude, sense of entitlement, being homesick, etc., but now a player this team was pretty high on going into the season is back in Sweden, and I can't see him coming back to GR. The chances he makes the Red Wings out of camp, from the SEL are pretty much slim to none. It's a situation that could have been avoided, IMO.




#2557608 Rank our griffins d prospects

Posted by Jesusberg on 19 December 2014 - 09:16 AM

He's also behind Kronwall, Ericsson, Dekeyser, Smith, Quincey, and apparently, Paetch and Evans.

 

If he's our 5th best prospect currently in the AHL, the chances of him ever sniffing the Wings are practically nil, whether he's playing every night or not. You can say he's a very good prospect, but don't gloss over that he's also apparently unable to win a regular spot in an AHL lineup at the moment.

 

Prospects wash out all the time. All over the league. 5th round picks do so much more often than not. I bet Gleason Fournier wasn't too happy that he sucked too much for the AHL, but he wasn't European so no one wrote a story about it. Did anyone here care? We feeling that loss? The pool of future NHL players is not going to say to themselves, "Hey, this one time, there was this one 5th round pick who couldn't win a regular AHL spot, and the Wings didn't go out of their way to make it easier for him. Those dicks, I'll never play there."

 

It's not about anyone being over-ripe, or our development process taking too long, or any unfair treatment. There are spots in GR besides Ouellet's. If Backman can't win one of those other 5, he should be unhappy with himself, not with the organization.

 

While my "why should we care" comment may have been flippant, and I'd certainly expect the organization to show more tact, I would much rather see them say, "Suck it up. Play better or have fun in Europe." than "Oh, sorry it's too hard for you, let me get one of these better players out of your way so you can play every day.".


I agree with some of your points, but I see things another way on others. Let me preface this by saying that I don't like Backman's tone, and I don't think any player should try to "strong-arm" his way into the line-up by suggesting he'll go elsewhere. That being said...

Backman being the "5th best" prospect in the NHL has less to do with him, and more to do with the talent in front of him. Coming into the year, I don't even think Jensen was on anyone's radar - certainly not mine. Him being unable to get a spot on the blueline right now could have something to do with how Blashill feels about his vets - or wanting to create pairings that are to his liking. Don't quote me on this, but I think he and Sproul were being used as a pairing at one time, and it just didn't take. My point is, there may be an element of circumstance and coaching blended in here, not just Backman's individual talents.

I really don't think Fournier and Backman are the same guy. Fournier looked great in the QMJHL, but never took in the AHL, or the ECHL for that matter. As much as I dislike that he brought it up, the SEL really is a much better league. Backman played well in a men's league, not one in the CHL. It's unfortunate that Fournier didn't pan out, though... I actually liked his game.

Fact is, I do think they have one too many AHL vets on the back-end there. They could have gone without Evans and kept Nedomlel up as the extra in GR. I'm not advocating giving Backman a spot because he's whining and deserves one, but I do think he actually needs regular ice time to adjust to play in North America. Not getting in playing time here really could hurt his long-term game. As I said, I think he's going about it the wrong way, though. This should have been an internal matter.


 

looks like 30% 

 

 

Also, seeing that Paul Maurice used to coach him in Carolina.... so he's a known commodity. That could've had something to do with it.

I saw the 30% yesterday, but didn't think to fix it on here. The Maurice connection didn't even occur to me. Makes more sense now.




#2557506 Rank our griffins d prospects

Posted by Jesusberg on 18 December 2014 - 11:25 AM

I'm not worried about Backman, he will be fine. But I do agree that Ouellet needs to get up with the big club full time. Why Kindl is still on this team is beyond me. We're not going to get much of a return for him but I believe he can still be a serviceable defenseman on several other clubs. There are 3 teams that I think could use help on the back end right now, due to lack of depth or injury. The Oilers need help at every position, but mostly on the back end. Kindl could be a good fit there. The Islanders and Jets could also use a little help on their back end right now, because of injuries. Any of these teams could have him for a mid to late round draft pick or even future considerations. We can bare to lose the "asset",  the roster spot should be more important to us right now.


I think they'd all be good suitors, as well. The biggest issue with moving Kindl, I believe, is the term on his deal. One less year on his deal and he's gone by now, IMO. The Jets seem like a perfect place for him to go, considering a lot of their injuries have some term on them, and they have plenty of cap space.

Rumors have them offering a bottom six player (Thorburn, Halischuk, Peluso, Galiardi) in return for a defender. I'd prefer a pick, but at this point I want that roster spot cleared up above all else.




#2557093 12/16 GDT : Blue Jackets 1 at Red Wings 0 (SO)

Posted by Jesusberg on 16 December 2014 - 02:19 PM

Babcock scratching Kindl and Lashoff over Ouellet screams, "Hey Kenny. I want this kid here. Do you see!?"




#2556918 Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Posted by Jesusberg on 15 December 2014 - 03:33 PM

I don't get all the talk about guys not being "top pairing" defenders. It's similar to having a forward like Abdelkader playing with Zetterberg-Datsyuk. Parity causes teams to look for balance through their line-ups - chemistry, spreading the talent, whatever. Tons of teams in the NHL do it.

Suter-Brodin/Spurgeon, McDonagh-Girardi, Bouwmeester-Pietrangelo, Orprik-Carlson, Martin-Letang, etc. All of those pairings have a defensive/shutdown guy whose numbers aren't anything to write home about. That's the NHL today. The pairings putting up big numbers like Giordano-Brodie or Markov-Subban are becoming a rarity in the league.
 




#2556309 Myers close to become a wing?

Posted by Jesusberg on 12 December 2014 - 11:00 PM

Athanasiou: "Hey guys, come check out this post on LGW. What's a Jesusberg? Either way, this guy said I should be made available for trade. I'm gonna go score a couple goals and maybe add an assist... make him look stupid."




#2556013 12/12 GDT : Panthers 3 at Red Wings 2 (SO)

Posted by Jesusberg on 12 December 2014 - 04:06 PM

I can't believe that I'm really starting to hate this team. Their "fans" on Twitter are saying that they "own the Joe" because they've won the past 3 visits there....LoL. I really would love like a 5-0 or 6-0 blowout. This team is really starting to annoy me. Go Wings!

 

 

 

Wait. Florida? Fans? What?


We should just be impressed that many people over the age of 60 can use Twitter.




#2556003 Myers close to become a wing?

Posted by Jesusberg on 12 December 2014 - 02:41 PM

Yea, we definitely could be...
But if larkin stays at um for lets say three years, Pavels contract will then be up.
Helms health is a concern, as is Weiss', yeah we have some prospects looking good for the future but I don't expect them to pan out as much as our current crop of kids did.
Not because I don'thave faith in the org.Just that id rather have more chances at one of them surpassing expectations.

Aa has the skill and speed to be great, I've been super high on him for awhile now, actually found lgw looking for people talking about him.


Yeah we have great depth now at c, but Pavel and z are getting up there, and id love to remain deep there in the future.

Believe me, I have this in mind as well. I'm very tentative when it comes to moving assets. I think running Sheahan-Larkin-Athanasiou-Glendening down the middle, in the future, would be excellent. However, I'm kind of viewing it in a similar way that I look at the defense. I really think that Detroit is going to hang on to Kronwall, Ericsson, DeKeyser and Smith (assuming nothing goes wrong in terms of health, etc.), leaving two/three spots for Ouellet, Sproul, Backman, Marchenko and Jensen. It's great to have that wealth, but something has to give there.

Center isn't as deep, obviously, but I still think that at least one of Zetterberg, Weiss and/or Helm will be around. There are more health issues with these guys than the aforementioned defensemen. Again, I'm not advocating moving a guy for the sake of getting a slight upgrade on the back end - it would have to be someone who was a big boost to the offense from the blueline. Basically, it comes down to me thinking that Riley has taken a big step forward, and having more comfort with the possibility of moving a center in a package deal. I'd be more at ease losing AA in a deal than I would Tatar, Jurco or Mantha.




#2555848 Myers close to become a wing?

Posted by Jesusberg on 11 December 2014 - 03:40 PM

I wish this one would die... especially after reading this:

 

http://www.thehockey...on-tyler-myers/

"And this is where things get interesting. I’m told the asking price from the Sabres for Myers is prospect Dylan Larkin, a roster player along the lines of a Riley Sheahan or Tomas Jurco, and a first-round pick. That seems like an awful lot for an underachieving player who still has five years on his deal with a cap hit of $5.5 million per season."
 

:huh: Seriously? Larkin, Sheahan/Jurco AND a 1st? No thanks.
 




#2555816 Babcock "I don't think it will be my final year here"

Posted by Jesusberg on 11 December 2014 - 01:21 PM

Not that I'm surprised, but...

 

 

Ansar Khan ‏@AnsarKhanMLive  3m

Babcock said contrary to reports he is not close to signing contract and doesn't expect to do so during season.

 

 

Helene St. James ‏@HeleneStJames  4m

red Wings coach Mike Babcock says extension not imminent. Says whoever reporting that "is wrong."

 




#2555136 Theoretical "Expansion Draft" implications - Who to protect?

Posted by Jesusberg on 09 December 2014 - 06:14 PM

Again, this is all "theoretically" based on an (unlikely to actually happen) June 2015 expansion draft based on the rules for the last expansion drafts.

 

It's also unlikely that those rules would be the formula for a "Cap Era" expansion draft. Two things didn't exist during the last expansions: The salary cap and the notion of "higher league parity".

 

I wouldn't be surprised if the league adds new provisions for a salary cap expansion.

 

The first thing to consider is that the expansion team would need to reach the minimum salary floor. The league probably knows that the expansion team won't have a snowballs chance in hell to compete in the now thin UFA market and would struggle to reach the cap floor without having provisions in the expansion draft. They would also want the new team to atleast be able to compete on level with basement level teams. Something they can't do with one draft worth of prospects and the pack of career AHL players or mediocre veterans that moved in the '98-2000 expansion drafts.

 

My guess is that the league will also put in rules stating that teams have to expose a certain number of players that have a cap hit over a certain level and/or a certain number of years remaining on their contract. Something like:

 

Each team must leave unprotected atleast:

-Four players (1G, 1D, 2F)

-One of which is under contract for atleast the next season with a cap hit at or over $3.5m

-One of which is under contract for alteast the next season with a cap hit from $2m-$3.5m

-Two of which are under contract for atleast the next season with a cap hit from $700k($150k over league minimum)-$2m

 

Then the league would mandate that the expansion team take a certain number of players that meet each criteria, like: Atleast 3 of the $3.5M+ players exposed and 5 from the $2m-$3.5m category, and atleast 7 from the $700k+ category.

 

Would be a good opportunity for some teams to offload bad contracts (ala Lecavalier), but also guarantees the expansion team atleast a small amount of NHL talent for their inaugural season, and a jump start at meeting the salary floor for their first season (most likely in the same fashion Edmonton did this past season, by overpaying mediocre UFA's like Nikitin and Pouliot!).

I agree that they may attach some conditions for the players being exposed, but I don't think there would be any shortage of those "bad contracts" available (Semin, Mike Richards, Brian Campbell and Matt Carle come to mind). While I think teams should have a minimum amount of salary exposed, if the criteria is too specific, it's going to handcuff a good number of teams. For example, outside of Michal Neuvirth, Buffalo doesn't have another player in the 2.0-3.5 range.

I think the onus should really be on the expansion teams. They can overpay UFA's, make deals, etc., but I agree there should be a minimum amount of cap dollars made available - maybe not just so specific on the number of players and their ranges. It's another obstacle (the cap), but I think teams would be relieved to unload some of their contracts for sure.


  • DSM likes this


#2555132 Theoretical "Expansion Draft" implications - Who to protect?

Posted by Jesusberg on 09 December 2014 - 05:43 PM

Mrazek is out of waiver options after this season. That wouldn't work.

"Petr Mrazek's waiver exemption of 5 year(s) and 73 games remains in place through to the end of the 2015-16 season. However, that exemption will end immediately when he appears in 73 career NHL regular season and playoff game(s). He has played in 14, meaning he is 59 away from his exemption ending."

http://www.capgeek.c...&player_id=2134


  • DSM likes this


#2555130 What Are You Playing?

Posted by Jesusberg on 09 December 2014 - 05:20 PM

If I can get NHL 15 for cheap between now and Christmas I'll get it..otherwise next year. Getting Far Cry 4, COD AW and wwe2k15 for Christmas...love playing The new Halo and Destiny


I can't speak for anyone else, but knowing what I know, I wouldn't even buy it for cheap. I've found the whole experience mind-numbingly frustrating. Sliders won't update, can't find a good set of sliders that I can work with and my "Today's Game" default screen is always a month behind. Though, if I'm being honest, I'd most likely buy it for like $20, just to add it to the collection. I'm just mad at myself for shilling out the $70.




#2555122 Theoretical "Expansion Draft" implications - Who to protect?

Posted by Jesusberg on 09 December 2014 - 04:31 PM

I would think CBS and MIN would be included. In the '98 expansion, the Ducks, Sharks, Lightning, Panthers etc. took part and they were all expansions in the early 90's.

The ten game minimum criteria is confusing to me as well. For this "theoretical" situation in which the draft takes place this coming June, Gustavsson and McCollum could still get claimed.


If we're protecting two, does McCollum even count? He's played one game in the NHL.

For some reason, I was thinking July and not June, hence me thinking Detroit could sign someone to protect their goaltenders right away. While I get this theoretical draft would occur this June, I imagine it's going to be next June or the one after (if this happens). I think it would be tough to find someone fitting the criteria to sign in Detroit's situation - it's all but certain that we're going to roll with Mrazek as the back-up next season. Someone like Fasth or McElhinney could meet the requirements (depending on how much they play this season), but it's hard to imagine they'd be up for playing in the AHL. I'm assuming that if they don't have a 3rd goaltender that meets the 10/25 game criteria, they'd have to expose one of Howie or Mrazek? Bleh if so.


  • DSM likes this