Thread: Proposal: kubina
View Single Post
Old
02-21-2012, 10:11 AM
  #49
killbuttman*
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unsportsmanlike View Post
Jagr: I would have liked Jagr too and thought that he would still be productive. But I thought the $3+ M he got in PHI was overpayment.

Jovo: FLO massively overpaid both in money and duration. I don't know why you would use a 35+ contract at $4.125M/yr for four years as a basis for the conversation. I think the overwhelming majority would be glad that Holland didn't offer that deal.

Vokoun and Theodore: Both wanted to have a shot at being starters. They would not get that in Detroit.

Mike Smith: Was actually a good option. However, it appeared he also wanted to be a starter and $2M (regardless of the Wings' capspace this season) would be way too much for a back up.

Burns: Of course most Wings fans would have wanted Burns. But the deal was Burns for Setoguchi, Charlie Coyle + 1st. That's a hefty price tag as Coyle was probably their best prospect. That'd be like the Wings giving up Filppula, Smith +1st. You may argue that would be worth it while others would disagree. But either way I don't think it'd be fair to say either side clearly would get the majority of the vote.

Top 6 Forwards: Personally, I feel like it's about timing and player availability. I was glad the Wings didn't waste money on fake top 6 fowards last summer. We'll have to wait and see what happens moving forward but i'm glad the Wings are in a position to go after Parise.

Kubina: I think he would have been fine but a 2nd, a 4th and a prospect is a ton to give up for a pure rental who really seems to be on his last legs. I'm glad the Wings didnt make that move.

Nash: As good as he may be that cap hit is massive and the pieces you'd have to move in order to get him (as are being speculated upon) I probably wouldn't want to give those pieces up. If he goes for less (than I expect) then ya I'd be annoyed the Wings weren't in on it (assuming Nash would be willing).



How can you be all over a poster for using speculation as a means to refute what you're saying when aside from a couple deals in the past all you're doing is purely speculating as to Holland's failure to get guys like Nash, Parise, Suter, Weber etc.?

You're speculating just as much - if not more. The argument is a two way street.
I didn't want Jovo. It's embarassing we even targetted him. I'm simply saying that Holland is developing a history of not getting the player he wants because he isn't aggressive enough. HE wanted Jovo, but his offer was so silly it was laughed at. The debate isn't whether Jovo is a good fit. I think he sucks. The debate is...can Holland be aggressive enough to add the pieces we need.

Holland was interested in Jagr. But didn't get it done.

You can give me all the excuses about the goalies wanting to be #1s you want. But if Holland's stance was so rigid that you were going to tell all these goalies that the job was Howard's NO MATTER WHAT and not up for grabs...then why not identify a career back-up like Hedberg or Garon or Budaj or a former #1 like Giguere who was willing to accept a back-up job? Why approach guys like Vokoun, Theodore, and Smith when they were all capable and wanting a shot to be a #1? So while we wasted time on these goose chases, all the better back-ups were signed.

Sometimes being conservative is the right thing. Not signing Whiz or Leino to silly deals is great. But this pattern doesn't give me ANY confidence that we'll land guys like Nash, Parise, Suter, or Weber. Ever. Bold moves are needed to land these guys. And I don't see it happening.

killbuttman* is offline   Reply With Quote