HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Detroit Red Wings
Notices

the anti schneider thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-15-2007, 08:12 AM
  #26
doublejack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Detroit
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by norrisnick View Post
Or alternatively the Ducks were a far better team than the Sharks... Plus they got the breaks no other team got this spring (most winners do).
I actually think the Sharks were the better team. They controlled the play more than the Quacks did, especially the first period of games. The Sharks have a far better / more talented group of forwards. Shutting them down was very impressive. The only area the Quacks were better was on D, and the Wings had no trouble scoring enough goals to win. It was keeping the puck out of the net that was the problem.


Quote:
Originally Posted by norrisnick View Post
Plus here's one GIANT factor to consider. How do we know his 38 year old wrist will be fully 100% healthy? Why in the world would ANY GM sign a guy that old to a contract before he's healthy? Schneider without the full use of his slapper is not a guy I want on the team AND just because he can't crank 'em like he used to doesn't mean he won't be healthy enough to get on the ice so we can't Mogilny him. We'd be stuck with whater cap hit he'd end up as (provided this is a multi-year deal which is what this is smelling like).
About the wrist, he did not require surgery to repair it. So while it was broken, it was not severely damaged. He'll probably always have some lingering pain. But I'm sure he'll go through a physical before the contract offer is official. If anything this will help to get him for a more reasonable salary.

doublejack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2007, 02:21 PM
  #27
FissionFire
Registered User
 
FissionFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Country: United States
Posts: 10,682
vCash: 500
Schneider getting hurt meant Lilja became a top 4 guy. With all Matt's faults, he's still better than Lilja, even fatoring in Adreas's good stretch in the PO's.

Also, Schneider's shot on the 5-on-3 PPs is a huge weapon. I'd bet we score at least once or twice more on them with him around.

FissionFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2007, 11:00 AM
  #28
HockeyinHD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Higgy4 View Post
I never said he wasnt a difference maker. I like Schneider, I always have. Even when people lambasted him again and again for his deficiencies. I just dont know that the Wings cannot go on without him and save themselves $4-5 million at the same time. The PP was inconsistent with and without him. And while he did play better then expected defensively in the playoffs, we still have to remember that he is normally a very average defender.

If the money is right, I would be cool with it. I just hope we dont hear about some 2 year/$10 million contract. If there is anyplace the Wings have decent depth, its on the blueline. Take that money and replenish the wing corps a little bit.
Yeah, that way next year we can have a whole new list of people to howl about playing in front of Filppula and/or Hudler.

I'm pretty sure most people on the boards here in general have little appreciation for the way Schneider's style of play enables the team to play well. The only reason, and I mean the only reason, we didn't see a significant dropoff in the Wings play minus Schneider is that Chelios stepped up and played a boatload of minutes and played incredibly well. People seem to gloss over that fact. It's not like Quincey stepped up and played great (he was ok at best) or like Lebda did (ditto), or like Markov did. It was nearly all Chelios filling that gap. That, and Lilja playing at an alarmingly high level for most of the last 13 games of the playoffs. Do people aim to suggest either of those components would continue unabated in Schneider's alleged absence in 2007-8?

The argument 'Er, the team was decent without Schneider so I guess that means we don't need him' is flawed because it overlooks both that fact, and the fact that the team went 3-4 without him, and the fact that the team gave up 10 goals in round 1, 9 in round 2, but 17 in round 3... the one where they didn't have Schneider.

He's very important to the way this team plays. Inferior players to him are making 5+ million already. Remember, Schneider's 3.9 mil deal was 'signed' under a 39 mil cap. At a 48ish mil cap a 3.9 mil slot is equivalent to a 4.8ish mil deal, so we all need to keep the financial landscape in mind when we look at these signings, and how that landscape has changed.

HockeyinHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2007, 09:46 PM
  #29
Higgy4
Registered User
 
Higgy4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 7,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyinHD View Post
Yeah, that way next year we can have a whole new list of people to howl about playing in front of Filppula and/or Hudler.

I'm pretty sure most people on the boards here in general have little appreciation for the way Schneider's style of play enables the team to play well. The only reason, and I mean the only reason, we didn't see a significant dropoff in the Wings play minus Schneider is that Chelios stepped up and played a boatload of minutes and played incredibly well. People seem to gloss over that fact. It's not like Quincey stepped up and played great (he was ok at best) or like Lebda did (ditto), or like Markov did. It was nearly all Chelios filling that gap. That, and Lilja playing at an alarmingly high level for most of the last 13 games of the playoffs. Do people aim to suggest either of those components would continue unabated in Schneider's alleged absence in 2007-8?

The argument 'Er, the team was decent without Schneider so I guess that means we don't need him' is flawed because it overlooks both that fact, and the fact that the team went 3-4 without him, and the fact that the team gave up 10 goals in round 1, 9 in round 2, but 17 in round 3... the one where they didn't have Schneider.

He's very important to the way this team plays. Inferior players to him are making 5+ million already. Remember, Schneider's 3.9 mil deal was 'signed' under a 39 mil cap. At a 48ish mil cap a 3.9 mil slot is equivalent to a 4.8ish mil deal, so we all need to keep the financial landscape in mind when we look at these signings, and how that landscape has changed.
I like Schneider. A lot more than most people on this board. I just don't think he is as crucial to the teams success as you do. Thats all. If they sign him, great. I wont be all that upset about it. But I also wouldnt be all that upset to see them try and use that money to give the team some scoring depth up front. Either way, I wont be howling about anything.

Higgy4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2007, 10:00 PM
  #30
State of Hockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 11,189
vCash: 500
As an outsider, it suprises me to see that an anti-Schneider thread pops up. Maybe Lidstrom has set the defensmen precedent too high in Detroit, but Schneider is a great defensemen. He logs a lots of minutes, is solid in his own zone, is a good puck mover, and has one of the deadliest slapshots in the league. I can think of 30 teams in the NHL that would gladly have him on the roster. Watching #5 and #23 work the PP is a treat as a fan of another team.

State of Hockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2007, 10:25 PM
  #31
TRIARII*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Italy
Posts: 708
vCash: 500
not criticizing you state of hockey , im not a hockey expert - just a big fan - and you prob know way more about the game than me - but i just want to further detail my veiwpoint =

- for me watching schneids work on the power play is torture because he rarely / never makes creative / unpredictable by the opponent passes , there just basic elementary passes that gains the pp no edge in getting the shot on the net in a high percentage situation . he doesnt have the quick mind / ice vision for it .

- he also takes large amounts of ridiculous shots from the blue line right into opponents or large player groups that are very very low percentage . if he learned to fake the big shot from the blue more while keepin an eye out for a man in better shooting or passing posistion he'd be twice as effective . as it is to me he detracts from lidstroms talent on the pp by keeping the puck out of nicks control more often . ide prefer them split on it and schneids on the 2nd unit for his shot .

- plus on the pp he seems to make alot of dangerous passes that are picked off and become dangerous the other way .

just my non expert veiwpoint

TRIARII* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-18-2007, 11:16 PM
  #32
Sadekuuro
Registered User
 
Sadekuuro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,185
vCash: 500
I agree with trapper keeper... he's got a great shot but he doesn't use it anywhere near as effectively as he could. I hope they retain Markov and add another non-Schneider defenseman.

Sadekuuro is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 08:28 AM
  #33
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Hey, Matty would be stupid if he didn't jump at a deal giving him $6 MM, and as I already said.... I just hope the Wings aren't the team to do it. It simply is too much money to lock up in a guy who more than likely is not the second coming of Chelios (in terms of longevity). I'm not one bit surprised to see yet another UFA season approaching with some incredible price tags on players already. I tried resurrecting HD's post on UFA d-men, and have been annoying as all heck in pointing out that Kronwall's 5-yr deal at a $3 MM cap hit is really not that big. Here's the latest from the Detroit News on Matty and what Ken thinks:

Quote:
Then there's Schneider, who along with his agent, Mike Gillis, likely saw Monday's announcement about Philadelphia acquiring potential unrestricted free-agent defenseman Kimmo Timonen from Nashville and quickly signing Timonen to a six-year contract worth $37.8 million. Timonen had 55 points (13 goals, 42 assists) in 80 games with Nashville.

Schneider had 52 points (11 goals, 41 assists) in 68 games with the Wings. He earned $3.3 million, in one of his best seasons. Holland said the Wings have interest in Schneider but only so many dollars to spend.

  Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 09:06 AM
  #34
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Further to my comments above, The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that Timmonen's contract is front-loaded, at $8 MM per year for the 1st 2 years of the 6 yr deal. You would think the guy won a Norris Trophy or something to get that kind of money! Seriously... I know both Pronger, Niedermayer and Lidstrom were signed when the cap was $39 MM, but does anyone else think this is a bit ridiculous?


Quote:
Although the contract would take Timonen to age 38, it is front-loaded so he will earn $8 million in each of the first two years, when he will still be in his prime.

"It has been an awesome day for me and my family," said Timonen, a native of Finland. "It is a once-in-a-lifetime chance. I'm really excited about this opportunity and to have this chance to be part of the Flyers."

  Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 09:20 AM
  #35
Winger98
Moderator
powers combined
 
Winger98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cleveland
Posts: 13,801
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Winger98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Further to my comments above, The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that Timmonen's contract is front-loaded, at $8 MM per year for the 1st 2 years of the 6 yr deal. You would think the guy won a Norris Trophy or something to get that kind of money! Seriously... I know both Pronger, Niedermayer and Lidstrom were signed when the cap was $39 MM, but does anyone else think this is a bit ridiculous?
Why bother front/back loading a deal? Is it just for a team's personal finances and how much they spend each year or could there be some benefit to it later on if they want to buy the guy out or something?

Winger98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 09:28 AM
  #36
8snake
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,284
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winger98 View Post
Why bother front/back loading a deal? Is it just for a team's personal finances and how much they spend each year or could there be some benefit to it later on if they want to buy the guy out or something?
It will be much easier to move Kimmo late in his contract should they want to trade him.

8snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 10:02 AM
  #37
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winger98 View Post
Why bother front/back loading a deal? Is it just for a team's personal finances and how much they spend each year or could there be some benefit to it later on if they want to buy the guy out or something?
Yes, in addition to what 8snake said about being able to move him later if required. I guess that would apply to buyouts too-- the more of his deal he gets upfront, the less likely some of it is subject to reduction in the event of future buyouts or rollbacks (never say never).

I think his agent is being smart here too. Escrow might be a factor. As long as revenues are increasing, the amt of escrow will be less. Keep in mind that the player share of league revenues starts going up after $2.2 billion is reached. If that slows down, and the majority of teams keeps spending above the midpoint, the player escrow goes up. 5% of 8MM is a lot more than 5% of 4 MM, for example. Financially, it is smarter for the player to get as much of his money upfront too, so it could be this is what he wanted and couldn't hope to do better in UFA season. The deal closer for Philly.

From a team's perspective, I don't know if Philadelphia's owner really cares about a few million difference in cash outlay. They're kind of like the Wings, so the annual cap hit was the bigger issue. It helps them too if there is ever a buyout or a need to move him in a trade later. I don't know if he has an NTC or NMC?

  Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2007, 08:14 PM
  #38
HockeyinHD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Higgy4 View Post
I like Schneider. A lot more than most people on this board. I just don't think he is as crucial to the teams success as you do. Thats all.
Fair enough.

By the way, do you think the Wings win a very close Ducks series with Schneider in and healthy? In game 6 they gave up a momentum-crushing shorthanded first goal when Cheli was out there on the PP (not anywhere near his strong suit anymore). In the game 5 they lost the team went 0-7 on the PP, and Lidstrom having to play 40 minutes (10 on the PP) probably had something to do with that, I'd imagine.

As to whether Schneider is 'crucial' to the Wings, that's hard to say. I'm fairly sure the team doesn't get past Calgary and San Jose without him, and I'm fairly sure they could've beaten the Ducks with him... so that lends itself to a certain degree of import, IMO. Without Schnieder I think the Wings' blueline goes from 'formidable and deep' to 'exploitable and woefully thin at the top'.

HockeyinHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2007, 08:32 PM
  #39
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyinHD View Post
Fair enough.

By the way, do you think the Wings win a very close Ducks series with Schneider in and healthy? In game 6 they gave up a momentum-crushing shorthanded first goal when Cheli was out there on the PP (not anywhere near his strong suit anymore). In the game 5 they lost the team went 0-7 on the PP, and Lidstrom having to play 40 minutes (10 on the PP) probably had something to do with that, I'd imagine.

As to whether Schneider is 'crucial' to the Wings, that's hard to say. I'm fairly sure the team doesn't get past Calgary and San Jose without him, and I'm fairly sure they could've beaten the Ducks with him... so that lends itself to a certain degree of import, IMO. Without Schnieder I think the Wings' blueline goes from 'formidable and deep' to 'exploitable and woefully thin at the top'.

I think there are certain players who are impossible to replace, Lidstrom is one, while Pronger's effect on the Oilers last year was obvious to all.

I don't think there was anything specifically about Matty that would have made a huge difference. He's the guy occupying the #2 D spot, and his injury came around after the team had already lost the #3 defenseman. That's what made it difficult. You can cover up to a point for one of your top 3 going down, but when that is 2 of the 3... that's pretty tough. It is a tribute to the Wings depth that the absences weren't debilitating on the team. Matty is a place holder, in that if you replace him with a bona fide #2 NHL defenseman of some veteran status, I don't believe we would feel the team had suffered an insurmountable loss. The question really is... how much in opportunity towards keeping the team AS GOOD next year and perhaps beyond does Holland give up if he pays Schneider $5 MM or more? Are there better combos of defensemen that tally up to $6 MM together, or a single guy that's almost as good but only cost ~$4ish MM.

  Reply With Quote
Old
06-20-2007, 08:34 PM
  #40
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Take Rivet off the market.

He re-signed with San Jose (no surprise there).

KK's:

Quote:
According to what our fellow-member Renaud Lavoie learned, the defender Craig Rivet concluded new a four years agreement evaluated to 14 million $ with Sharks de San Jose, Wednesday.

  Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2007, 07:16 AM
  #41
HockeyinHD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I think there are certain players who are impossible to replace, Lidstrom is one, while Pronger's effect on the Oilers last year was obvious to all.
Well... yeah. We're talking about Norris/Hart level players there, though. I don't think the question is/was 'irreplaceability', but rather Schneider's relevance to the teams' success.

Quote:
I don't think there was anything specifically about Matty that would have made a huge difference. He's the guy occupying the #2 D spot, and his injury came around after the team had already lost the #3 defenseman. That's what made it difficult. You can cover up to a point for one of your top 3 going down, but when that is 2 of the 3... that's pretty tough. It is a tribute to the Wings depth that the absences weren't debilitating on the team. Matty is a place holder, in that if you replace him with a bona fide #2 NHL defenseman of some veteran status, I don't believe we would feel the team had suffered an insurmountable loss. The question really is... how much in opportunity towards keeping the team AS GOOD next year and perhaps beyond does Holland give up if he pays Schneider $5 MM or more? Are there better combos of defensemen that tally up to $6 MM together, or a single guy that's almost as good but only cost ~$4ish MM.
As I understood it, Higgy was talking about just letting Schneider walk and using that money at forward, relying on whoever was clunking around the system to fill Schneider's spot. If we're talking about letting Schneider go and replacing him with a similar guy that's one thing. If we're talking about replacing him with Derek Meech... that's kind of different.

As far as paying 5 mil goes, Schneider occupied around 8.5% of the cap in 05-06 and 7.5% of the cap in 06-07. With an alleged cap between 48-50 mil at 5 mil he's occupying 10 - 10.5% of the cap... so over the course of the past three years we're looking at an average of a top 2 guy (and really, a legit #1 on about 20 of 30 teams) taking up under 9% of the cap over three years. I have a hard time feeling too badly about the return on that.

HockeyinHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2007, 09:09 AM
  #42
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyinHD View Post
As I understood it, Higgy was talking about just letting Schneider walk and using that money at forward, relying on whoever was clunking around the system to fill Schneider's spot. If we're talking about letting Schneider go and replacing him with a similar guy that's one thing. If we're talking about replacing him with Derek Meech... that's kind of different.
Similar and somewhat younger guy. I still think Matt is riding on his reputation a bit, and am doubtful that somehow next year he'll feel super motivated. He's a guy who has a niche, plays it well enough to maintain the status quo, but doesn't give you that fiery passion of a Chelios. (Admittedly hard to find.)

Quote:
As far as paying 5 mil goes, Schneider occupied around 8.5% of the cap in 05-06 and 7.5% of the cap in 06-07. With an alleged cap between 48-50 mil at 5 mil he's occupying 10 - 10.5% of the cap... so over the course of the past three years we're looking at an average of a top 2 guy (and really, a legit #1 on about 20 of 30 teams) taking up under 9% of the cap over three years. I have a hard time feeling too badly about the return on that.
At the age of 38, I think there are very few players who have the same level of game they possessed in younger times. Norris/Hart kind of guys aside, there's a big fall off after that. That's why I called it opportunity cost. 1 or 2 more years of top dollars for defenseman on a depreciating asset.... I dunno. If Matty accepts less money than alleged market value, then I'll keep quiet. I do think it would be foolish to pay him anything close to $5MM or more per year.

  Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2007, 01:50 AM
  #43
Karamazov
Registered User
 
Karamazov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyinHD View Post
Yeah, that way next year we can have a whole new list of people to howl about playing in front of Filppula and/or Hudler.

I'm pretty sure most people on the boards here in general have little appreciation for the way Schneider's style of play enables the team to play well. The only reason, and I mean the only reason, we didn't see a significant dropoff in the Wings play minus Schneider is that Chelios stepped up and played a boatload of minutes and played incredibly well. People seem to gloss over that fact. It's not like Quincey stepped up and played great (he was ok at best) or like Lebda did (ditto), or like Markov did. It was nearly all Chelios filling that gap. That, and Lilja playing at an alarmingly high level for most of the last 13 games of the playoffs. Do people aim to suggest either of those components would continue unabated in Schneider's alleged absence in 2007-8?

The argument 'Er, the team was decent without Schneider so I guess that means we don't need him' is flawed because it overlooks both that fact, and the fact that the team went 3-4 without him, and the fact that the team gave up 10 goals in round 1, 9 in round 2, but 17 in round 3... the one where they didn't have Schneider.

He's very important to the way this team plays. Inferior players to him are making 5+ million already. Remember, Schneider's 3.9 mil deal was 'signed' under a 39 mil cap. At a 48ish mil cap a 3.9 mil slot is equivalent to a 4.8ish mil deal, so we all need to keep the financial landscape in mind when we look at these signings, and how that landscape has changed.
Very well said. I would love to get Matt back for around 4 per year but I have a feeling we will indeed be looking for 5. I don't think he's a guy we could afford to lose without signing a big name to replace him.

Karamazov is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2007, 08:33 AM
  #44
TRIARII*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Italy
Posts: 708
vCash: 500
schneiders too stupid and unphysical to get anything over 2.9 from me .
too many stupid shots and passes . i still say hollands over blowing his worth in order to make the trade he made to aquire him look good . let schneider go and keep markov , and also sign another scrappy defender like markov whos bigger .
i want D from my defenders not offense . i want them to be able to not cough up the puck in their own zone and stop enemy offense as their FIRST priorities , a point shot or carrying the puck like you get out of schneider is a luxury not a need . and with the cap space and small unphysical team / D its a luxury we cant afford . when holland gave big money to krons he fired schneider in my book , scheiders old job falls to krons now . and the Dman who replaces schneider has to be bigger and more physical , thats a PRIORITY with current roster . and you give krons or lebda all the ice time on pp / top units and shots that schneider gets and either would equal the 11 goals schneider hit this season .

ps - though im not a krons fan and would try trading him and rebuilding the entire 2nd pairing , making it bigger / tougher . lids - markov first pairing , cheli - quincey / lebda 3rd pairing .


Last edited by TRIARII*: 06-22-2007 at 09:05 AM.
TRIARII* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2007, 10:32 AM
  #45
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
trapper keeper, I think you're underestimating the value of the Wings puck possession and transition games. Compare how badly the Ottawa team looked compared to the Wings in being able to dictate the tempo of the game and make those long outlet passes, or key passes to get the puck up the ice quickly. Even though I appreciated their skill before, it really struck me when I watched the Sens/Ducks series. Ottawa was completely unable to control the game because their defense were not only somewhat poor passers - relatively speaking - but relied on very short passes. When the Ducks knew that they never had to leave guys back to cover, to avoid getting burned, they became even more aggressive and locked up Ottawa in their own end almost completely.

So I understand the desire to have the team toughen up a little bit, but for the 1st 2 D pairings, you have to have a pretty highly skilled defenseman who can turn and control the tempo a bit, and who is an offensive threat in the sense that he can spark the offensive rush. I'll grant you that Matty can do that well, but his play on defending the crease or oncoming forwards is and remains a trouble spot. That's why I put him a notch below the upper echelon of defenders. Too many brain farts in his own end. Find a guy who makes up for that and pay HIM $5-6 MM, and maybe hope he's younger too (more than likely), locking him to this year's value and not the next 2 or more.

  Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2007, 10:45 AM
  #46
TRIARII*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Italy
Posts: 708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
trapper keeper, I think you're underestimating the value of the Wings puck possession and transition games. Compare how badly the Ottawa team looked compared to the Wings in being able to dictate the tempo of the game and make those long outlet passes, or key passes to get the puck up the ice quickly. Even though I appreciated their skill before, it really struck me when I watched the Sens/Ducks series. Ottawa was completely unable to control the game because their defense were not only somewhat poor passers - relatively speaking - but relied on very short passes. When the Ducks knew that they never had to leave guys back to cover, to avoid getting burned, they became even more aggressive and locked up Ottawa in their own end almost completely.

So I understand the desire to have the team toughen up a little bit, but for the 1st 2 D pairings, you have to have a pretty highly skilled defenseman who can turn and control the tempo a bit, and who is an offensive threat in the sense that he can spark the offensive rush. I'll grant you that Matty can do that well, but his play on defending the crease or oncoming forwards is and remains a trouble spot. That's why I put him a notch below the upper echelon of defenders. Too many brain farts in his own end. Find a guy who makes up for that and pay HIM $5-6 MM, and maybe hope he's younger too (more than likely), locking him to this year's value and not the next 2 or more.
thanks for the insight fugu , i realize you know alot more about hockey than me and put this post very cleanly / informative ( you sound like a teacher) . i learned alot from reading it , and always respect the class you conduct yourself with on this board .

TRIARII* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2007, 10:51 AM
  #47
Fugu
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by trapper keeper View Post
thanks for the insight fugu , i realize you know alot more about hockey than me and put this post very cleanly / informative ( you sound like a teacher) . i learned alot from reading it , and always respect the class you conduct yourself with on this board .


Nah.... I just "talk too much" is all. I think we all learn from each other at times-- and trust me, I don't know more about hockey than you do. It's the offering of different viewpoints that gets us all to think about things, hopefully in a new way. Thanks for the compliment though.

  Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2007, 03:14 PM
  #48
HockeyinHD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Similar and somewhat younger guy. I still think Matt is riding on his reputation a bit, and am doubtful that somehow next year he'll feel super motivated. He's a guy who has a niche, plays it well enough to maintain the status quo, but doesn't give you that fiery passion of a Chelios. (Admittedly hard to find.)
Everything you just said could be applied to Datsyuk, or Lidstrom, or any number of really good players, Fugu. I don't quite get your point here? Schneider's not as fiery as Chelios? Um, yeah... okay?

Quote:
At the age of 38, I think there are very few players who have the same level of game they possessed in younger times. Norris/Hart kind of guys aside, there's a big fall off after that. That's why I called it opportunity cost. 1 or 2 more years of top dollars for defenseman on a depreciating asset.... I dunno. If Matty accepts less money than alleged market value, then I'll keep quiet. I do think it would be foolish to pay him anything close to $5MM or more per year.
So, you're against signing a guy coming off a strong year because he is 38? Have you been railing against Hasek, I wonder? At any rate, I don't think anyone posed the argument that 'this is the best Schneider has ever played'. I haven't, you haven't, and I haven't seen anyone else do it. I think the argument that I have at least posed is right now, regardless of age, Schneider has been playing hockey at a rather high level and possesses the specific skills which make him an excellent fit in an offense like Detroit's, especially now that the team is developing two gears (puck control and chip and chase.)

Here's the real question for you. Find me a guy with Schneider's skills who can come into Detroit and soak up 23+ minutes a game on the blue line playing second unit pairings, score 50+ points a year almost religiously, and is a legitimate goal-scoring threat from the blue line (as in, outscoring Lidstrom per game since they've both been in Detroit by almost 20%, and this doesn't even take into account Lidstrom's humongous IT advantage.) Oh, and the guy isn't going to kill you on defense. Find me that at 5 mil or less and I have no problem.

This 'oh gee, we ought to just let the young guys play' stuff is just amusing in it's sheer tonnage of Deja Vu... mostly because people are just singing the same song at a different position. Last year it was howls and gesticulations that Hudler, Kopecky, Bootland or Filppula wasn't getting enough (or any at all) IT. Now this year I can tell it's going to be howls and gesticulations that Meech, Kindl, Ericsson and Quincey are all getting hosed.

HockeyinHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2007, 03:28 PM
  #49
MOENing
 
MOENing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Cam Town
Country: United States
Posts: 2,715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by trapper keeper View Post
- takes 100's of stupid shots that have zero chance of scoring per season
- coughs the puck up in his own zone alot
- doesnt seem too bright / creative / well ice visioned
- doesnt play ruggedly

if he came cheap and you could put a big rugged stay at home Dman with him itd be a good set up . but under the cap we cant and or we dont have that type Dman on the roster .
to me holland keeps holding on to schneider and over blowing his worth because he doesnt want the avery + #1 + #2 price tag to look like a bad deal .
i think that he is good player give him credit he's in the nhl and your not no offense

MOENing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2007, 03:49 PM
  #50
TRIARII*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Italy
Posts: 708
vCash: 500
yes citizen saint i think hes a good player , tee's off on some wicked shots , can skate beautifully at times , when he's fired up can play a rough game . so i shouldnt have titled it anti schneider because i respect his game , and even more so respect the class person he is off the ice . schneids is a very cool person to me and a solid nhler . my point is more so not wanting holland to offer him a giant contract because of the cap which would leave us short of what we need to win the cup . ide rather the money be spent on a cheaper / bigger less talented Dman , with the saved money going towards trying to inject more talent into the winger corps . thats how i see getting to the cup .

so im glad you brought this up because it was sounding like i have no repect for schneids when ide love him on the team for cheaper or if there was no cap , im just haggling over cap space outlays .

TRIARII* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:30 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.