HFBoards

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

Saint Nick's Halo is crooked

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-23-2009, 11:40 PM
  #1
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,340
vCash: 500
Saint Nick's Halo is crooked

No lie. I picked up Nick Lidstrom off waivers in my fantasy hockey league.
Figured I'd rake up winnings cause Lidstrom is mr. slow start and finish strong.

21 games. 1 goal. 7 assists, +7.
Since I got him:
7 games. 0 goals. 3 assists. -1

More than any other player, he needs to bring it up a notch. Or three.

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 08:34 AM
  #2
doublejack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Detroit
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,123
vCash: 500
I think it is almost getting to the point of taking him off the first PP unit. He's been that bad so far.

doublejack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 08:36 AM
  #3
Heaton
Moderator
||||||||||||||||||||
 
Heaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 16,635
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Heaton
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublejack View Post
I think it is almost getting to the point of taking him off the first PP unit. He's been that bad so far.
I'd like to see Lebda take over for Lidstrom on the 1st PP unit.

Heaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 08:48 AM
  #4
doublejack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Detroit
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,123
vCash: 500
I don't know if that's a serious response or sarcasm, Heaton.

Obviously we have some injuries that are affecting the point rotation on the PP. However, Lidstrom has been completely ineffective. He leads the team with 4:05 of PP time per game, yet has produced a single goal and two assists in all of those minutes. That sucks. Compare to Kronwall with 3g and 4a in 2:43 of PP time a game, or Rafalski with 1g and 7a in 4:02 of PP time per game.

The player I'd like to see get Lidstrom's PP minutes is Ericsson. Why is Big Rig, in light of all the injuries, still not getting a look on the PP? He leads all of our defense with 10 ES points, and has a cannon.

I'd give Lidstrom the benefit of the doubt and let him have a little more time to get going. But if he continues to suck, he has to come off the PP. He's been awful to this point.

doublejack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 08:55 AM
  #5
Heaton
Moderator
||||||||||||||||||||
 
Heaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 16,635
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Heaton
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublejack View Post
I don't know if that's a serious response or sarcasm, Heaton.

Obviously we have some injuries that are affecting the point rotation on the PP. However, Lidstrom has been completely ineffective. He leads the team with 4:05 of PP time per game, yet has produced a single goal and two assists in all of those minutes. That sucks. Compare to Kronwall with 3g and 4a in 2:43 of PP time a game, or Rafalski with 1g and 7a in 4:02 of PP time per game.

The player I'd like to see get Lidstrom's PP minutes is Ericsson. Why is Big Rig, in light of all the injuries, still not getting a look on the PP? He leads all of our defense with 10 ES points, and has a canon.

I'd give Lidstrom the benefit of the doubt and let him have a little more time to get going. But if he continues to suck, he has to come off the PP. He's been awful to this point.
Well we know why Ericsson isn't going to get PP time it's whether you agree with it or not. I think it's smart to give Meech PP time considering that's (presumably) where his worth is going to be. Babcock said after changing the defensive pairings that he wanted Ericsson to be focused on defense and PKing, can't really blame him as Ericsson has been average at best in that department.

Even so, Lidstrom needs at least another 10 games before we do something drastic like pull him for a rookie who's never done it before at the NHL level.

Heaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 09:00 AM
  #6
doublejack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Detroit
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heaton View Post
Well we know why Ericsson isn't going to get PP time it's whether you agree with it or not. I think it's smart to give Meech PP time considering that's (presumably) where his worth is going to be. Babcock said after changing the defensive pairings that he wanted Ericsson to be focused on defense and PKing, can't really blame him as Ericsson has been average at best in that department.

Even so, Lidstrom needs at least another 10 games before we do something drastic like pull him for a rookie who's never done it before at the NHL level.
Fine with me. Perhaps in about 10 games we'll get lucky and Kronwall will be ready to return. Ideally, I'd like the PP pairings to be:

Kronwall - Rafalski as the top unit
Ericsson - Stuart / Williams as the second unit

That is assuming Lidstrom is done

doublejack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 09:04 AM
  #7
12YearExtension
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 855
vCash: 500
He has been surprisingly bad this year. It's sad to see.

I don't know if I'd want him back at even 5 million, it might be better to move on if he isn't going to raise his level of play.

12YearExtension is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 09:06 AM
  #8
Heaton
Moderator
||||||||||||||||||||
 
Heaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 16,635
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Heaton
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublejack View Post
Fine with me. Perhaps in about 10 games we'll get lucky and Kronwall will be ready to return. Ideally, I'd like the PP pairings to be:

Kronwall - Rafalski as the top unit
Ericsson - Stuart / Williams as the second unit

That is assuming Lidstrom is done
I'm not sure that helps the situation. I mean, ideally I'd like to have Bertuzzi, Leino and maybe Cleary off the PP. But there's really no better options right now. I like the idea of Kronner/Rafalski on the top pairing. But Stuart/Ericsson/Williams aren't an upgrade on the PP over Lidstrom.

Heaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 09:09 AM
  #9
Heaton
Moderator
||||||||||||||||||||
 
Heaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 16,635
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Heaton
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12YearExtension View Post
He has been surprisingly bad this year. It's sad to see.

I don't know if I'd want him back at even 5 million, it might be better to move on if he isn't going to raise his level of play.
You're not going to find a better defensemen available on the UFA market than Lidstrom (even at age 40) next season for a reasonable price. I know there's a couple pipe dreams, but their teams aren't going to let them go. And if they do, you know you're overpaying.

Heaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 09:12 AM
  #10
doublejack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Detroit
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heaton View Post
I'm not sure that helps the situation. I mean, ideally I'd like to have Bertuzzi, Leino and maybe Cleary off the PP. But there's really no better options right now. I like the idea of Kronner/Rafalski on the top pairing. But Stuart/Ericsson/Williams aren't an upgrade on the PP over Lidstrom.
The numbers don't lie. Williams has in fact been more effective on the point this season that Lidstrom. Stuart has a PPG already in very little PP time, a larger sample might show he is also more effective than Nick. As for Ericsson, he's blown Lidstrom away at ES in terms of creating offense, and he ran the PP for Grand Rapids. What's the harm in giving him a look?

Lidstrom has been the best defenseman on the team from a purely defensive point of view, but his offensive game has slipped big time. Is he done? It's too early to say, but eventually he's going to have to be pulled from the PP if he doesn't start generating offense.

doublejack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 09:23 AM
  #11
12YearExtension
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heaton View Post
You're not going to find a better defensemen available on the UFA market than Lidstrom (even at age 40) next season for a reasonable price. I know there's a couple pipe dreams, but their teams aren't going to let them go. And if they do, you know you're overpaying.
Right, I haven't looked at the list myself, but should the Wings sign Nick to a 5-6 million dollar deal just to play defense and put up 40 points?

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see him come back, I just don't know if it is really worth it financially.
He could still be a great defensive defenseman, playing 22-24 minutes max with no PP time.

He's still got a great outlet pass(one of the best) , and he could potentially solidify a pairing and let one of Ericsson or Kronwall do their thing offensively.

Right now I'd rather see him out there on the number one PK unit instead of getting 4 minutes off PP time. I mean, come on Babcock. Puts out Ericsson on the first PK last night and Lidstrom on the PP?

Something there isn't working...

12YearExtension is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 09:26 AM
  #12
Heaton
Moderator
||||||||||||||||||||
 
Heaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 16,635
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Heaton
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12YearExtension View Post
Right, I haven't looked at the list myself, but should the Wings sign Nick to a 5-6 million dollar deal just to play defense and put up 40 points?
Considering the potential options? Yes. a 1 year deal for Lidstrom at those numbers or a 6 year deal for someone who'll do the same thing at close to that number? I think it's a no brainer.

Now if one of those pipe dreams comes through and we could get Anton in a multi-year deal at around 4-4.5m? Sure. But Lidstrom isn't done. He'll pick it up offensively and hopefully the rest of the team outside of Kronner and Zetterberg do too.

Heaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 09:34 AM
  #13
12YearExtension
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heaton View Post
Considering the potential options? Yes. a 1 year deal for Lidstrom at those numbers or a 6 year deal for someone who'll do the same thing at close to that number? I think it's a no brainer.

Now if one of those pipe dreams comes through and we could get Anton in a multi-year deal at around 4-4.5m? Sure. But Lidstrom isn't done. He'll pick it up offensively and hopefully the rest of the team outside of Kronner and Zetterberg do too.
Yeah, fair enough. Volchenkov(sp) would be amazing to get.

I also think Nick will pick it up, but I'm so used to seeing him at a level so far beyond where he is at now, and I don't think he will ever reach it again.

Hopefully he at least gets going.

12YearExtension is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 09:34 AM
  #14
thrillhous
Registered User
 
thrillhous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,535
vCash: 500
He is obviously "done". The classic case of a defenceman putting up 59 points one season and then the next they're just done. No catastrophic injury, they just stop being good. Add him to the list.

thrillhous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 09:44 AM
  #15
doublejack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Detroit
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,123
vCash: 500
IMO, it's too early to think of offering Lidstrom 5-6M for another season. He hasn't played well enough to warrant that much money, at least not yet. I'm also not even sure Lidstrom will want to play another season if he continues to fade.

doublejack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 09:50 AM
  #16
12YearExtension
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublejack View Post
IMO, it's too early to think of offering Lidstrom 5-6M for another season. He hasn't played well enough to warrant that much money, at least not yet. I'm also not even sure Lidstrom will want to play another season if he continues to fade.
That's why I brought it up.

Is it worth it? Not yet, and Heaton says there aren't any good UFA's other than Anton, who will probably get locked up.

12YearExtension is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 09:53 AM
  #17
doublejack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Detroit
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,123
vCash: 500
I don't have a handy list of pending free agents, but it may be a wise move to take that $5-6M and pursue a goalie, particularly if the list of available defensemen is lacking. There is always the option of making a trade, too.

IMO, giving Nick another huge deal, even if it is just for one more season, is a mistake unless he picks up his game. It would be akin to writing off next season (like the Tigers giving Ordonez his $18M extension). This team isn't a threat to win the Cup, and I don't see how another year possibly changes that equation without a major roster shakeup.

doublejack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 09:55 AM
  #18
Heaton
Moderator
||||||||||||||||||||
 
Heaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 16,635
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Heaton
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublejack View Post
I don't have a handy list of pending free agents, but it may be a wise move to take that $5-6M and pursue a goalie, particularly if the list of available defensemen is lacking. There is always the option of making a trade, too.

IMO, giving Nick another huge deal, even if it is just for one more season, is a mistake unless he picks up his game. It would be akin to writing off next season (like the Tigers giving Ordonez his $18M extension). This team isn't a threat to win the Cup, and I don't see how another year possibly changes that equation without a major roster shakeup.
I think giving Turco or Nabokov a huge long term deal would be even worse. There's really no really good goalies available.

Heaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 10:05 AM
  #19
12YearExtension
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heaton View Post
I think giving Turco or Nabokov a huge long term deal would be even worse. There's really no really good goalies available.
What's up with Turco lately? He used to be a spectacular goalie(just not against the wings).

If he could be had for 3-4m, I might go for that.

12YearExtension is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 10:06 AM
  #20
Heaton
Moderator
||||||||||||||||||||
 
Heaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 16,635
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Heaton
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12YearExtension View Post
What's up with Turco lately? He used to be a spectacular goalie(just not against the wings).

If he could be had for 3-4m, I might go for that.
The Stars wouldn't let him go for just that. He'll sign somewhere between 5 and 6m. Same with Nabokov.

Heaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 10:11 AM
  #21
12YearExtension
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heaton View Post
The Stars wouldn't let him go for just that. He'll sign somewhere between 5 and 6m. Same with Nabokov.
I figured, but I wouldn't overpay for an older-goaltender, and I don't think Holland would either.

Oh well.

12YearExtension is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 10:13 AM
  #22
doublejack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Detroit
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heaton View Post
I think giving Turco or Nabokov a huge long term deal would be even worse. There's really no really good goalies available.
OK, I just took a quick look at the 2010 UFA list. It is indeed pretty ugly.

There are some RFA's of interest, though. Turco or Nabby for a few years is fine with me, but any more than 3 or 4 is too long.

Again, making a trade is also an option. I know Chicago will be looking to dump some salary, and there are always teams looking to move talented RFA's that are due a raise.

doublejack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 10:14 AM
  #23
Frozen Fiend
DOUBLE D
 
Frozen Fiend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Kalamazoo
Country: United States
Posts: 4,596
vCash: 50
Wait, are you guys really discussing giving Lidstroms money to a goalie next year? Are you ******* high? He is Nicklas Lidstrom! He will make no less than 5 million next year, and he will be on the team. What's more, Holland would never take a goalie over Lidstrom.

Lidstrom and the team have a had a slow start... imagine how the team would have done without him? He will pick it up offensively.

Frozen Fiend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 10:19 AM
  #24
12YearExtension
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozen Ice View Post
Wait, are you guys really discussing giving Lidstroms money to a goalie next year? Are you ******* high? He is Nicklas Lidstrom! He will make no less than 5 million next year, and he will be on the team. What's more, Holland would never take a goalie over Lidstrom.

Lidstrom and the team have a had a slow start... imagine how the team would have done without him? He will pick it up offensively.
It's a discussion forum, and we are discussing things that could happen if Nick isn't back, or even if he is.

12YearExtension is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2009, 10:21 AM
  #25
Frozen Fiend
DOUBLE D
 
Frozen Fiend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Kalamazoo
Country: United States
Posts: 4,596
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12YearExtension View Post
It's a discussion forum, and we are discussing things that could happen if Nick isn't back, or even if he is.
I don't know, it just seems so outlandish to discuss something like this. This is how I see it, either he signs for ~5 million next year, or he retires, and I doubt he retires.

Frozen Fiend 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 02:35 AM.

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.