Toggle sidebar

Should Holland be replaced as GM? (and moved to front office)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Claypool

Registered User
Jan 12, 2009
13,670
4,352
ArGarBarGar said:
If Holland won't call him up as a regular, that is a bigger indictment of his ability than anything he could say. If Mantha comes up, has a good year in the NHL, you can use that to project future value on the player and make a deal for a contributing piece coming back. If you keep him in the AHL, what has he proven? Mantha was a highly touted prospect when drafted, and the more time he spends in the AHL at this point the worse the optics get no matter what strategy you are trying to employ with his development.
Click to expand...

Having Mantha play on the fourth line providing no offense won't help his case, either. He led the Griffins in playoff scoring. I'd say Holland's little experiment by swapping him for Andersson worked, at least for now. Mantha wasn't highly touted when he was drafted, either. That's why he went where he did. He was a long-term project from the start.

If Mantha comes up and has a good year in the NHL why the hell would they trade him?
 
Bench

Bench

3 is a good start
Aug 14, 2011
21,239
15,029
crease
ArGarBarGar said:
If Holland won't call him up as a regular, that is a bigger indictment of his ability than anything he could say. If Mantha comes up, has a good year in the NHL, you can use that to project future value on the player and make a deal for a contributing piece coming back. If you keep him in the AHL, what has he proven? Mantha was a highly touted prospect when drafted, and the more time he spends in the AHL at this point the worse the optics get no matter what strategy you are trying to employ with his development.
Click to expand...

He turns 22 in a few weeks. So, Mantha is going to be at least 23 before he even sniffs a roster spot. Even then... I dunno. It's pretty jammed up next year, too. And we're not even getting into AA, also 22.

Barring injuries, they'll be nice and overripe next year or maybe the year after at 24. We've seen that go down before.
 
ArGarBarGar

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,037
11,732
Claypool said:
Having Mantha play on the fourth line providing no offense won't help his case, either. He led the Griffins in playoff scoring. I'd say Holland's little experiment by swapping him for Andersson worked, at least for now. Mantha wasn't highly touted when he was drafted, either. That's why he went where he did. He was a long-term project from the start.

If Mantha comes up and has a good year in the NHL why the hell would they trade him?
Click to expand...

Just because he fell in the draft doesn't make him a long-term project.

If he comes up and has a good year, you would trade him because he is a valuable asset that can be moved for an asset that the team desperately needs. Players who contribute, especially young ones, give you more flexibility in the trade market.
 

Claypool

Registered User
Jan 12, 2009
13,670
4,352
Bench said:
He turns 22 in a few weeks. So, Mantha is going to be at least 23 before he even sniffs a roster spot. Even then... I dunno. It's pretty jammed up next year, too. And we're not even getting into AA, also 22.

Barring injuries, they'll be nice and overripe next year or maybe the year after at 24. We've seen that go down before.
Click to expand...

Tatar was 23 during his first full season in Detroit. He absolutely benefited from his time in the AHL. People now talk about him being traded in a proposed deal for Fowler. What do you think the value of a 23-25 year old 6'5 winger that could score 30 goals would be? Not sure why everyone is getting caught up on the age thing. It's in Detroit's best interest to continue developing Mantha. I don't think their development system is holding Mantha back, either. I think his time in Grand Rapid has made him a much better and more responsible pro player.

Frk It said:
Because we need defenseman, and he's not a defenseman.
Click to expand...

Unless you're getting a top 10 defenseman back (spoilers: you're not) then it's dumb to move a player of Mantha's size and ability for another bandaid.
 
ArGarBarGar

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,037
11,732
What else does he have to learn in the AHL? Do you not think he is NHL ready at this point?
 
Heaton

Heaton

Moderator
Feb 13, 2004
22,548
925
Auburn Hills
So, Holland can't draft or develop defensemen and he can't sign the defensemen we need and we can't trade for defensemen... so...
 

Claypool

Registered User
Jan 12, 2009
13,670
4,352
ArGarBarGar said:
What else does he have to learn in the AHL? Do you not think he is NHL ready at this point?
Click to expand...

Mantha has to play better than an unmotivated and lethargic Thomas Vanek in training camp to earn a roster spot. if he can't manage that do you think he's ready for top-6 minutes in the NHL?
 
Frk It

Frk It

Mo Seider Less Problems
Jul 27, 2010
36,244
14,753
Claypool said:
Unless you're getting a top 10 defenseman back (spoilers: you're not) then it's dumb to move a player of Mantha's size and ability for another bandaid.
Click to expand...

That's setting a unreasonably high price, basically the type of extreme demands that will never actually get a trade done.
 
ArGarBarGar

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,037
11,732
Claypool said:
Mantha has to play better than an unmotivated and lethargic Thomas Vanek in training camp to earn a roster spot. if he can't manage that do you think he's ready for top-6 minutes in the NHL?
Click to expand...

Is Vanek our worst winger going forward?

Why does Mantha need top-6 minutes from the get-go to be usable in the NHL? Whatever happened to putting kids on the 3rd and 4th lines to get reps in at the NHL level (which is way faster and more skilled than the top line of the AHL)? Where did Datsyuk start out his rookie season?
 
Frk It

Frk It

Mo Seider Less Problems
Jul 27, 2010
36,244
14,753
ArGarBarGar said:
Is Vanek our worst winger going forward?

Why does Mantha need top-6 minutes from the get-go to be usable in the NHL? Whatever happened to putting kids on the 3rd and 4th lines to get reps in at the NHL level (which is way faster and more skilled than the top line of the AHL)? Where did Datsyuk start out his rookie season?
Click to expand...

3rd line is the sweet spot for rookies, outside of exceptional ones like Larkin. In my opinion.

But our top 9 is already all decided, so it's a moot point.
 
Pavels Dog

Pavels Dog

Registered User
Feb 18, 2013
19,912
15,022
Sweden
Frk It said:
I don't think Mantha or Svechnikov have the trade value you think they do. 2 years ago, I think Mantha had legitimate trade value. When he was fresh off huge QMJHL numbers and we were talking about him making the team at 19. Now he has had 2 ok seasons in the AHL, and figures to start once again in Grand Rapids. Svech had a pretty disappointing WJC tournament and hasn't even played a game in the AHL yet.

I'd also bet a decent amount of money that both Tatar and Nyquist have more trade value than Mantha and Svechnikov, even after a down season.

Larkin is the only guy I think nets a top 2 defenseman, without significantly adding. Maybe some of these other guys you can massage something with a high draft pick and another prospect.

Mrazek is awesome, but goalie's don't net that type of return. They almost always get moved for draft picks, and not high end roster players.
Click to expand...
I think Mantha and Svech still have a lot of trade value, NHL GMs are not as fickle as fans who think a 7 game tournament where players like Mattias Tedenby look like superstars are all that matters. Nyquist and Tatar may have more trade value in the eyes of some teams, it probably comes down to need and valuing future or immediate help.

I'm in agreement with you though that Larkin is our only trade asset that could return a top 2 D. Best anyone else can bring, even in a solid package, is a guy like Fowler.
 
Frk It

Frk It

Mo Seider Less Problems
Jul 27, 2010
36,244
14,753
Pavels Dog said:
I think Mantha and Svech still have a lot of trade value, NHL GMs are not as fickle as fans who think a 7 game tournament where players like Mattias Tedenby look like superstars are all that matters. Nyquist and Tatar may have more trade value in the eyes of some teams, it probably comes down to need and valuing future or immediate help.

I'm in agreement with you though that Larkin is our only trade asset that could return a top 2 D. Best anyone else can bring, even in a solid package, is a guy like Fowler.
Click to expand...

I'd actually be more than happy with Fowler, but that's just me :dunno:
 

njx9

Registered User
Feb 1, 2016
2,161
340
ArGarBarGar said:
Why does Mantha need top-6 minutes from the get-go to be usable in the NHL? Whatever happened to putting kids on the 3rd and 4th lines to get reps in at the NHL level (which is way faster and more skilled than the top line of the AHL)? Where did Datsyuk start out his rookie season?
Click to expand...

Given the Blashill/Babcock 4th line use, I would rather have Mantha/AA in GR than getting minutes with Miller/Glendening. I don't think there's any value in that usage for a guy we want to eventually play in the top 6 (it's how you end up destroying Jurco's ability to do anything but jam up the puck in the corner for a few seconds). That said, it always all comes back to the Helm contract. That was the perfect spot to let Mantha/AA/Bert/Whoever-else-you-want battle in training camp/through the season to get playing time. It still wouldn't have needed to be >12 minutes a night, but it wouldn't have been 8-15 minutes of pure grinding and diving in front of pucks, either. I get the Miller/Ott/more-of-the-same complaints, but those are the spots we ought to want cheap, grindy vets in (unless the roster suddenly has the talent to field 4 scoring lines again, but I don't think we're even slightly close to that).
 
Bench

Bench

3 is a good start
Aug 14, 2011
21,239
15,029
crease
Vatican Roulette said:
Young cost controlled left winger who scores about 25-30 goals a year.

I don't see why Detroit adds, and Detroit takes on more salary for less controlled years.
Click to expand...

Because top pairing defenders like Fowler are more valuable than scoring wingers. Supply and demand. There are more of the latter than the former.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom