Jump to content


krsmith17's Photo

krsmith17

Member Since 12 Jun 2011
Offline Last Active Today, 06:08 PM
-----

#2558082 Rank our griffins d prospects

Posted by Jesusberg on Today, 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 Today, 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.




#2557687 12/19 GDT : Islanders 2 at Red Wings 1

Posted by Euro_Twins on Yesterday, 04:07 PM

Wings will lose their fifth in a row tonight.


Don't you have anything better to do?


#2557620 Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Posted by kliq on Yesterday, 11:10 AM

kliq, I agree with about 99% of your posts but I can't disagree more on that being a "much more accurate" trade proposal... I would lose my s*** if that trade were to happen. We just lost one of my favorite young Wings (Sheahan), my (everyone's) favorite prospect (Mantha), one of the top players in the American League (Pulkkinen), and my favorite defense prospect (Sproul). Maybe we should add in Mrazek and Scrivens to top it all off. That trade would be absolute robbery by Edmonton in my opinion.

 

lol no worries. When I say this is an accurate proposal, I dont mean this is what I would do, I mean this is what I think it would take to get Hall. I dont think Holland would ever give all this up for him.

 

But I guess you never know, I wouldn't think Seguin would have gone for as little as he did, but he did.
 




#2557619 Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Posted by e_prime on Yesterday, 11:04 AM


 

Here is an interesting article up about this:

http://thehockeywrit...ng-taylor-hall/

 

They give a proposal from a few teams, and I think this is much more accurate then the extreme's on both ends posted in this thread.

 

For Detroit, here is their proposal and analysis:

 

 

To Detroit Red Wings = Taylor Hall and Jeff Petry

To Edmonton Oilers = Riley Sheahan, Anthony Mantha, Teemu Pulkkinen and Ryan Sproul

 

ANALYSIS: There is both quantity and quality in this return package. Sheahan is a top-nine centre with size, Mantha is one of the best power-forward prospects in the league, Pulkkinen is leading the AHL in scoring and a sniper at that level, and Sproul is a gifted offensive defenceman. Detroit is the only team in the league that could afford to move four top prospects like that without totally depleting its pipeline. The Red Wings know Pavel Datsyuk and Henrik Zetterberg don’t have many years left, not to mention coach Mike Babcock’s contract is expiring, so they might be willing to go all-in for another Cup run. Adding Hall up front would be huge and Petry would fit the bill as that right-handed defenceman Detroit has been searching for, plus he’s a Michigan native who would almost certainly re-sign with the Red Wings.

 

Good Ole JR 1
 
...for Edmonton

 

kliq, I agree with about 99% of your posts but I can't disagree more on that being a "much more accurate" trade proposal... I would lose my s*** if that trade were to happen. We just lost one of my favorite young Wings (Sheahan), my (everyone's) favorite prospect (Mantha), one of the top players in the American League (Pulkkinen), and my favorite defense prospect (Sproul). Maybe we should add in Mrazek and Scrivens to top it all off. That trade would be absolute robbery by Edmonto in my opinion.

 

Robbery by Edmonton and losing our collective s***  isn't the half of it...

I like how this proposal was written pretty much as a sales pitch for Detroit acquiring Petry... when the real piece in that trade would be Hall.

...but sure, let's trade away our third best center (behind Z and Dats) our first bonafied sniper we've drafted in years, a budding prospect who's lighting it up in the AHL, and the guy who's arguably the next D call-up behind XO -- for a guy who's a secondary trade piece (such as say... Helm or Kindl would be in any trade put together by us) in Petry and a guy who's "uncoachable."  Sure. That makes sense.

Also, why does every single trade proposal have to include the fact that Z and Dats don't have that many years left and Babcock might not return to the team. Nof****** s***. Does that mean we should be desperate to acquire pieces that aren't necessarily needed? Hell no.  Petry isn't a top pairing D-man. We shouldn't even consider getting him unless Edmonton is willing to take Kindl going back the other way.  Giving up three solid forwards in exchange for Hall isn't worth it.

 

Also krsmith. kilq didn't write the proposal... just posted it.




#2557610 Where were team-mates on the Smith headshot

Posted by kipwinger on Yesterday, 09:37 AM

Don't worry Frank and co. Mike McKee will be here smashing faces in about 5 years or so...

 

Sure he will.  Lol. 




#2557608 Rank our griffins d prospects

Posted by Jesusberg on Yesterday, 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.




#2557589 Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Posted by kipwinger on 18 December 2014 - 10:49 PM

Unless you're one of those who consider Mantha and Mrazek as sure-thing future stars, that package is not all that different from Carter to CBJ, nor too different from the Kessel or Seguin deals (value-wise). Not really that much more than Ott gave up for Ryan either.

 

Sure, it's not uncommon for a good player to go cheaper than that, but it's not that outrageous for a young star either.

 

I still say it's just not the kind of package Edm would be looking for. They already have plenty of young players with uncertain futures. It's not a typical sell-everything-for-kids rebuild situation. I could see something like the Nash deal, couple good roster players in their prime to balance out the lineup, plus a little extra. Or I could see a Seguin-type deal where they try to get a proven veteran star. Or maybe try to land a stud goalie.

 

That's a legit point, and admittedly I do consider Mantha and Mrazek sure-thing future stars.  I base that assumption off two things, A) they've excelled at every single level they've played at, and B) our organization is excellent at prospect development.  I can only compare them on their body of work so far, and in every way they've been exceptional. 


I heard last time the Pens were there Crosby stood up and yelled "me! Me!"

 

Oh, I get  it, because he's a homosexual.  Hilarious. 




#2557571 Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Posted by number9 on 18 December 2014 - 08:13 PM

 

Wouldn't you if you were him?

 

I already do this




#2557550 Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Posted by kipwinger on 18 December 2014 - 05:00 PM

Another thing Kip, Nyquist is on par to be just as good as Hall this season.  He has more goals than Hall this year, more PP goals, and is only a few points behind him.  If we are trading value for value/potential, Nyquist for Hall should be a straight up trade.  And Edmonton would be getting the deal because Hall makes $6M and Nyquist is still sub $1M, granted he is due a significant raise, but not to $6M.

 

I stand corrected on the "uncoachable" comments.  Dreger made them, and while they may or may not be true, I've relied on Dreger's analysis in the past and would be a hypocrite if I ran you down for doing it now. 

 

As far as Nyquist vs. Hall.  Hall is, and will continue to be the better player.  The fact that they momentarily have similar point totals doesn't really mean too much.  I like Nyquist fine, and I see no reason to run him down, but he's simply not the better player. 




#2557545 Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Posted by jimmyemeryhunter on 18 December 2014 - 04:31 PM

 
I agree with a couple of your points.  Largely that Mantha is untouchable, and the previously mentioned trade packages are overkill.  But I disagree with a couple of things. 
 
1)  When has Hall every been considered "uncoachable" and who made the claim?  I've never heard that.  As far as I knew, he was the only one of their young kids who didn't have an attitude problem.  I've heard that about Yakupov, RNH, and Eberle (to a lesser extent), but not Hall. 
  

Here's one of the articles about hall being uncoachable. http://sports.yahoo....-000824459.html


Helm IS NOT a good player. His hockey intangibles are terrible.

He is just super fast so he is able to keep pressurne on the opposition and that's also what makes him so good defensively.


He isn't a center piece of any trade he is that second or third guy you throw in.

You say he's not a good player, then describe three ways he's a good player.
Are you trolling?


#2557535 Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Posted by kipwinger on 18 December 2014 - 04:07 PM

Mantha = Untouchable. Period.  Sure he is unproven at the NHL level, but he is the real deal.

 

 

Helm, Smith, Pulkkinen should be enough for a guy who is "uncoachable" in EDM.  Helm could be a leader there and would instantly be the best defensive forward.  Smith is still young enough to have untapped potential, especially in a larger role, and Pulk is one of our top prospects and has been touted as a future 2nd liner in the NHL.

 

What makes me laugh is, every time someone talks about trading Helm (for example) people here scream, NO, why trade your best penalty killer, the best bottom 6'er in the league, etc...etc... He is so great at his position, he is invaluable.  Yet, when his name is tossed around in acquiring something we need, in the same breath they say Helm would not get us anything is trade.  Either he is one of the best defensive forwards in the league or he is our scraps.  He has huge trade value, and guarantee 29 other teams would love to have him.  I understand your love for him, but he is either good or bad. I believe he is good enough to package and get something we need, and with Sheahan and Glendening, Helm is very tradable.  We wouldn't really miss him too much.

 

I agree with a couple of your points.  Largely that Mantha is untouchable, and the previously mentioned trade packages are overkill.  But I disagree with a couple of things. 

 

1)  When has Hall every been considered "uncoachable" and who made the claim?  I've never heard that.  As far as I knew, he was the only one of their young kids who didn't have an attitude problem.  I've heard that about Yakupov, RNH, and Eberle (to a lesser extent), but not Hall. 

 

2)  Just because other people were offering too much, doesn't mean that you aren't offering too little.  Taylor Hall is a very good player.  You'd certainly have to give up a bigger piece than Helm as the cornerstone of any deal.  Probably Nyquist + Smith + middling prospect would get it done.  Helm as a center piece in that trade would get you laughed off the phone. 




#2557527 Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Posted by kipwinger on 18 December 2014 - 03:14 PM

Call me crazy but I think trying to trade for a potentially elite player is a good thing. Hall is 23 years old and scored 80 points in 75 games last season. He is not the reason Edmonton is horrible, that's on managment. I would think that Edmonton fans would commit ass suicide if they were to trade him and I doubt he's really on the block. Even if he were the Wings wouldn't part with the pieces to make it happen.

 

But I want to play too.... 

 

Mantha + Tatar + Smith + 1st Rd pick for Hall and Petry

 

Mantha is a blue chip prospect...but still a prospect. Tatar is a good player but a tradeable asset. Losing Smith would hurt but I think we have some prospects that could step in if we don't make a trade. Again Hall could be an elite player and if you haven't noticed the two of those the Wings have are a little long in the tooth

 

In 2009-2010 Alexander Semin had 84 points.  Prior to that, his previous efforts were all as good (or better) than Hall's.  A number of other players have touched 80-90 pts once or twice and then completely fallen off.  Actually, that happens more often than a guy consistently performing at an elite level for a whole career.  Plus, having two 50 pt. guys (theoretically) is better than having one 100 pt. guy.  It's a lot harder to shutdown two guys. 

 

I wouldn't trade Tatar+Mantha+Smith+1st for almost anybody in the league.  The only exceptions are guys who will absolutely NEVER get traded. 




#2557594 Where were team-mates on the Smith headshot

Posted by number9 on Yesterday, 12:59 AM

Well Pasha is probably one of the most gifted players server in terms of skill not even 40 can match that. Beating the Wings has become too simple and that's not a good thing regardless of the record the book is our there => play a hard nosed physical game, intimidate the team and you'll soon. Ever since Godstrom left the PP had become abysmal as evidence by the opponents taking more liberties with the Wings. I wonder if Dubinsky would have even looked at one of our players with Orr or Mclaren on the bench? Skill needs to be balanced and the Wings are lacking in that regard, so some nastiness and mean SOB isn't the worst thing. When s the last time someone challenged Hall or Hoping? Can't remember it because answering to Gazdic isn't a blessing experience. Even better how many cheap shots does Johnny hockey receive per game? None because the stare of Grats is on the bench ready to go at each time. God do I miss the bash bros and the tight bunch this team once was... Skilled, Hard nosed, hard working and entertaining as hell

 

Abysmal on the pp? We're 7th in the league in pp%

 

Yeah Orr and Mclaren are so good at protecting players that the Leafs demoted them to their farm team. In fact they only have 12 games between them in the AHL lol they can't even make that team.

 

Each time? Mcgrattan has only skated for the Flames 8 times this season. Even that no-depth team isn't finding him useful lol

 

Please Frank, this is getting ridiculous.




#2557586 Where were team-mates on the Smith headshot

Posted by jimmyemeryhunter on 18 December 2014 - 10:07 PM

The thing is Franzen brings it upon himself. He goes out there and runs his d****** all game long. You don't see dat or z get near the abuse or challenges to fight that Franzen dies because they keep their mouths shut and play.

Datsyuk and zetterberg are two of the most respected players in the league.
Z still gets ran a lot, datsyuk barely ever does because everyone respects him.
And if you go straight for his body, hell duck you, if you go for the puck hell embarass you.
And datsyuk literally goes out of his ways to play a clean game.
If he's backchecking and ends up hooking someone instead of lifting their stick hell apologize...

I get the point you're trying to make, but comparing them is apples to oranges.