Its amazing people are banging on Holland for signing him instead of other FA's. Its like you people believe that Holland gets his choice from of all the guys available. It takes two to get a contract done. Kenny can be willing to sign a guy but if he has no interest in coming to Detroit its not going to happen. Detroit is not a prime spot for FA's anymore. We need to realize this. In order to get guys here you are seeing Kenny have to give and extra year or pay more salary. This signing isnt bad at all.
Yeah, I feel the same way. We need help at center and Nielsen gives us an all-purpose veteran 2C who can play brutal minutes against top players and come out looking good. Six years is a long time, though. But if that's what it took to land him, well, then that's what it took to land him. (I believe the Isles actually offered him a slightly better deal.)
I think everyone would be cooler with the deal if Helm were out of the picture. Helm's extension complicates things.
Staal seems like he would be the lesser of two evils on price and term bit of a low risk signing and if he does bounce back he could be a steal for a year or 2 until Larkin is ready okposo or ericksson would be the winger id be ok with but has anyone heard anything on Ladd or Boedker?
Eric Staal isn't quite the player he once was, but if we're looking for someone to simply hold down the 1C role just for, like, a year, we could do much worse than signing him to a short deal. Jordan Staal is another option. (I think?) (Is there a Hurricanes fan in the house?)
You haven't seen either of them play center with big minutes. I'd say Larkin will be a first line center by the time we switch arenas he has such a good work ethic and he's so smart
AA will definitely produce but how will he do on faceoffs and playing in his own end
I think Larkin could be a serviceable 1C this coming season. I think Athanasiou could be a serviceable 2C this coming season. But do we want to bet on those two things happening? Do we want to take the chance? Do we want to potentially stunt the growth of these players by forcing them into big-time roles they're not quite ready for?
I'd rather see them grow into -- and, yes, earn -- the roles over the course of the next couple of seasons. This is why a guy like Backes or Hanzal intrigues me. Either one could be a bridge 1C for a season or two.
I wonder what it'd take to land Matt Duchene. DeKeyser...and...a French-Canadian player (Mantha/Ouellet)? Who knows with Sakic and Roy. They're weird and they do stupid things.
Boom. I would like the s*** out of this if I could.
As things currently stand, we have zero proven elite-level players on the roster. This has been a growing issue for the past few years. A lack of top-level talent has an effect on your whole lineup. Suddenly a Nyquist or Tatar is asked to win matchups against the best players in the league. Everyone has to play out of their depth. What you get is a team that, while perhaps defensively sound, can't score for beans.
The report the #stlblues asking for Dylan Larkin for Kevin Shattenkirk is humorous and untrue
HSJ and Khan have suggested/stated the asking price for Shattenkirk is Larkin. Because, like I've said, if you're getting your info from Detroit media, then the asking price for any and every high-end player is always our best young player.
Miller and Glendening are possession black holes. Whatever positives they bring are outweighed by the fact that they spend all of their time at even-strength without the puck (often against top players, because reasons). You don't win with a fourth line that's "gritty and real good defensively." You win with a fourth line that's talented enough to be a third line and can devour other teams' bottom-sixers. Also, this is one less spot for a kid, which is always good to see. (yeah but thoes kidzn arnt real gud defensivly)
I thought Stamkos wanted to be the main guy?
Anyway, I can for sure see the appeal of playing in Buffalo or Toronto, but at the same time we are talking about what was the last place and 23rd place teams in the league as of a couple months ago. Up-and-coming is never a guarantee, and there's definitely a level of risk associated with signing the rest of your career away to one of those two teams. The Wings haven't been all that exciting the past few seasons, but at the very least we've been a consistent playoff team. For similar money, it might be more appealing to come to Detroit because we have a better track record of playing games that matter in April.
There are a couple of factors that might favor the Wings, or at least work against the top competition.
One, and you've touched on this here, is that the Sabres and especially the Leafs are probably two or three years away from being truly competitive. At that point, Stamkos will be right around 30 years old and may be in the early stages of decline. (Truth be told, he may already be in decline.) Is he willing to wait two or three years for the team to become competitive? Would he be ok with being eaten alive by the Toronto media at the first sign of trouble? Is he willing to joing an organization that has no recent history of success, one that may not become a perennial powerhouse? (Does he want to play on a bad team coached by Mike Babcock, who will inevitably put him on the wing and coach him to play "heavier" and "more defensively"?) These teams, by their own admission, have to "learn how to win." That's not necessarily as true of the Wings.
A second, related issue is the fact that all of the Sabres' and Leafs' top young talent will need substantial pay raises, which means they might find themselves where the Lightning now find themselves -- full of young talent, but lacking the cap space it'll take to keep all of those top players. Does Stamkos want to be the twelve-million-dollar reason why the Sabres can't keep Sam Reinhart or the Leafs can't keep William Nylander? Does he want to be counting for that much against a young team's cap when other players on the team are matching or exceeding his production and doing so for a fraction of his pay? Would that cause problems in the locker room? Would it lead to the younger talent demanding bigger money than they might otherwise demand, because "Well, Stamkos is getting paid this much to put up 65 points and I'm putting up 80+ points. And that's f***ed."
Did I mention Toronto eats its young?
Dreger: RedWings keenly interested in Stamkos. If they don't land, probably look at Eriksson, or Boedker, or Okposo, or maybe Backes.
Please no Boedker. He's not the player people think he is. We're talking substantially less competent than Tatar or Nyquist.
I would do $12M, yes. Why? Simple: our need is that great. Buffalo's need isn't nearly as great as ours, which is why I'm not convinced that they're prepared to go two or three million higher than the consensus market value. They don't need a Steven Stamkos. We absolutely do. (Unless, perhaps, we can acquire a guy like Martin Hanzal. But even then, there's a big talent gap between Hanzal and Stamkos.)
Been pondering the Stamkos situation. We would obviously love to have him and have the money stashed away if he can be swayed now.
With that said, I think it's highly unlikely that he'll join our team. Trying to see it from his perspective, what's most important? In rank, I believe:
*A chance to win the cup
*Acknowledgement from teammates, coaches and the fans
*A future legacy
Based on the teams that are actively going for him, we rank mid or low on these selling points. I see Tampa and Toronto clearly in the lead. It would have to take very special circumstances to sign him.
You're assuming 1) those four considerations are what's most important to Stamkos, 2) he would rank the importance of said considerations in that same order, and 3) his assessment of the given teams would match your own.
Truth is, we know next to nothing about Stamkos's motivations and preferences and opinions etc. For all we know, he finds the prospect of becoming the seventy-million-dollar captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs more terrifying than tantalizing.