Jump to content


Jesusberg's Photo

Jesusberg

Member Since 14 Mar 2009
Offline Last Active Today, 05:46 PM
**---

#2533017 Dekeyser/Tatar status update

Posted by Jesusberg on 25 July 2014 - 04:12 PM

My point is that you can't really apply that logic to everyone (i.e. giving a bridge deal to everyone coming of ELC).  Take Crosby as another extreme case.  You wouldn't sign him to a 2 year prove it deal after his first 3 years.  To me, bridge deals are more of a risk management concept.  Sometimes, a player would prefer 2 years at $3M per rather than 6 years at $4M per...it really depends.

 

Take Subban for example.  Montreal went with a bridge deal for him and are going to get burned now.  Not sure if he pushed for the bridge deal or not, but they would have been better off signing him long-term a couple years ago, now they will end up paying much more.

 

I understand your point of view though....you haven't put in enough time to demonstrate consistency, therefore don't deserve a long-term lucrative contract....however, teams often give players contracts they don't currently deserve to avoid having to pay them even more in the future.

For the record, I'm not against skipping bridge deals when the situation calls for it. (I know my 3rd post in this topic seems to contradict that, because I said "players"). My original point was this: 

Tatar should sign a "bridge" deal, just like most younger players. I can't stand when I see a guy come off of his ELC and get a 6 million dollar contract (not saying Tatar is getting this, or has asked for it) for one season of strong play. The rare occasion, it's deserved and the deal works out

So perhaps I wasn't specific enough, but I'm referring to the mid-range players, not superstar. I acknowledge that skipping bridge deals can be beneficial. At times, skipping those bridge deals turns out to be a fantastic situation for a team - i.e. John Tavares. I think most players considered to be superstars can "safely" skip those deals.

Montreal's screwed right now because of Subban's bridge deals, and that's where I think a team like Ottawa did the right thing (Karlsson @ 6.5 per). 

However, in Tatar's particular case, I would feel much safer giving him a bridge deal to determine his long-term contract's value. As of right now, he's played predominantly on the 3rd line. The players mentioned above are studs, playing against the other team's top competition. Maybe it's my perception of Tatar's potential, but I don't see Detroit being burned by a bridge deal with him. I don't think it'll amount to a situation where Tatar is able to demand upwards of 7 million on his next deal.

I get the idea of risk management, and I wouldn't have been totally opposed to a 5 year, 3-3.5 million deal. It worked out well with Filppula. I just think that the 2-3 year deal, in Tatar's case, would be the best fit for now. 




#2532965 Dekeyser/Tatar status update

Posted by Jesusberg on 24 July 2014 - 02:31 PM

 

Who's suggesting he get a 6 million dollar deal?

I edited it right before you replied. I had Edmonton in mind when I threw out the 6 million dollar figure.




#2532963 Dekeyser/Tatar status update

Posted by Jesusberg on 24 July 2014 - 02:18 PM

Tatar should sign a "bridge" deal, just like most younger players. I can't stand when I see a guy come off of his ELC and get a 6 million dollar contract (not saying Tatar is getting this, or has asked for it) for one season of strong play. The rare occasion, it's deserved and the deal works out. I think there's a lot of risk, as it just sets a bad precedent, and players expect the money without really proving they're worth the contract.




#2532946 Alfie wants to play

Posted by Jesusberg on 24 July 2014 - 12:47 PM

Pucktividi, it doesn't and shouldn't always come down to who is the better player, sometimes it has to be a more calculated decision. When it comes down to handing a roster spot to a (21 year old) kid that still has another year of waiver exemption (Tomas Jurco), or re-signing a (future hall-of-fame) veteran to a reasonable contract (Daniel Alfredsson), I would pick the second one 95% of the time.

 

In my opinion there are a number of reasons for doing this. One being point production. In this case, both player will more than likely produce the same number of points, my guess being between 40-50. Secondly, development. I'm a big believer that a player is much better off playing top line minutes in all situations in the minors rather than getting sheltered minutes and no special teams in the pros. Another thing would be confidence. This doesn't apply as much to a player like Jurco as much as Mantha, but confidence can definitely be completely diminished if thrown in to the deep end too early. I'm sure there are even more reasons but I'm going to finish off with team depth. A veteran player like Alfredsson is brought in, while a great young kid like Jurco is buried to increase the overall depth of the team. When the inevitable injuries hit, Jurco / Mantha are great first call ups.

 

Everyone is well aware of how highly I regard Jurco, he is far and away my favorite prospect and will more than likely be my favorite Red Wing in a few years. Hell, I'm getting a new dog in a couple months and I'm between two names, Zetty and Jurco and I'm leaning toward Jurco... I cannot wait for this kid to be up full time with the Wings, however I still believe that another year in the American League is the best thing for his development, and because of that, I'm confident that is where he will end up.

 

I think that because people got a glimpse of Jurco last season, and saw some flashes of high-end skill, they missed some of the knocks on him (right now). There are still little things that Jurco is going to have to learn to reach his full level of consistency at the NHL level. I remember seeing Tatar during one of his first call-up games and watching him go offside twice in the span of a few minutes, mostly because he wasn't used to the pace/speed yet. As you mentioned in a previous post, Nyquist and Tatar were able to adjust to the NHL because they were brought in the right way, and there's nothing wrong with doing that with Jurco right now.

All in all, Jurco is not a necessity at this point - but allowing him to mature properly is definitely a necessity. We're going to need that when Hank and Pavs leave, and a guy who's putting up 40-50 when he could put up 60-70 isn't going to help that.

 

On a similar note, I think that before Mantha comes up, Pulkkinen should be the next call-up behind Jurco... but that's a whole other issue.




#2532809 Alfie wants to play

Posted by Jesusberg on 22 July 2014 - 02:01 PM

 

I agree, it's not his fault.  But it would be stupid to bring back the EXACT same roster as a year ago, and since he doesn't have a contract, it seems like Alfie would be the reasonable one (at this point) to leave out. 

 

I, like everyone else, wish it would have been someone else (Cleary) but it's too late for that. 

 

I've got faith that in a full season Jurco could put up 30-40 points and be WAY harder to play against than Alfie.  That's all. 

 

While I think it would be stupid to bring back the same roster, we're already in that position, IMO. I just don't think that Alfredsson should be left out because Holland has made other boneheaded moves. I get what you're saying - plug the hole while we still can.

Part of me feels like Jurco won't be used properly, anyway. At least not until Cleary is out of the way. I think Jurco, in a year or so, will be a huge upgrade over Abdelkader in that net-front role on the top line, because he's got the skill to boot. What I don't see is him being placed in that role right now. At this point, he's battling guys on that 3rd line for time, because I don't think Babcock, etc. even considers him as a top 6 guy right now (even though I think he'd be fine on the 2nd line with two vets).
 

 

I don't know though.  I mean, I hear what you're saying.  But I guess my whole point is that I think we need a whole different look up front.  Personally, I hate the idea of Alfie with Dats and Z.  I don't think he can play that many minutes first of all.  He faded fast down the stretch.  But he's also a perimeter player and so are they.  None of them are big or play great in the crease.  They're also all getting a little old and injury prone.  I definitely don't want my whole top line to come with that many question marks.  Personally, I'd like to see Jurco with Dats and Z, and Mantha with Tatar and Sheahan. 

 

Will it happen?  No.  And IMO we'll be worse for it. 

I think every one saw him fade down the stretch, but I think that can be attributed to having to play a much larger role than expected all season. Additionally, wasn't he basically abused during the Olympics? I seem to remember him being way overplayed during the tournament. Playing him in a top 6 role would work, but I do agree that 1st line time might be a bit too much. I'd love the skill set on a Z-Dats-Alfie line, but I don't think they'd have the legs to keep it up throughout the season.

 

 

But that was just how it sounded.  It's clear now that you weren't saying that, and instead are suggesting that Legwand and Alfie could potentially combine for around 100 pts. this coming season, and so if we don't resign them we'll need to replace that production.  I agree, they have the potential for that.  But it's a moot point because, as we both agree, Weiss will be counted on for about 50 points which would cover the loss of Legwand's 50 point potential so we'd only need to replace Alfie's points if he isn't resigned.

 

 

If we're really speaking on the potential of points, then I think just about every one on the team is going to be expected to potentially do better than they did last year. Whether it's Z, Dats, Weiss and Mule being healthier, or Nyquist and Tatar being regulars right off the bat, I think this team should see increased production across the board with the forwards.

That being said, it's almost expected that this team is going to face injuries again. I'd prefer to have as much depth as possible at this point. It sucks, but it's a reality that these forwards have a number of health issues. I still want to see guys like Nyquist, Tatar and Sheahan insulated by the veterans. Right now, for my money, I trust Alfredsson to set a better example on and off the ice than Mule or Weiss. No disrespect to Weiss, but I think the jury is still out on what he's going to bring to this team, and Mule is Mule.

I don't think, given the current state of this team, that it's going to kill them now or in the future to bring back a veteran who can contribute on a consistent basis.




#2532787 Alfie wants to play

Posted by Jesusberg on 22 July 2014 - 12:08 PM

 

Maybe we'd be better, maybe we wouldn't.  But it's not like we were good with Alfredsson, so why not try something different?  Sometimes it's all about the team dynamic.  Who ever believed Columbus would be a better offensive (and defensive team) without Nash, Carter, Gaborik, or Horton (injured)?  On paper it seems like it's crazy, but the team might actually be better in the long run.

 

 

Man, that's just sooo not on Alfredsson, at all. The team being "good" or not doesn't come down to one veteran player. He lead the team in scoring - a team that was without it's two best offensive players for a little under half the season, and was probably the most consistent scoring forward on the team throughout the season. He gives the team another look at the PP, and unlike Hudler, Samuelsson, etc. he can actually hold the blueline.

Holland has just left this stale taste in everyone's mouths when it comes to signing veterans. I can't stand signing vets for the sake of it - but this is one of the few vets in recent memory that Kenny should re-sign. For his production, it was without a good chunk of the core offensive players on this team. He was charged with carrying a load for this team that he never should have, and he still did a solid job doing it.

Even if you don't want to consider the guy a top 6'er, he's a great insurance policy. The team stays healthy and you've got a player who can add 50 or so points, he goes down with injury and Jurco can come up. I am fully behind the idea that one of Ouellet/Sproul/Backman/Marchenko should be in Quincey's spot, and I'm also fully behind Jurco being in Cleary's, but I don't think you remove a productive, veteran player from your team for the sake of change.




#2532592 Dekeyser/Tatar status update

Posted by Jesusberg on 20 July 2014 - 03:36 AM

Well as the season went on he seemed to get better offensively so I wouldn't be surprised if he put up 30-35 points next year.

 

I don't doubt he'd be able to do it with the proper PP time, but I'm not sure he'll get it. Most of his 23 points were ES, but so were Smith's - to push to that 30-35 point mark, he'd need consistent time on the PP, I think.

 

I hope Smith gets his proper shot on the PP this year, as I think that's where his value lies. Kronwall and Kindl are mainstays, as long as Kindl's in the line-up, and I think the team has enough forwards who might play the point on the PP.

I guess we'll see, but I think that DD's talents should be more focused on minute eating and the PK next season, while some of the more offensively inclined guys should work the PP. Just my two cents.




#2532578 Callahan and Nestrasil re-signed

Posted by Jesusberg on 19 July 2014 - 07:10 PM

I'd like to see the guy get a shot on the team. I don't think anyone's going to mistake him for a 2nd liner, but as has been mentioned by a few others, he could bring a different element to this team. He may not fit on anything but a 4th line in Detroit, but I think he could compliment skilled guys by being a distraction and screening the goaltender. The net presence, piano pulling guys have their place on NHL clubs, too... should he grow into that role.

He may not turn into that, but the downside is that he'd fit in as a 4th liner who brings high energy and good tempo.

 




#2532477 Wings re-sign Cleary $1.5 mill + $1mill in game bonuses

Posted by Jesusberg on 18 July 2014 - 11:56 AM

Honestly, while I was upset with the whole "10 games for the bonus" deal, I see it as a positive now. I'd rather Dan play his 10 games and the team not have to feel obligated to play him for 25-30 to get his money. Best case scenario if Dan plays poorly - he gets his 10 games in, then rides the pine.

I still don't like the deal, but I guess I see a silver lining with the number of games he'll play to earn the bonus.




#2532145 Alfie wants to play

Posted by Jesusberg on 15 July 2014 - 11:40 AM

If Alfie wanted to win the Cup, he obviously wouldn't want to come back to Detroit.
 
So that begs the question.  Do we really want a player on our team that isn't serious about winning the Cup?


Uh... So call a guy out for going to a team you doubt has a chance at winning the cup, then criticize his desire to win?

I don't get it...

He was basically the most consistent forward on the team last season. He was a welcome addition in my eyes. If he's healthy, I'd want the guy back.


#2531500 What is the plan with Mrazek?

Posted by Jesusberg on 11 July 2014 - 09:38 AM

The thing is, I really don't think Mrazek is going to be splitting a ton of time. I think McCollum is more of an insurance factor than anything. I really believe Mrazek will play the large majority of the GR games, unless he's called up due to injury.


#2531312 Wings re-sign Cleary $1.5 mill + $1mill in game bonuses

Posted by Jesusberg on 10 July 2014 - 07:16 PM

It's like watching someone hang on too long and become a shell of their former self. This is the Dan Cleary I'm going to remember...




#2531121 Wings re-sign Cleary $1.5 mill + $1mill in game bonuses

Posted by Jesusberg on 10 July 2014 - 03:59 PM

The worst part about this is that it puts Jurco in the AHL, unless Alfie doesn't re-sign or someone like Andersson is moved. Awful.




#2531087 Wings re-sign Cleary $1.5 mill + $1mill in game bonuses

Posted by Jesusberg on 10 July 2014 - 03:42 PM

...huh. Welp.
 

I-quit-GIF.gif




#2531055 Red Wings Target Mike Green

Posted by Jesusberg on 10 July 2014 - 03:18 PM

I think the bottom line right now is that the perceived price for Green is a wee bit high - management (specifically Trotz) is maintaining that Green factors into their future plans. Posturing or not, it's being done to give the guy more value. I think the only way Detroit gets him right now is by prying him away from Washington via overpayment. If that means moving Tatar+, or any of the bigger names, count me out for now.

If Green could be had for, let's say, Andersson, Pulkkinen + 2nd that would be the maximum that I would want to pay, personally. And giving up that 2nd is scary, as Detroit is already without a 3rd rounder. That may not be enough in Washington's eyes, and it likely isn't right now. I actually like what Green brings, but he comes with a lot of risks - risks that should bring his price tag down. The issue is that the Caps don't have to move him right now, and Detroit is clearly desperate for a RH, offensive defender. At this moment, Washington has the leverage. IMO, it would be silly to make a move for Green until/if his price goes down some.