HFBoards

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

Hudler released from Dynamo contract

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-27-2010, 07:24 PM
  #151
jaster
glendeningforcaptain
 
jaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 6,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holliday View Post
I'm going to go out on a limb and say Holland understands "Bettman's new world" more than anyone here will ever know.
Wait. You mean to tell me that fans on a message board giving strategic advice to Holland regarding how to run an NHL team might be misplaced? Color me shocked

jaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 07:35 PM
  #152
zackisonfire*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,635
vCash: 500
Just curious how some of you would feel about this.

If one of Mursak, Tatar, or Ritola where to play lights out in training camp and into the preseason, would you encourage them playing in the top-6 next season?

By the same token, would it be a good option for Detroit's management to take a calculated risk on one of the prospects because of their friendly cap hit? Even if they don't blow everyone away?

Just a couple questions I've been mulling over for the past few days.

zackisonfire* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 07:59 PM
  #153
Anchor Town
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by humdrum View Post
Just curious how some of you would feel about this.

If one of Mursak, Tatar, or Ritola where to play lights out in training camp and into the preseason, would you encourage them playing in the top-6 next season?

By the same token, would it be a good option for Detroit's management to take a calculated risk on one of the prospects because of their friendly cap hit? Even if they don't blow everyone away?

Just a couple questions I've been mulling over for the past few days.
who would be the odd one out then?

Anchor Town is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 09:30 PM
  #154
Booyah!
Registered User
 
Booyah!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,191
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaster View Post
Because a 5-6-7 of Ericsson, Kindl, and Meech is not feasible, so Lilja, or someone like him, is a necessity. Defensive depth is about a million times more valuable than unused cap space. As for Hudler, he's coming back whether people like it or not, and it will more than likely push Bertuzzi out, unless a significant trade is on the horizon or a surprising retirement occurs.
Why so anxious to get rid of Bertuzzi? The guy is finally finding his place in front of the net, he's big, has good hands and well liked if the Wings can get his skill set and size for 1.5-1.7mio, why would they not do it? Especially when you have no other size. Get rid of Maltby, Williams and May and there you go, more than enough salary to cover him

Booyah! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 11:06 PM
  #155
jaster
glendeningforcaptain
 
jaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 6,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booyah! View Post
Why so anxious to get rid of Bertuzzi? The guy is finally finding his place in front of the net, he's big, has good hands and well liked if the Wings can get his skill set and size for 1.5-1.7mio, why would they not do it? Especially when you have no other size. Get rid of Maltby, Williams and May and there you go, more than enough salary to cover him
I'm actually not anxious to get rid of Bertuzzi. Under different circumstances, I wouldn't mind having him back. But even with Maltby, Williams, and May off the roster (which I project all three to be), I still don't see enough room for Bertuzzi. They need to make space for Hudler's contract, and they need the cap space from somewhere.

jaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 03:26 AM
  #156
garry1221
Registered User
 
garry1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Walled Lake, Mi
Posts: 2,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to garry1221
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaster View Post
I'm actually not anxious to get rid of Bertuzzi. Under different circumstances, I wouldn't mind having him back. But even with Maltby, Williams, and May off the roster (which I project all three to be), I still don't see enough room for Bertuzzi. They need to make space for Hudler's contract, and they need the cap space from somewhere.
Again, I don't see the NEED to make room for Hudler. After he left, the front office prepared for two years without Hudler. That, IMO is still what we should do. If it weren't for Dynamo folding, Hudler would still be there and none of this conversation would have taken place. Why should the wings bow down to Hudler's every whim, when he flew to greener pastures. Hudler may bring a scoring punch to the bottom six, but frankly, our bottom six is holding it's own and producing pretty damn well for us right now. I'm not going to automatically pencil him in to the top six because I can't see where he'd fit and produce on a regular basis.

garry1221 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 07:15 AM
  #157
HockeyinHD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaster View Post
For the third time, I'm talking about between now and the start of the season. There is no hockey to be played for Hudler in that time frame, so all we have to go on is what's already happened. What Holland has said and done. And unless you are a crazy conspiracy theorist, or believe Holland is just seething over the Hudler situation and can't wait to angrily trade him out of spite, you should know that the Wings will start the season with Hudler. Do you disagree? It's not a difficult concept.
Hey, you're the guy who thinks making a statement filled with certainty is evidence of bias, Jaster. Argue that over with yourself and get back to me when each of you have come to a conclusion.

Quote:
Once the season starts, a million different things could happen, and as far as I know, no one knows what those things will be. But you seem to know well enough to conclude that Hudler will "probably" be shopped 2 months into the season. I'm just trying to figure out what you know that everyone else doesn't.
Conclude that 'probably'?

Quote:
Obviously speculation, yes, duh. But that's it? That's all your basing it on? My oh my, HiHD, that's not much substance. And only 2 months into the season? Are you considering Holland's track record of trading, or trying to trade, players he's excited about, 2 months into a season? I know I did. I'm still looking for more substance than bias is all.
Of course that's it, Jaster. Were you expecting a graph? Maybe a chart of derivative trading?

Quote:
That's not what I'm saying about Hudler. I'm saying I don't think his current salary is an overpayment. You are saying it is. My original point in this part of the discussion was that I don't disagree with your conclusion, I disagree with your premise.
And your disagreement is as much based on your own 'bias' as mine is by mine.

The difference is I'm not going to pretend I'm basing my position on some kind of concrete surety, while you apparently are... all the while castigating me for being 'biased'.



Yep, it's a Hudler thread all right.

Quote:
Says you. If you think Babcock, or NHL coaches in general, simply rank their forwards 1-12 and then divide the top-6 and bottom-6, I'd have to disagree. It's not about making the third line better. In many cases, it's about maximum value, and when deciding which of Bertuzzi and Cleary to play in the top-6 and which to play on the 3rd line, Bert in the top-6 and Cleary on the 3rd line maximizes value.
Again, that's just sophistry. Babcock is going to put the guy he thinks makes the second line better there, and then whoever is left goes to the third line, or lower.

He is not going to say 'well, I could have Cleary on the second line and he'd be better there than Bertuzzi, but since Cleary would also be better than Bertuzzi on the third line, and 'more betterer' there, I'll put him there instead'.

Silliness.

Quote:
So then why is Cleary/Hudler such a huge dropoff from Bertuzzi?
They aren't. Their salary-production value is.

Quote:
Why are we suddenly in trouble, in the scenario where one of Hudler or Cleary has to take Bertuzzi's minutes in the top-6? Why such worry and hand-wringing and appeals to a sky fairy?


Any more hyperbole you'd like to throw out there? Some more distortions and exaggerations of my opinion? No?

I think it has the potential to become a serious concern, jaster. Make of that what you will.

Quote:
Nope. We're talking about the incarnation of Hudler and Cleary that will exist in the top-6 next season. It's an increase in salary, but it's not 400%.
Douple nope. We're talking about what the 2010-11 Cleary/Hudler will be compared to what the 2010 Bert was. In 2011 Hudler and Cleary will account for 5.675 mil of cap space and Bert this year accounted for 1.5, which is a 378% bump. Nearly 400%.

That's why I'm a bit worried. I don't think Cleary/Hudler will be 378% more effective than Bertuzzi was, so to the degree that they aren't 378% more effective, Detroit's stuck with a less efficient roster, cap-wise.

Quote:
Only one of them would take the top-6 spot, so it's more like a 90% increase.
That's the problem. Almost regardless of how it shakes out, Detroit's going to have a guy making 2.8 or more playing on the third line. Not a big fan of that.

HockeyinHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 11:03 PM
  #158
jaster
glendeningforcaptain
 
jaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 6,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyinHD View Post
Hey, you're the guy who thinks making a statement filled with certainty is evidence of bias, Jaster. Argue that over with yourself and get back to me when each of you have come to a conclusion.
Ok, so you don't see the difference between the off-season and the season. Good to know for the future


Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyinHD View Post
Conclude that 'probably'?
You seem to think that is some kind of contradiction. It is not. You concluded that a certain thing would probably happen. Another fairly simple concept.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyinHD View Post
Of course that's it, Jaster. Were you expecting a graph? Maybe a chart of derivative trading?
Ok, so there it is. Heavily lacking in substance. Established bias it is.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyinHD View Post
And your disagreement is as much based on your own 'bias' as mine is by mine.

The difference is I'm not going to pretend I'm basing my position on some kind of concrete surety, while you apparently are... all the while castigating me for being 'biased'.



Yep, it's a Hudler thread all right.
Haha, you are so very lost in this conversation I'm saying:

1. Hudler is probably worth his contract, if he produces what I expect him to produce. A 60+ point player who boosts your PP is worth $2.875M in the current market. And for the record, I don't even like the type of player Hudler is, but I recognize that a few specialists (both offensive and defensive) on the team can be of much benefit.

2. Hudler will not be shopped or traded before the season begins. All relevant factors regarding this aspect of the conversation are in. We know what Holland and Hudler have said and done. I'll ask again, do you disagree? Do you think there's a chance Holland trades Hudler before the season begins? Any chance at all?

3. After the season begins, I don't know what will happen, but if I had to guess, I'd say Hudler still wouldn't be shopped or traded two months into the season. Just a guess.

You've said:

1. 'Hudler is overpaid,' which, fine, it's a simple disagreement. We place a different amount of value on different aspects of an NHL player. Pretty standard on a hockey forum.

2. 'Hudler will probably be shopped or traded two months into the season.' Probably, as in "insofar as seems reasonably true, factual, or to be expected; without much doubt." You're saying it's very likely that Hudler will be shopped. Two months into the season. You're support for this is that Hudler's success in the top-6 has not been great, while seemingly ignoring the fact that Holland has rarely, if ever, traded a player two months into a season. Especially one he has been trying to acquire and is excited to get back. I pressed you for any other reasoning you might have used, but that's it; 'Hudler hasn't been great in the top-6' You play it down as merely "speculation," but maybe you should think about changing your wording.


The difference is not the silliness you suggested above, the difference is that you have a position that appears based mostly on established bias and I do not. Period.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyinHD View Post
Again, that's just sophistry. Babcock is going to put the guy he thinks makes the second line better there, and then whoever is left goes to the third line, or lower.

He is not going to say 'well, I could have Cleary on the second line and he'd be better there than Bertuzzi, but since Cleary would also be better than Bertuzzi on the third line, and 'more betterer' there, I'll put him there instead'.

Silliness.
Again, says you. Bertuzzi vs. Cleary in the top-6 is pretty even. Bertuzzi might be better there, but it's not by much. Again, their production shows that. But if they are fairly even in that role, and Cleary is a far more valuable 3rd-liner than Bertuzzi is, then the decision is a no-brainer. And I think that is more the case, maximizing value, than Bertuzzi being greater than Cleary. I don't think Cleary's line versatility and Bertuzzi being worthless in the bottom-6 is an irrelevant factor. I believe it comes into play.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyinHD View Post
Any more hyperbole you'd like to throw out there? Some more distortions and exaggerations of my opinion? No?

I think it has the potential to become a serious concern, jaster. Make of that what you will.


There's been no hyperbole, distortions, or exaggerations. You've made a number of statements about Hudler being a problem that can be viewed as worry or hand-wringing, and capped one of them off with, 'god help us.' Just right now, you use "serious concern." It's all the same to me. They're all synonymous. Sorry you like some of those words and not others.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyinHD View Post
Douple nope. We're talking about what the 2010-11 Cleary/Hudler will be compared to what the 2010 Bert was. In 2011 Hudler and Cleary will account for 5.675 mil of cap space and Bert this year accounted for 1.5, which is a 378% bump. Nearly 400%.

That's why I'm a bit worried. I don't think Cleary/Hudler will be 378% more effective than Bertuzzi was, so to the degree that they aren't 378% more effective, Detroit's stuck with a less efficient roster, cap-wise.
Triple nope. What we're talking about is apparently not the same. I'm talking about how well Hudler and Cleary can fill Bertuzzi's top-6 role, should he not come back.

If you want to compare Hudler+Cleary to Bertuzzi, irrespective of who gets what role, um, alright, but it doesn't really hold any meaning. And making up numbers like 400% using a bogus comparison to make things look more lopsided than they are is hyperbole, Mr. Hyperbole Police (the "bump," or increase, is not 378%; it's 278% ((5.675-1.5)/1.5 = 2.78)). If we're going to compare next year's Hudler and Cleary to anything, assuming one would be in the top-6 and one on the 3rd line (and Bert gone), it should be to this year's Bertuzzi and Cleary. A 2nd and 3rd line player; $4.3M cap hit; 146 games, 33 goals, 45 assists, 78 points. Next year, Hudler and Cleary will have a hit of $5.675M, a $1.375M, or 32%, increase. Will they exceed the Bertuzzi/Cleary production from this year? I think so. They did last season (by 4 goals, 15 assists, and 19 points). And part of that extra $1.375M the Wings are spending is to replace a declining 35-year old with a 26-year old with a future.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyinHD View Post
That's the problem. Almost regardless of how it shakes out, Detroit's going to have a guy making 2.8 or more playing on the third line. Not a big fan of that.
And, as I said earlier, this is where we fundamentally disagree. I don't have a problem with a $2.8M player on the 3rd line; you wring your hands over it To each their own. If the cap goes up to $57-58M next year and the Wings carry 22 players and spend up to near the ceiling, the average player cap hit will be about $2.6M. To me, Hudler is better than average and, as of now, worth his cap hit. Cleary maybe not so much, but he's his own case. If it comes down to Hudler vs. Bertuzzi, I wouldn't want to shut the door on Hudler simply because Cleary is already on the team and one of them will have to take their 2.8 hit to the 3rd line.

jaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2010, 08:40 AM
  #159
PocketGnome
Registered User
 
PocketGnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ann Arbor Michigan
Country: United States
Posts: 1,143
vCash: 500
Looks like it might become "official" today.

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index....red_win_1.html

PocketGnome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2010, 09:23 AM
  #160
HockeyinHD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaster View Post
Ok, so you don't see the difference between the off-season and the season. Good to know for the future
Now you're just being silly. I appreciate silly, but still.

Quote:
You seem to think that is some kind of contradiction. It is not. You concluded that a certain thing would probably happen. Another fairly simple concept.


You trying to rationalize that just doesn't get old.

Quote:
Ok, so there it is. Heavily lacking in substance. Established bias it is.
As is your position. I am fine admitting to it, while you seem to think you are wrapped in a cocoon of 'settled science'.

Quote:
1. Hudler is probably worth his contract, if he produces what I expect him to produce.
...and yet you dislike Bertuzzi strongly, who for barely half of the price put up 18 and 26.

Quote:
A 60+ point player who boosts your PP is worth $2.875M in the current market. And for the record, I don't even like the type of player Hudler is, but I recognize that a few specialists (both offensive and defensive) on the team can be of much benefit.
Hudler's never produced 60 points in his career. The only season he got close (when he had 57) was on a loaded top to bottom club. This year even Datsyuk and Zetternerg only had 70.

I mean, this argument can be applied to Homer about as evenly as you are trying to apply it to Hudler.

Quote:
2. Hudler will not be shopped or traded before the season begins. All relevant factors regarding this aspect of the conversation are in. We know what Holland and Hudler have said and done. I'll ask again, do you disagree? Do you think there's a chance Holland trades Hudler before the season begins? Any chance at all?
Since you've forgotten, here is my comment on this topic made rather a while ago in this very thread:

"Right now, day 1? You're right.
Later, around day 200 or so? Probably less right, approaching totally wrong."

From that simple statement you've derived any number of (while amusing) wholly ridiculous assertions.

Like...

Quote:
2. 'Hudler will probably be shopped or traded two months into the season.' Probably, as in "insofar as seems reasonably true, factual, or to be expected; without much doubt." You're saying it's very likely that Hudler will be shopped. Two months into the season.
'Very likely'?

In an attempt to aid you, since apparently left to your own devices you'll just make things up, I think Detroit is unlikely to trade Hudler now, but they will be more likely to trade him later, and the amount they are likely to move him will increase gradually over time, reaching a point at which they will really want to trade him.

Quote:
You're support for this is that Hudler's success in the top-6 has not been great, while seemingly ignoring the fact that Holland has rarely, if ever, traded a player two months into a season.


I say '200 days or so' and you've now locked yourself into a rigid interpretation of that as 200 days with no modifier in an attempt to... I don't know what, really.

Quote:
The difference is not the silliness you suggested above, the difference is that you have a position that appears based mostly on established bias and I do not. Period.
No, your position is both based on your own bias regarding Hudler (if my position qualifies as bias, so does yours), as well as what appears to be a blithe willingness to misrepresent what I've said.

Quote:
Again, says you.
Well, obviously.

Quote:
Bertuzzi vs. Cleary in the top-6 is pretty even. Bertuzzi might be better there, but it's not by much. Again, their production shows that. But if they are fairly even in that role, and Cleary is a far more valuable 3rd-liner than Bertuzzi is, then the decision is a no-brainer. And I think that is more the case, maximizing value, than Bertuzzi being greater than Cleary. I don't think Cleary's line versatility and Bertuzzi being worthless in the bottom-6 is an irrelevant factor. I believe it comes into play.
Says you.

The basic question is this: Do you believe Mike Babcock would not put the best option he has in the top 6? I think he will put the best top 6 together than he can, and then work out the bottom 6 as possible. If you disagree, you disagree.

Quote:
There's been no hyperbole, distortions, or exaggerations. You've made a number of statements about Hudler being a problem that can be viewed as worry or hand-wringing, and capped one of them off with, 'god help us.' Just right now, you use "serious concern." It's all the same to me. They're all synonymous. Sorry you like some of those words and not others.
You don't have to apologize. I don't tend to take the exaggerations and distortions people apply to arguments on messageboards very seriously.

Quote:
Triple nope. What we're talking about is apparently not the same. I'm talking about how well Hudler and Cleary can fill Bertuzzi's top-6 role, should he not come back.
Quadruple nope.

You: "So then why is Cleary/Hudler such a huge dropoff from Bertuzzi? Why are we suddenly in trouble, in the scenario where one of Hudler or Cleary has to take Bertuzzi's minutes in the top-6?'

Cleary and Hudler are a potentially significant dropoff from Bertuzzi because right now Bertuzzi made 1.5 mil, and those two guys will be making 5.675 mil combined, and at least 2.8 mil individually. Dropoff. A declination from a previous point to a current or future point. Bertuzzi previously, Cleary/Hudler in the future. So, I doubt that they would individually be nearly 90% more 'effective' than Bertuzzi was in 2010. Looking strictly at points, in order to be 90% more effective than Bertuzzi, the Cleary/Hudler top 6 replacement duo would have to put up 34 goals and 49 assists in that single slot.

That's why I see a potential dropoff between what the Wings had in that spot in 2010 vs what they may have in that spot in 2011.

We can't compare them to 2011 Bertuzzi because we don't know a) if he'll be back or b) what he would cost if he stays or c) if he'll be any better or worse then.

Now, if Bert is re-signed for 2 mil, or 2.5 mil, or whatever? Obviously we're talking about a different thing. We're talking about what Bert might do in 2011 and what that costs vs what Cleary or Hudler might do in the same role, and what it costs.

Honestly, depending on what he signs for I think even re-upping Bert himself has dropoff potential, since I doubt he will a) sign for less than he made in 2010 or b) produce much more than he did in 2010.

Quote:
If we're going to compare next year's Hudler and Cleary to anything, assuming one would be in the top-6 and one on the 3rd line (and Bert gone), it should be to this year's Bertuzzi and Cleary.
... and you're already flawed, because Cleary's already an overpaid player. Comparing an overpaid player in 2010 with the same overpaid player in 2011 isn't terribly intelligent, considering my point here is that since Detroit already has an overpaid player in Cleary, adding another potentially overpaid player in Hudler becomes a more significantly negative event.

Quote:
And, as I said earlier, this is where we fundamentally disagree. I don't have a problem with a $2.8M player on the 3rd line; you wring your hands over it To each their own.


I think it's an issue that could be a serious concern. Apply your special sauce to that statement as you see fit.

Quote:
If the cap goes up to $57-58M next year and the Wings carry 22 players and spend up to near the ceiling, the average player cap hit will be about $2.6M. To me, Hudler is better than average and, as of now, worth his cap hit. Cleary maybe not so much, but he's his own case. If it comes down to Hudler vs. Bertuzzi, I wouldn't want to shut the door on Hudler simply because Cleary is already on the team and one of them will have to take their 2.8 hit to the 3rd line.
So, which would you rather have: 5.675 mil in cap space heading into the 2010-11 UFA signing period, or Cleary and Hudler?

That's the larger part of the debate. It's rarely just 'one guy or the other guy', because there are so many moving parts. Sure, bringing Hudler and his salary onto the team all by itself isn't a huge deal... but it's not all by itself. The team already has Cleary's deal, they already have a bunch of other deals, and how those other deals intermingle will directly impact who they try and sign and what they are able to offer.

HockeyinHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2010, 12:18 PM
  #161
PocketGnome
Registered User
 
PocketGnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ann Arbor Michigan
Country: United States
Posts: 1,143
vCash: 500
http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index....nfirms_fo.html

It's confirmed.

PocketGnome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2010, 12:46 PM
  #162
MrSandMan*
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,432
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketGnome View Post
Can he play game 2?

Why not?

F*king refs!

MrSandMan* 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 09:16 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.