Like who? Everyone acts like because we lost out on Parise and Suter, which was solely due to geography, that we somehow aren't a "destination" team. Name all these top free agents that Holland pursued that the Wings didn't get.
Weiss and Alfredsson were the top two UFA's last year and the Wings signed them both. Then before that every other team in the league was salivating over Danny DeKeyser. Who got him? Oh, yeah, that team no one wants to go to.
Same with Brunner - Lost of teams interested, he chose us.
Who cares if his body breaks down? If his body wears down, they'll put him on LTIR (no cap hit) if he wants to fight through the injury and play another season or he'll retire if he can't (without a recapture penalty because it's post lock out). He could literally play for three more years, retire, and the Lightening would owe him nothing more than the three years salary and have a lower cap hit than the actual salary on top of it.
I don't see the problem with it.
That's not actually what would happen if his body wears down - that's if he has one really serious injury. Injuries could just lower his ability to be effective and then they're stuck with a player who plays like last year's Cleary on their roster for the rest of his large contract.
Not really the best deal and it does have some risk, but Tampa pretty much were forced to resign him after St. Louis left. No other UFA would fill that hole. Good for them that they were able to talk him down at least a little from the demands that he made with NY.
No what I said is you have to get top talent. Of the last 20 teams that won the SC, 70% of them had 4 or more top 10 picks on their roster when they won the cup. That is the proven path to winning. You can do that 3 ways: draft, trade, or UFA. Very few make it to ufa anymore so that leaves 2 options: draft and/or trade. Hoilland doesn't seem to have the guts or desire (whatever it is) to make trades. That leaves one option: the draft. To get top 10 picks and the premium talent you have to not make the playoffs. Or have bad seasons.
We are done with a 20 year run or so. But we were really bad for a long time. It was when we started to draft well, with a purpose, and develop the young talent that we started to win. yes we have some luck along the way and did things others were not doing like scout/draft eastern euros/russians. But the team from 95 through 02 was loaded with guys that were top 10 picks for various teams. Yzerman doesn't come if we don't lose. same with lapointe and Premieau. Prems of course becomes Shanny another top 10 pick. Not to mention picks up like Murphy and Ward.
Now of course there are exceptions to every rule. Our 08 team was one of them. But that is also why that teams core players have only won one cup.
It is just incredibly flawed that you think the only path to winning is to tank and get a top 10 pick.
First of all, even if we take your 4 top 10 requirement, you said yourself we can get them by trading and we've amassed a lot of tradable prospects.
Second of all, you're equating top 10 picks with top talent, which is false. Dats and Zetterberg are certainly better than most top 10 picks. Mantha probably should have been top 10. There's a lot of top talent elsewhere in the draft. We've got some of the best scouts, so we use that. People say that the time of draft steals are over, but look at where we got Marchenko for instance. Another thing is that we focused on development. A top 10 pick left to his own can flop, a lower pick with the right guidance and support can be just as good.
Third, how do you actually want to implement this tanking operation, because our roster as is will make the playoffs unless we turn into a MASH unit again? Are we going to sell off our older players, like Dats, Z, Kronwall, etc? In that case, we'd end up like Edmonton with top picks and no one to show them the way. We'd also lose a huge amount of respect as an organization and UFAs would take notice. Babcock would leave, Kenny would get fired and we'd have a lesser GM come in and totally change the very plan that you were working on. Do we sell off our budding young talent like Nyquist, Tatar, Mantha, Dekeyser, etc? Players that could become as any top 10 pick we might get. Do we just have a team meeting and say "now you must suck"?
Anyway, I see you're posts as understandably frustrated, but I really feel that the team is rebuilding and doing it in a way that will make us competitive for a long time. We're not doing trades because we're building up our prospects and keeping our draft picks. We have about a full roster worth of NHL worthy prospects (I include young players already on the team). We'll get even more at this next draft. We'll let them fight it out for their places in our future and then we can start trading some of them for other pieces.
Another problem with the original argument is that all drafts are not equal in talent depth and top 10 is really an arbitrary line to draw.
This year we have the 15th pick. All the talking head say that the talent level drops after the first few players and no one agrees on the order for players after these first few players. So the 7th choice and the 15th choice are really ranked pretty equally. Would it really help us to have the 10th pick this year? Would that mean we could then win the cup?
mar, I fully understand the rebuilding process, I just wish we would do it or go for the cup. I don't mind if we have 2-3 losing seasons, get highly rated top draft choices and then begin the next 15 year run. Its the half a$$ patch and pug approach that bothers me. We are not getting better and we are not getting the young high end talent we need to get better.
When it comes to bad for long periods of time, I remember the 70's all to well. The RW's had no real plan. Very similar to what we are doing today.
It sounds like you think the only way to rebuild is to tank. There is many examples around the league to show that strategy doesn't always work.
This team is rebuilding and we're doing it while making the playoffs and keeping a competitive team. We are getting better as our young players are getting better. I don't know how you could have watched Nyquist, Tatar, Dekeyser, Jurco, Sheahan, etc. and not thought of them as "the young high end talent we need to get better."
I'm no Holland basher, but all I'm saying is these contracts to older players have a lot of risk. You don't know exactly when a guys game is going to fall off a cliff, see Cleary, Sammy and Bert as examples of contracts/wasted roster spots.
I understand what you're saying. I don't think Cleary Sammy Bert fell of a cliff, though. We've seen their decreased effectiveness over the seasons leading up to last. And think it's rare to truly go from hero to zero.
Alfie still put up 18g and 49pts in 68 games. That PPG might slide a bit, but the situation is quite different than Cleary, Sammy and Bert. We get him without giving up our young prospects. I just hope he is better at controlling the puck on the PP. There was so may times during the year he would bungle a hard pass.
Meh, he was a good signing last season, but the older he gets, the riskier it gets to bring him back. He's going to be turning 42 years old in December...how many forwards are still effective at that age? I wouldn't go more than $3 million and even that has plenty of risk....the problem with building a team with all these old players as Holland likes to do, is that old players are more injury prone.
If gets injured then Mantha or Pulkkinen play. That's doesn't sound like too big a risk to me. Holland's not building a team with "all these old players." We'll actually be a pretty young team next year.
Well, seeing as Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Franzen and Kronwall are all a year older and on the unhappy side of 30 expecting them to carry the team is becoming less and less feasible. Couple that with Nyquist likely not exploding this year, Sheahan returning to form and Tatar putting up similar numbers as he did last season and finally the the defense being mediocre they could easily be worse than last year.
So you're expecting Dats, Zetterberg, Sheahan to only play half the season again. Ericsson and Franzen will miss 30 games again. Nyquist won't play in 25 games again. Weiss will only play 26 games again.
Cause all those things will have to happen again for us to be worse than the past year
Then for all I care plan the parade ...sometimes realism isn't the worst thing in the world and no even healthy this team wouldn't compete with the big dogs. But its the same every off-season some people still believe that this is a good team. Guess Babcock, Zetterberg, Kronner and Pasha are all wrong when they are getting eager and want some changes...
They didn't say they wanted changes, they just said they wanted to get farther in the playoffs next year. Change in outcome not necessarily the roster.
I feel our biggest problems this year were injuries and inexperience in the playoffs. Sheahan, Jurco, Nyquist, Tatar, Smith, Glendening, etc. have added experience. With that and If Z, Dats, Weiss, and Ericsson are healthy in the playoffs I feel we're a very different team.
Add to that one of our D prospects stepping up and possibly Mantha or Pulkinen(still haven't learned how to spell it) and I'm really excited about our chances.
Typical Holland....re-sign Monster and be riddles with injuries again... Holland is an idiot if he re-signs monster, there are FAR better back-ups out there to sign and at the same price and term...oh wait, we got a far better one in Mrazek already signed. Get ready for Q and Cleary to be back along with Alfredsson. The only UFA's you are going to see Holland get are unproven, undrafted projects... No Cup again. Holland could give two s***s about getting Datsyuk another Cup in the next 3 years....didn't he learn from the Lidstrom retirement that once your star realizes that you aren't making any efforts to get the Cup, he will stop re-signing. Holland probably thinks that in 3 years Datsyuk will start signing one year contracts until he is 42. Think again Holland, youf****** idiot. Hey, instead of finding healthier, better players, lets just keep the ones that SUCKED the entire year. f*** this!
I think an injury prone Monster for one year would actually be a really good situation. That way, Mrazek gets another year being Starter in GR, but also gets to play some NHL games when Monster inevitably goes down with the pulled groin.
I previously said I wanted Nabokov - and he would be great -, but it's going to be hard to get any quality backup to come here for just one year. Because of his injury problems, Monster probably wouldn't be in huge demand and hopefully will be willing to make it a one year deal. If he signs for 2 years I won't like it.
A forward is the best option IMO for a few reasons.
First we need some more balance(righties).
Second we have lack of center depth...remember Anderson as first line center??!!!?!?
Third can Weiss be the number two?
Fourth who takes over for dat if he retires at end of current deal?
Fifth and most importantly IMO....I'm 99% sure we won't get a TOP PAIRING defenseman. There's none in UFA and none for trade...now a bottom pairing or a righty?? Sure we can are but forward just is easier to get more talent at which we do need.
Also we new size. Tatar and nyquist have shown skill but they continue the Detroit tradition of no size. Which is what he had a convo of size AND skill as does very other team when they're dominate.
We do not have a lack of center depth. the andersson at 1st line center was a perfect storm of everybody getting injured.
Did you even watch the Canadians? Hell even NBC guys commented in it a couple times. He was always a threat and putting pressure on the opposing team.
I live in Montreal. There's pretty much citywide disapproval of the way Vanek played. I watched all the Canadiens/ Rangers series - they broke down two goal against where CBC guys specifically blamed Vanek because he didn't backcheck
Search Thomas Vanek news for further reviews of his playoff performance:
Fg is right/wrong a bit here. Yes Toews will get huge money. But and this is key. If he becomes a UFA other teams can only sign him to a 7 year deal if that happens he gets 10 mill/cap hit. By resigning with the B hawks they can resign him to an 8 year deal. That will allow them to get a lower cap hit. 70 mill divided by 8 years. kane is not in the same class as Toews. In 7 full seasons he has hit 30 goals once. A typical year is 23-27 goals. Good player yes, but not a superstar. 6.5-7 mill is more like it for him.
I definitely think Toews is the better player, but the stats you showed don't say much. If you're comparing goals, Toews has only reached 30 goals twice. Also, Kane scored 29 in 69 games this year and 23 in 47 games last year - if you prorate that to a full season, that's basically him being a 30 goal scorer 3 out of 6 years. Anyway, point-wise they're pretty equal and they're both definitely stars
Toews is a great leader the more of a complete player. I actually think they'll make pretty much the same amount if only because Toews seems likely to take a bigger discount to help the team.