View Single Post
09-24-2013, 01:27 PM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Henkka View Post
Yeah, I was also 100% sure about Nyquist, when we had that false information here that Nyquist has also lost his waiver-eligibility. But since he is still free, they are going to use that option if necessary.

I'm not against that idea as long as Nyquist has place to play. It's not the end of the world like it looks to be many in this board. He isn't going get benched anywhere. He will play and develop. ~10 games at minors doesn't really matter a thing on his long-term development.

This reminds me of the case when Filppula got demoted, played 4 games down and Babcock was furious about it. Then Holland waived Brad Norton, Val was promoted again and he never looked back.

Yeah, waiver eligibility is THE THING. Last season Tatar was was demoted, because we could do it.

But it was injuries in NHL side affected a lot about that Griffins 1st line, who was called up and who not. If Helm and Bertuzzi would have been healthy, Andersson would never see games up. But they needed a center and a big guy. Andersson had these in same package, great. If there would have been different injuries, the story could be different. Nyquist and Tatar up, Andersson sees the whole season at Griffins. It just went that way.

This season we can't waive Tatar, so he's gonna play. He is not gonna sit on the bench, what people are debating here. "Washed up vets are gonna play instead of kids" -********.

I'm gonna give you guys a healthy scratch tracking at next season to give some statistical prove about this plan, how the vets will rotate and kids will play.
I don't understand your logic Henkka.
So -- Tatar played good enough in the NHL -- but was sent down because he was waiver eligible.
But now that he's not waiver eligible, he's going to play?

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote