Zetterberg4Captain
Registered User
Woah...noAre you suggesting that Berggren is an elite perimeter playmaker? I will let you walk that back right now...
I'm not talking about "a" player just a style of player
Woah...noAre you suggesting that Berggren is an elite perimeter playmaker? I will let you walk that back right now...
I think you nailed it.
I still think you develop a two-way NHL game by playing IN the NHL. I certainly see Pelican's point too, though.
College doesn't fully prepare you for the workplace. You still need to develop once you're there. And playing AHL defense doesn't fully prepare you to play D in the NHL. Not all prospects are like Mo and Ray, and Berg needs NHL minutes to develop, mistakes or not.
That's entirely possible. The question I don't have an answer for is the level of desire for this specific player to refine his game. If Berggren is willing to work his tail off to round things out, then by all means, give him a shot to the extent that he earns one.Not all prospects are like Mo and Ray, and Berg needs NHL minutes to develop, mistakes or not.
That's entirely possible. The question I don't have an answer for is the level of desire for this specific player to refine his game. If Berggren is willing to work his tail off to round things out, then by all means, give him a shot to the extent that he earns one.
But that's different from what some others are pushing for: he can score in the AHL, so toss him in the top six, no matter his warts, and I'm sure he'll be fine.
That's entirely possible. The question I don't have an answer for is the level of desire for this specific player to refine his game. If Berggren is willing to work his tail off to round things out, then by all means, give him a shot to the extent that he earns one.
But that's different from what some others are pushing for: he can score in the AHL, so toss him in the top six, no matter his warts, and I'm sure he'll be fine.
He just doesn't help you when he doesn't have the puck. He does next to nothing to help you get it back if you don't have it. I am not asking him to be a "200 ft player." I am asking that he not be a wallflower when the Wings don't have the puck.Very true. Berg's lack of minutes probably reflects his effort/work ethic more than his abilities.
Honestly sounds like you have a vendetta against him. He's improved a lot in his off-puck play. Doesn't mean there's not areas of weakness still but I really question why he's being held to a standard that for example Daniel Sprong seems to be exempt from. Kane too, but I understand that a powerplay assist once per game makes it impossible to criticize his complete lack of any defensive effort for the other 59 minutes per game.He just doesn't help you when he doesn't have the puck. He does next to nothing to help you get it back if you don't have it. I am not asking him to be a "200 ft player." I am asking that he not be a wallflower when the Wings don't have the puck.
Sprong should be let go. He was a plug that filled a spot for a season and has zero chance of being in the long term plans.Doesn't mean there's not areas of weakness still but I really question why he's being held to a standard that for example Daniel Sprong seems to be exempt from. Kane too, but I understand that a powerplay assist once per game makes it impossible to criticize his complete lack of any defensive effort for the other 59 minutes per game.
Honestly sounds like you have a vendetta against him. He's improved a lot in his off-puck play. Doesn't mean there's not areas of weakness still but I really question why he's being held to a standard that for example Daniel Sprong seems to be exempt from. Kane too, but I understand that a powerplay assist once per game makes it impossible to criticize his complete lack of any defensive effort for the other 59 minutes per game.
I mean I couldn't imagine seeing Sprong or Kane ever making even one play like this:
Honestly sounds like you have a vendetta against him. He's improved a lot in his off-puck play. Doesn't mean there's not areas of weakness still but I really question why he's being held to a standard that for example Daniel Sprong seems to be exempt from. Kane too, but I understand that a powerplay assist once per game makes it impossible to criticize his complete lack of any defensive effort for the other 59 minutes per game.
I mean I couldn't imagine seeing Sprong or Kane ever making even one play like this:
I am a big fan of buying low on John Gibson. He actually bridges the gap quite well to Cossa in my opinion. He has three years left and we might get some salary reduction and a willingness to take on Husso. Cossa should get his feet wet in a few games next year, backup the year after then go into a 1A & 1B scenario in Gibson’s final season.Cossa is the starter the season after this one and absolutely he'll play a Lyon type role in 24-25. He's not as far away as you think.
And none of those goalies hold first round (15th OA) value, TDL or now or ever. Cory Schneider as an early 20s superstud prospect got 9OA (Bo Horvat). Gibson in his 30s, Ullmark in his 30s, and Markstrom in his 30s clearly do not.
I am a big fan of buying low on John Gibson. He actually bridges the gap quite well to Cossa in my opinion. He has three years left and we might get some salary reduction and a willingness to take on Husso. Cossa should get his feet wet in a few games next year, backup the year after then go into a 1A & 1B scenario in Gibson’s final season.
The thing I haven't seen addressed is, if the Wings move the pick for an established player with an established player salary, how do they fit that in? Things are going to be tight as it is.
Regardless of what else we do at least two guys making $3M+ need to be shipped out. With picks or whatever if need be.The thing I haven't seen addressed is, if the Wings move the pick for an established player with an established player salary, how do they fit that in? Things are going to be tight as it is.