Like I said, a guy who brings 20 less points in the regular season, that can hit, fight and show up in the playoffs if nothing else but laying out bodies in the top 6 is much more important to a team then a 60 point getter that can't play in his own zone or be even slightly effective in the corners.
Think of it this way. We could trade Hudler for a couple prospects or draft picks, with that money sign Armstrong. Essentially youre trading Hudler for Armstrong and 2 prospects. Sounds good to me anyday.
Its obvious that Hudler can put up points. What he can't do is play defense or be physical which are integral parts of hockey. Detroit believes in solid two way play from all forwards, Hudler was the only one last season that couldn't play good defensively.
Dats and Z are still physical players, especially compared to Hudler.
Just don't even try explaining to them.they don't understand the fact that playoff hockey isn't for one-dimensional ballerinas.
well, at least we agree on one thing. meanwhile, as you prep the ruler to see who's opinion has the bigger dick, i'll simply wash my hands of this retarded argument, and let you get all crosby about how right you are. cause you're right. in that reason and logic are the furthest things from your mind...
enjoy the discourse. i'm out of this one...
Later ******.You know it all man.
How is Armstrong a better fit for this team?
We're not gonna resigng more than one of Bertuzzi, Williams and Holmstrom. Top6 guys we're going to have next season: Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Franzen, Filppula, Bertuzzi/Williams/Holmstrom, X
Bottom6: Cleary, Helm, Draper, Abdelkader, Eaves, Miller
We already have enough bottom6 guys for next season. Of our top6 guys only two are better than Hudler offensively. Plus, three of them, Filppula, Zetterberg, Datsyuk are all good penalty killers too.
I fail to understand how Armstrong or any guy that brings us less offense and more defense for that same money could be a better option for this team. Armstrong has potential for +50, Hudler has potential for +70. Hudler is two years younger and has already played for this team and played under Babcock. You can hate all you want but I know which of them Babcock and Kenny want.
You just seriously don't get it.He's gonna be a 3rd line guy again.A linemate of his last year(Filppula)will be getting 2nd line minutes,therefore not playing with him.His ofense will be at the same level or less because of this.
a single one dimensional (and i dispute this allegation) player does not a TEAM make. it makes a single player. count much?
and if huds is sof****** short, good! he'll skate right under the d's legs, and punch their sacs while he's doing it! threads like this serve as a sickening reminder why the rest of the league hates our fans. seriously, you just have to be right. righter than babs, righter than kenny...
i wonder if the KHL would give me 5 million tax free to root for them...
Yes, and that's why we need a guy like Hudler. As a team we already have that defensive abilitiy, but lack offense. Getting Hudler helps with that. It's like we have 80 offense 100 defense and Hudler balances it to 100-100.
Of course I take a guy that is great in offense and great in defense over a guy that is great in offense but only average in defense, IF THEY WOULD HAVE THE SAME CAP HIT. We're living in a cap era, and when we get Hudler we don't pay too much money for defense which would be "wasted" as we already have great two-way guys.
Got the point?
I'm just saying overall,you want most,if not all of your players to be responsible on both side of the puck.I don't think Hudler brings it.
We also already have a lot of soft players. Datsyuk, Z, Cleary and Flip should be put into scoring roles and not have to worry about defense. WIth guy like Hudler on the team it is more likely that they'll be forced into playing more defensively. If Dats or Z are stuck playing with Hudler they'll have to play twice as defensive to cover for his liable ass.
I wouldn't say Clarkson would be a better fit for our team's top 6 I would say he would be a better fit for our team however. And Armstrong would be a hell of a lot better then Hudler by far. You guys talk about how Hudler put up that many points playing on the 3rd line with bad players. Armstrong played for Atlanta and didn't play with Kovalchuk a lot. Hudler has played with twice the talent in his career then Armstrong and Armstrong would be a guy that people would keep their head up for. I don't think anyone keeps their head up for Hudler, even with their head down they're staring at the top of his head the guy is so damn small.
Physicality is another aspect that comes into it.I think Armstrong is just a better fir for thi team right now.
As I said, we don't need to pay guys for playing PK as already have one of the best two-way forwards in the game. We need offense and I'd think it's stupid to right now pay more for a guy who gives us less offense but better defense.
Colby Armstrong is 2 years older than Hudler. He's had a bigger role in Trashers had here. Yet his best season is only 40 points and didn't even break 30 points this season. Hudler had 57 points here while playing in 3rd line. I think the chances that Hudler scores 70 points are much bigger than Armstrong scoring 60 points.
Maybe you're the one who should get over yourself, especially as you have basically no proof for your arguments. If one can even call those arguments.
Maybe you should be a fan of some other team if you don't like European players or players who can actually PLAY the game. You know, play with the puck.
I'm sorry.What does defense win again?championships or something?But thats not an argument i guess.what a load of s***.I like guys that can play defense too.I'm not a big fan of one dimensional players.Sorry.Guess i'm not a true fan.Defense wins championships.Assf***.
Selfish? He had played on a 3rd line here and he was better than that. Everyone knows it. You don't take paycuts if you haven't even been in the organization that long and you're a semi-young player still getting better. With that logic every player here are selfish because they don't take the league minimum to get other good players here. Obviously Red Wings gambled as they didn't show any concrete signs of really wanting to have Hudler here. I think no player who still have a lot of years left want to be in that kinda unsure situation.
Lidstrom has been here for many years. It's totally different thing for veterans like Selanne too.
Again your argument is completely stupid and you're just trying to make things up to make Hudler look bad. Blaming a young player for not taking a paycut... What a load of crap.
edit: The only SELFISH guy here was the Red Wings who wanted it all but eventually got nothing.
You do if you truly want the team to win.I'm not saying everyone should take league minimum,now am i?How am i making up things?Hudler bolted for Russia because he was offered more money.did he not?
That he did, he'll be a UFA going into next year, but with Hudler coming back, I don't see them making a push for him and I can see him re-signing long term with NY anyway with the way he clicked with Gaborik...
and yes, he would have been a HUGE upgrade over Williams...
I'd take Prospal over Hudler anyday.I don't think Prospal's contract was very fat either.But you're right.He most likely will be re-signed.