Jump to content


Richdg's Photo

Richdg

Member Since 03 May 2012
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 08:04 PM
*----

#2303224 Who's going to make it big if anyone?

Posted by Richdg on 25 May 2012 - 03:24 PM

The prospect game is one of the biggest traps fans fall into. Every teams site has the same thing going on. these 5, 10, 15 whatever players are going to be great in a few years. maybe 1 out of 10 every turns into anything. There are towns in the northern part of the US and in canada, where just about every man played junior hockey, yet none make it to the NHL. You have to remember, Juniors is for 17, 18, and 19 year old KIDS! High school age players. Even moving up to the AHL is a major step.

If we return to the days on building only through the draft, we will become the Dead Wings once again. Then after 3-6 years of drafting the top talent we can move back up. I don't ever want to see that type of hockey from the Wings again! I still have nightmares from the late 70's and early 80's....... 20 win seasons........ YUCK!


#2303222 Who's going to make it big if anyone?

Posted by Richdg on 25 May 2012 - 03:16 PM

I'd take another Franzen a thousand times over. You can throw away that pretty piece of metal from '08 if he's not there. :D





Yes, 1 great post season. but hey, we get to watch and remember that for 8 more seasons...... length of the terrible contract he is signed to........
  • Nev likes this


#2303168 Who's going to make it big if anyone?

Posted by Richdg on 25 May 2012 - 11:14 AM

Smith has the best shot. he could end up as high as a #2 or never make it. Sheahan will be a 4th line checking guy, Nyquist-who knows. yes he has talent, but he is also only about 175 pounds. Tatar is not really a legit NHL player, and the rest are still in juniors. No way anyone can tell on them.
  • Nev likes this


#2302611 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 22 May 2012 - 12:18 PM

The people are more negative,because of our(another) early exit,which is reasonable.

Shouldn't be negative about our prospects though,based on the last wjhc (jurčo,mrazek,backman,pulkkinen)or recent whc(jarnkrok,tatar).
The majority of them are not NHL ready yet,but it's hard to ignore theirs good development.



You have just stumbled on the point. They are all playing in the Juniors. That is equal in age to HS and the first year of college. All of them are 3+ years from seriously pushing for time in the NHL. If they ever do. History is filled with good junior players that never work out. Or guys that score a lot in the Juniors that never become more than 4th line checkers.

In the past we never really had a stacked farm....yet we always had amazing players trickling through the system....but now for once i can say im actually really excited about our farm....so many good players, so much potential there, im like a giddy school girl lol....if worst came to worst and only a few trickled through i would still be thrilled!

The brilliant mind of Lloyd Christmas + The positive outlook of Friedrich Nietzsche + The cool headedness of Chicken Little = Richdg



So funny. Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about. But that is ok. Sooner or latter you will understand that I am right. Just make sure you post it as much as your bile.


#2302542 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 21 May 2012 - 11:49 PM

Stamkos, Staal (Eric)-hurt, Crosby-said, he needed to finish rehab, Giroux, Hartnell, Pietrangelo, Weber were still playing, Thornton, Iginla, St.Louis, Boyle are too old, considering Sochi, Campbell - if that is a Boston one, you must be joking, Lupul, Parenteau, Couture are not obviously better than the forwards who were there. I agree that D and to a degree G could be better with the players you mentioned, but Cam Ward is no slouch either.

Thomas is too old for Sochi, Miller is not better than Howard this season.
E.Kane was there, I don't know if P.Kane was healthy.
Stafford, Kesler, Cole (Carolina one) were either hurt or fresh out of rehab.
Byfuglien had legal issues.
Wheeler, Foligno, Malone, Umburger, Leddy, Gardiner were not obviously better than the players already there,
Carlson(IIRC), Suter, Shattenkirk, Oshie, Legwand, Backes were still playing.
So that leaves Kessel, Pavelski, maybe P.Kane, Higgins. All good players but hardly any more valuable to their team than the players other teams were missing. More notable ones: Backstrom (G), Kiprusoff, Pitkanen, Hamrlik, T.Ruutu, Edler, Murray, Paajarvi, Enstrom, Hossa, Visnovsky, Jurcina, Meszaros, Halak, Hornquist, A.Markov, Radulov, Voynov and I'm sure i forgot many more.

That's true, but it's really your own internal problem. If Hockey USA or Hockey Canada can't assemble the best team possible, who's to blame?



http://www.tsn.ca/ca...ature/?id=63060
According to this, Yzerman is an executive director, and Lowe is just one of a large
management group.
And I remember Yzerman saying that WHC participation will be an important consideration when determining the Olympic roster. After this WHC there's only one more left before the Olympics, and who knows what players will be able to go in 2013. They may be going deep into the playoffs, have injuries, or they just may not be picked next year. That's what I mean when i say this may have been the last chance at an Olympic audition for many NHLers.



Just a quick example. STL and Wash lost in the same round. Semin went and backes did not.


#2302523 A general, how I would build a team

Posted by Richdg on 21 May 2012 - 09:02 PM

So you're saying the Wings are a little too young?

Looking at top 15 forwards, top 8 defensemen, and top 3 goalies in games played:
8 players 26 or under
12 players 27-32
6 players over 32
4 out of 6 optimal positions are 27-32

Taking out the injury replacements:
7 under
10 prime
6 over

Prior to adding Quincey and moving Commodore, we were perfect though. Guess it's no wonder things went south right after that...


I wasn't talking about the RW yet. But since you brought it up, lets. Currently the RW have 21 returning players from last year returning. Here they are by age groups, with their age in 2012.

26 and under:
Abby 25
Emmerton 24
Helm 25
Mursak 24
Nyquist 22
Kindl 25
Smith 23

27-32:
Eaves 28
Filppula 28
Miller 28
Zetterberg 32
Ericsson 28
Kronwall 31
Quincey 27
White 28
Howard 28
MacDonald 32

Over 32:
Bert 37
Cleary 34
Dat 34
Franzen 33

Then there are the old UFA's Lidstrom and Hommer. 42 and 38 respectively.

On the surface the roster is balanced fairly well. Majority of the team in the 27-32 year old group. 4 of the 6 premuim positions covered in that group. But that is also were some of the questions arise for the team. Filppula and Howard are UFA's after this coming season, and Zetterberg moves out of it due to age. Now we are down to just 1 of the 6 premium postions covered by this group. White is solid as a #4 D, but can either Quincey or Ericsson become a #3 D? Both are going to be/are paid like one. eaves, Miller, and MacDonald are just backup role players and that is fine. The question is: where do our next group of stars come from? History says this is the make/break years for Ericsson and Quincey. Most of us feel good about Smith. The rest of or prospects are several years away. this is also why everyone is talking so much about signing(insert your fav. UFA here) free agents. We need a youthfull talent infusion.

Now look at the roster via lines and budget amounts. yes this is just my opinions and everyone has their own versions of this.

top line: LW(3m budget): open, C(6m budget) Datsyuk, RW(3m budget) Franzen, this line needs a new LW
2nd line: LW (3m budget) open, C(6m bidget) Zetterberg, RW(3m budget) open, this line needs a new RW and LW
3rd line: LW(3m budget) Nyquist, C(4m budget) Filppula, RW(3m budget) Cleary, this line is set for the year.
4th line: LW(2m budget) Abdelkader, C(2m budget) Helm, RW(2m budget) Bertuzzi, this line is set for the year.
13 and 14th forwards: Mursak and Emmerton. Both are under the 1m per year budget.

Defense:

top pair: 1D(6m budget) open, 2D(5m budget) Kronwall, we need a new #1, ideally a RH shot.
2nd pair: 3D(4m budget) Quincey?, 4D(3m budget) White, can Quincey be a number 3d?
3rd pair: 5D(2m budget) Ericsson-overpaid? or can he become the 3D?, 6D(1m budget) Smith
7D: Kindl, under the 1 million per year budget

Goalies:

starting G: Howard, budget is 5 million and he is under that
backup G:MacDonald, budget is 1 million and he is at it

Now looking at the roster this way, we have 2 guys that don't really fit: Miller and Eaves. Neither one is good enough to fill any of the 3 open forward positions. We also have a hole at the #1 D. That is 4 opens to be filled via trade or FA. With the current contracts and budgeting, our total payroll would be 65 million. Leaving 5 million (based on an estimated cap of 70 million) leftover to bank for next season. After this season we have the following UFA's: Howard (should resign for 5 m or less per year), White (should resing for about 3 m per year), Cleary-needs to be let go and free up his 2.8 million cap hit, and Filppula who maybe should be let go, freeing up his 3 million per year. With those 4 contracts expirering, and a modest cap increase to 72 million, we will have 18 million to spend. 5 goes to Howard, 3 to White, leaving 10 million left to fill the #3 C and the #3 RW position. If, and we can hope Bertuzzi retires, that adds another 1.5 million to spend, if Sheahan is ready to take his spot on the 4th line.


By doing all of this, you can start to see something of a 2 year plan, to keep us moving forward, without a huge drop off. I am not going into the 100$ guessing game of naming FA's or trades, that horse has been beat to death already. But there are several UFA's this year that stay in budget and fill our 4 holes, while improving our team. Then we get to the loaded 2013 class of UFA's and can find a potentail super to help at C.


#2302512 A general, how I would build a team

Posted by Richdg on 21 May 2012 - 08:13 PM

Honestly, nothing you've ever posted needs to be repeated here, or anywhere. Ever.



Way to show a complete lack of class. But you have to live with yourself, not me. To bad you can't engage your mind. Good to see the old commie trick of: "if you can't refute the message, attack the messager", is alive and well.


#2302438 A general, how I would build a team

Posted by Richdg on 21 May 2012 - 01:23 PM

4. Of course as time moves forward the cap will increase. As the cap goes from 70-72 million I would add that money to the 3rd center. that spot is now budgeted for 6 million. later as the cap adds the next 6 million, I would increase the budgeted amounts for the top 6 RW/LW. each of those 6 positions now make 4 million. After that, all additional cap increases would get divided equally amoung the top 3 C, top 2 D, and the starting goalie.



5. I posted this on another thread as well, but needs to be repeated here. In general, men reach their physical peaks around 27. if you go look at players in every sport, they generally have their best years from age 27-32. yes you can have some freaks come along, but those are rare. Ideally, 1/3 to 1/2 of the team would be in this age group. it is hard to get to 1/2 now with the cap, because guys this age in their primes, get paid premium dollars. But a team should have 10+ guys between 27 and 32. With the balance split equally between those younger and older than this group. In a perfect world, you have 11 guys between 27-32, 6 guys 26 and younger, and 6 guys 33 and older. if things are really going well, your top 3 forwards, top 2 dmen, and starting goalie are in the group 27-32.


#2302363 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 20 May 2012 - 11:33 PM

Just because he doesn't eat the s*** sandwhich put on his plate by arrogant fans/management doesn't mean he doesn't cheer for the team to win.



No need to be rude. I don't careif people agree with me or not. That is their right. Those that don't like what I post are always free to not read it. But they do and react. If my posts where not hitting a nerve, they wouldn't post.


#2302361 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 20 May 2012 - 11:17 PM

So you have proven that you flunked statistics 101. What a load of crap. All of your number are totals i.e. total points, total goals, etc. So lets's look at Datsyuk. He missed alot of games this year due to injury. As a result he gets a "red" mark in points, shots, goals, etc. because his totals are down and all of his totals are down for the year because of injury. From this you conclude that he is declining. And who cares about having individual players that put up great numbers. It's a team sport and the Wings were once again near the top of the league in scoring.

Fail.



Clearly you failed reading. dat has zero reds this year. His number were up from last year. A season where he was also hurt (notice a trend here) and only played 59 games. I didn't even list goals. There were 3 things for each player listed: Games played, total points, and shots. That is it. In every case, using linear regression (stats lingo for you) our slope is linear, strong, negative, with outliers. BTW I just got a B+ in Statistics from GVSU last semester! please try again, but you will fail.


#2302344 A general, how I would build a team

Posted by Richdg on 20 May 2012 - 07:44 PM

How do you build a successful NHL team you ask? It's simple. I don't get why people think Ken Holland's so smart??



Forwards:

6mil-6mil-5mil
5mil-6mil-5mil
1mil-1mil-1mil
1mil-1mil-1mil
1mil, 1mil

Defensemen:

5mil-5mil
5mil-5mil
1mil-1mil
1mil

Goalies:

5mil
1mil



...THAT's how you structure a 70 million dollar salary cap in today's NHL. There are 11 players that you give about 5mil to (and three of them you could give 6mil to) - your top six forwards, your top four defensemen and your goalie. I don't care if you draft and develop them, if you trade for them, or if you sign them. You get them. That's where you need your elite talent.

...As for the rest of the guys, your bottom six forwards, your bottom pairing defenseman, your backup goalie, and your healthy scratches. None of these guys should be making more than 1mil a season. Most of them should be cheap, young, big, strong, fast, tough, hard-working ready-to-play draft picks that you make. They don't need to be able to score. They just need to be those things. And you can find those things anywhere in the draft if you're looking for them. If one of the guy's blows up and is in line for a big contract...you let him walk...and you call up the next guy.

Simple as that.


What you are talking about is completely impossible. For example. Our #5 D is either ericsson or Quincy. Both are over 3 million per season. Your buddy Stoll is in the 2.5+ range as a 3rd or 4th liner. The cold hard trueth is, guys in the league for more than 3 years will make 2+ million as bench players.


#2302299 A general, how I would build a team

Posted by Richdg on 20 May 2012 - 12:01 PM

Before anyone jumps off of a bridge, this has nothing to do with any team. It is a general set of thoughts. What would I do in terms of team make up and roster control/spending if I was running a NHL team. Keeping some things in mind: 23 man roster and a 70 million $ cap, here we go.

1. Player experience/roster management. Ok we have a 23 man roster. It is impossible to have all 23 players between 27 and 32, which is the prime of most players careers. Not to mention the cost of having a team like that. My ideal roster would have 2 rookies, 2 second year, 2 third year, 2 fourth year, 2 5th, 2 6th, 2 7th, 2 8th, 2 9th, 2 10th, 2 11th, and 1 guy with 12 or more. By doing this you are keeping young and cheap plays coming in and managing the costs. If the average rookie is 22 when he makes the roster, this still keeps the majority of the players between 26 and 32. The prime playing years. Some of course come earlier and some later.

2. managing the cap. If you divide 70 million by 23, you spend 3 million per player. if you actual payroll looked like that you would have a pretty poor team. Also most rookies and young players don't make nor do they need to make 3 million per year. So where and how much do i spend? The backup goalie, 7th Dman, and the 13th and 14th forwards are all at 1 million or less. That is 4 guys of the 23. leaving 66 million to spend on 19 players. The starting goalie is in a 5 million per slot. The 1-6 Dman make the oppisite amount. IE the 1 makes 6, the 2 makes 5, the 3 makes 4, the 4 makes 3, the 5 makes 2 and the 6 makes 1. At this point I have allocated 30 million of the 70 and covered 11 players. Leaving 40 million for the remaining 12 forwards. The 4th line guys make 2 million each. This leaves 9 players and 34 million left to spend. The 6 remaining RW and LW each get paid 3 million. This leaves 3 players and 16 million to spend. The 1 and 2 C get 6 million each, and the 3rd C makes 4 million. That allocates all 70 million allowed for the cap.

3. Now i have never been inside of RW HQ. But I am sure they have a plan along these lines somewhere. Every company does. You have to know where the money is going etc..... Now some may want to spend more accross the board on the top line. So be it, everyone has their own opinions. But in the end, you still have to have 23 players and can only spend 70.

later I will take these thoughts and tie these with the wings and their roster. I am sure that will be fun! LOL!



4. Of course as time moves forward the cap will increase. As the cap goes from 70-72 million I would add that money to the 3rd center. that spot is now budgeted for 6 million. later as the cap adds the next 6 million, I would increase the budgeted amounts for the top 6 RW/LW. each of those 6 positions now make 4 million. After that, all additional cap increases would get divided equally amoung the top 3 C, top 2 D, and the starting goalie.


#2302240 A general, how I would build a team

Posted by Richdg on 19 May 2012 - 05:10 PM

Before anyone jumps off of a bridge, this has nothing to do with any team. It is a general set of thoughts. What would I do in terms of team make up and roster control/spending if I was running a NHL team. Keeping some things in mind: 23 man roster and a 70 million $ cap, here we go.

1. Player experience/roster management. Ok we have a 23 man roster. It is impossible to have all 23 players between 27 and 32, which is the prime of most players careers. Not to mention the cost of having a team like that. My ideal roster would have 2 rookies, 2 second year, 2 third year, 2 fourth year, 2 5th, 2 6th, 2 7th, 2 8th, 2 9th, 2 10th, 2 11th, and 1 guy with 12 or more. By doing this you are keeping young and cheap plays coming in and managing the costs. If the average rookie is 22 when he makes the roster, this still keeps the majority of the players between 26 and 32. The prime playing years. Some of course come earlier and some later.

2. managing the cap. If you divide 70 million by 23, you spend 3 million per player. if you actual payroll looked like that you would have a pretty poor team. Also most rookies and young players don't make nor do they need to make 3 million per year. So where and how much do i spend? The backup goalie, 7th Dman, and the 13th and 14th forwards are all at 1 million or less. That is 4 guys of the 23. leaving 66 million to spend on 19 players. The starting goalie is in a 5 million per slot. The 1-6 Dman make the oppisite amount. IE the 1 makes 6, the 2 makes 5, the 3 makes 4, the 4 makes 3, the 5 makes 2 and the 6 makes 1. At this point I have allocated 30 million of the 70 and covered 11 players. Leaving 40 million for the remaining 12 forwards. The 4th line guys make 2 million each. This leaves 9 players and 34 million left to spend. The 6 remaining RW and LW each get paid 3 million. This leaves 3 players and 16 million to spend. The 1 and 2 C get 6 million each, and the 3rd C makes 4 million. That allocates all 70 million allowed for the cap.

3. Now i have never been inside of RW HQ. But I am sure they have a plan along these lines somewhere. Every company does. You have to know where the money is going etc..... Now some may want to spend more accross the board on the top line. So be it, everyone has their own opinions. But in the end, you still have to have 23 players and can only spend 70.

later I will take these thoughts and tie these with the wings and their roster. I am sure that will be fun! LOL!


#2302230 The truth of our decline.

Posted by Richdg on 19 May 2012 - 03:14 PM

LOL its called scoring percentage dude (pretty sure i said that in my original post....its reading not fantasy haha). Percentage of points scored per games played. Example: 80 pts in 80 games played would be 100% and 40 pts in 80 games played would be 50%......LOL did u really think i was just pulling random numbers out of a hat?????

Next ur gonna post a thread about how we dont have a good farm and Suter is only famous for his name :hehe:



Actually, now that I understand what you where trying to say, it proves my point. If dat was at 125% scoring in 2008 and is at 95% scoring in 2012, that is a 30% DECLINE! Not to mention he is playing fewer and fewer games each year. In 08 and 09 Dat had 97 points. he played 82 games in 08 and 81 games in 09. Now he is down to the mid and lower 70's in games played. So thanks for making my point.


#2302162 Which current NHL players do our top prospects compare to?

Posted by Richdg on 19 May 2012 - 12:16 AM

The problem with our "prospects" is, we really don't know if they are. As of today, most are just names. Pick any of the rating sites you want, most rate our prospects with a high of Smith on down. But everyone of those sites gives a strong cya on each guy. For example, Hockeysfuture.com gives Smith a 8.0 rating which is equl to a potentail #2 D. But at the same time they also give him a grade of C, which means "may make it, but could drop 2 points". At 6 points Smith goes from a future #2 to a journeyman #6 or 7 Dman. Everyone else on our list has already made it to the NHL: maursk and nyquist or has yet to play a professional game. Could all of them develop? Yes. Could they all flame out? Yes. Most are 3+ years away from any of us being able to tell, one way or the other. The problem is, we need the help now.
  • Nev likes this