Speculation: Is it time for Holland to step down?

[dtones520]

A deal that is an absolute bargain over the majority of the contract, is worth it. Ages 29-37 are likely to not be an issue at all. Ages 38, 39 may be a concern... But the cap will go up, and right now we are paying 4.25 million to Quincey who sucks. Ehrhoff probably won't even regress to a point where he is worse than what Quincey is now, and if he does we could have just LTIR'd him. Paying 4.0 million to Ehrhoff in 2021 probably isn't even as dumb as paying more money to Quincey with a lower cap. And you get 7-8 years of really good play to make up for it, in a window where we still have D + Z.



Where did I say that?



Their GM made it clear they only want guys who are onboard, I can understand why it would make sense for both sides to go different ways.



Recapture penalty



They used a compliance buyout, they are on the hook for nothing.



Signing Ehrhoff in 2011 would not have prevented us being able to sign Suter at all. In any way. We would have had plenty of cap space to have both. Having both of them would make the biggest weakness of this team right now a big strength.

You have been very vocal about not signing Cleary, Bertuzzi, Samuelsson, etc to contracts, but you were fine giving a deal into his 40s to Ehrhoff. I don't really see the difference.

And if I'm not mistaken if you use a compliance buyout you are on the hook for 2/3 of the remaining contract. Is that not correct?

I never said it would have prevented us from signing Suter. I said that management likely didn't want to have two 10+ year contracts on defensemen in two offseasons.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

You have been very vocal about not signing Cleary, Bertuzzi, Samuelsson, etc to contracts, but you were fine giving a deal into his 40s to Ehrhoff. I don't really see the difference.

And if I'm not mistaken if you use a compliance buyout you are on the hook for 2/3 of the remaining contract. Is that not correct?

I never said it would have prevented us from signing Suter. I said that management likely didn't want to have two 10+ year contracts on defensemen in two offseasons.

Ehrhoff is a much better player.

Suter was going to be offered that regardless of what was going on, really it is unfortunate Parise got to him, that was all playing out perfectly and likely would have trimmed most of the contracts we want out. Similar to how Rafalski was worth chasing and figuring out things later and harder decisions were made.

 

[Frk It]

You have been very vocal about not signing Cleary, Bertuzzi, Samuelsson, etc to contracts, but you were fine giving a deal into his 40s to Ehrhoff. I don't really see the difference.

It's not the same thing at all, and it would have not been a deal "into his 40s". His contract would have run out at age 38/39. Save the hyperbole.

It's night and day difference.

One is giving a contract to a top free agent to preserve an incredibly cost-effective cap hit, that extends him into the late 30's. And the other is blind loyalty extending contracts to players already in their late 30's who just proved to you they sucked last year.

It's not the same thing at all.

And if I'm not mistaken if you use a compliance buyout you are on the hook for 2/3 of the remaining contract. Is that not correct?

I'm also not 100%, but if I'm not mistaken the players get paid a partial salary, but they have no cap hit after that moving forward.

I said that management likely didn't want to have two 10+ year contracts on defensemen in two offseasons.

Well, maybe they shouldn't have considered Suter a "sure thing" a full year in advance and not looked at any free agents. That was awfully premature.

 

[Run the Jewels]

Its not a black and white red wings or Oilers way. The wings way worked amazing pre cap ear where we could outspend other teams by tens of millions, post cap we had 3 top 10 players in the league and the best Dman. We dont have the $$$ or player advantage anymore

Actually Mike Babcock was on record as being "pissed off" about the Burns trade so yeah, the only reason for him to be PO'd would be if he inquired about Holland's offer to get Burns and found out Holland had no idea Burns was on the market.

Sorry, but there's all sorts of smoke that suggests Holland is reactive and wasn't actively working to find a replacement for Lidstrom and Rafalski. Missing out on one trade or UFA is understandable, but when you've fanned year after year and guys like Bouwmeester are being acquired for so little going back the other way it tells you all you really need to know.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

Harnessed, you did see what offer Feaster turned down from Holland, right?

How is that evidence of him being reactive?

 

[Crymson]

Harnessed, you did see what offer Feaster turned down from Holland, right?

How is that evidence of him being reactive?

It's evidence of him being a damned fool. He should send Feaster a thank-you card.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

It's evidence of him being a damned fool. He should send Feaster a thank-you card.

I suppose if you want to argue one thing, then fine. But I'm arguing something else.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

I am curious how that changed. Bobby Mac and Pierre had that as Sheahan, Jurco and a 2nd where it stayed for the better part of a year. Then all of a sudden changed with no parties involved really speaking on it. I remain a little dubious that Nyquist and Tatar were offered together, talked about sure, but a firm offer?

The first one I believe was probably flat out offered and I would have been incredibly upset, especially since we have no Pietrangelo to prop up JayBo. The second one.... Yeah about that, I have doubts that was firmly offered, just my opinion.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

I am curious how that changed. Bobby Mac and Pierre had that as Sheahan, Jurco and a 2nd where it stayed for the better part of a year. Then all of a sudden changed with no parties involved really speaking on it. I remain a little dubious that Nyquist and Tatar were offered together, talked about sure, but a firm offer?

The first one I believe was probably flat out offered and I would have been incredibly upset, especially since we have no Pietrangelo to prop up JayBo. The second one.... Yeah about that, I have doubts that was firmly offered, just my opinion.

Not to derail the topic, but really? JayBo by himself is a damn fine defenseman.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Not to derail the topic, but really? JayBo by himself is a damn fine defenseman.

He is a fine D-man, but he has dropped into the perfect partnership. We have nobody approaching that here, not only that but JayBo and Kronwall both have to play on the left. The JayBo we get is maybe the guy in Florida that was very good, but far from elite. His stock has really rebounded, but a huge part of that is Petro. Who in my opinion is in the Top 5 D-man conversation. We don't have that to offer him here. He gets some of his mistakes erased, he went to a very physical team. Everything about that trade was a perfect fit for JayBo and good for him after the decade plus of awful teams. He has quickly gone from overrated to underrated right back to overrated. People can never seem to quite diagnose him.

 

[Winger98]

I am curious how that changed. Bobby Mac and Pierre had that as Sheahan, Jurco and a 2nd where it stayed for the better part of a year. Then all of a sudden changed with no parties involved really speaking on it. I remain a little dubious that Nyquist and Tatar were offered together, talked about sure, but a firm offer?

The first one I believe was probably flat out offered and I would have been incredibly upset, especially since we have no Pietrangelo to prop up JayBo. The second one.... Yeah about that, I have doubts that was firmly offered, just my opinion.

Bobby Mac's quote about the involvement of Tatar/Nyquist was a bit more open about who was supposed to be coming back. The quote was something like, "...for JayBo or some other player."

My bet is that for those two we started asking for JayBo+ or we targeted Giordano.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Bobby Mac's quote about the involvement of Tatar/Nyquist was a bit more open about who was supposed to be coming back. The quote was something like, "...for JayBo or some other player."

My bet is that for those two we started asking for JayBo+ or we targeted Giordano.

That would make a lot more sense, I just don't think it got near as far as the other offers. It made for fun Feaster bashing on the main board and it sounds bad given the way they came on but what were they actually targeting as you said it seems far from just 1 thing in my opinion.

It does speak though to how much guys values can change positively and negatively. My guess is we talked about lots of players over the years that would be startling. Jarnkrok was fairly protected and then suddenly banished, just like our own rankings this is more fluid than most give it credit for. Though in my opinion we have never heard a low valuation on Nyquist so his involvement just to me meant something more was at play and that probably fell through quickly. Calgary was pretty into selling each off individually, that likely didn't get far.

 

[dtones520]

Ehrhoff is a much better player.

Suter was going to be offered that regardless of what was going on, really it is unfortunate Parise got to him, that was all playing out perfectly and likely would have trimmed most of the contracts we want out. Similar to how Rafalski was worth chasing and figuring out things later and harder decisions were made.

Bertuzzi was a very, very good player at Ehrhoffs age, Samuelsson was a 40-50 point guy and a 30 goal scorer at his age and Cleary was a 20-20 guy at his age. What happened? They all got old and their skills diminished. Let's not let the last years of their career diminish what they were 7-10 years ago. So, I ask again, why is it wrong to sign veterans that were good once to short term, low money deals but okay to sign a good player to a 10 year deal that will likely span into the down years of his career? Both situations take spots away from kids who are up and coming, which is the big complaint with signing vets. So, please, explain the difference.

 

[dtones520]

It's not the same thing at all, and it would have not been a deal "into his 40s". His contract would have run out at age 38/39. Save the hyperbole.

It's night and day difference.

One is giving a contract to a top free agent to preserve an incredibly cost-effective cap hit, that extends him into the late 30's. And the other is blind loyalty extending contracts to players already in their late 30's who just proved to you they sucked last year.

It's not the same thing at all.



I'm also not 100%, but if I'm not mistaken the players get paid a partial salary, but they have no cap hit after that moving forward.



Well, maybe they shouldn't have considered Suter a "sure thing" a full year in advance and not looked at any free agents. That was awfully premature.

Sorry, I thought Ehrhoff was a bit older than he is. But my point still remains. Dan Cleary is 35, Todd Bertuzzi is 39, Mikael Samuelsson is 37. So signing a 28 year old guy to a 10 year deal is not the same as resigning those guys at the end of their careers out of loyalty and an overvalue of veterans, but it is gambling that a guy is going to be worth a contract 10 years after he signs it. And most players start declining at the age of 35. At least with signing guys to short term deals at the end of their career you can choose to not resign them after their skills decline enough to not warrant a contract, in Ehrhoffs case we would have had no options but to waive him or hope he retires or get lucky and have him be the rare guy who is still playing at a high level in his late 30s.

I agree with you, they shouldn't have looked at Suter as a sure thing, I don't even know if they did. All I know is that they didn't offer Ehrhoff a 10 year deal and Buffalo did, and I'm sure that Holland and co have their reasons, no sense in continuing to argue over something that didn't happen 3 years ago, we obviously disagree on the subject.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

He is a fine D-man, but he has dropped into the perfect partnership. We have nobody approaching that here, not only that but JayBo and Kronwall both have to play on the left. The JayBo we get is maybe the guy in Florida that was very good, but far from elite. His stock has really rebounded, but a huge part of that is Petro. Who in my opinion is in the Top 5 D-man conversation. We don't have that to offer him here. He gets some of his mistakes erased, he went to a very physical team. Everything about that trade was a perfect fit for JayBo and good for him after the decade plus of awful teams. He has quickly gone from overrated to underrated right back to overrated. People can never seem to quite diagnose him.

I think you underestimate Kronwall's ability, personally. No, he is no Petro, but he is a great top pairing defenseman for us. We don't need someone much better than Kronwall, but just a defenseman at a comparable level to Kronwall to help eat minutes and give us more options in terms of pairings.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

I think you underestimate Kronwall's ability, personally. No, he is no Petro, but he is a great top pairing defenseman for us. We don't need someone much better than Kronwall, but just a defenseman at a comparable level to Kronwall to help eat minutes and give us more options in terms of pairings.

Yes but they couldn't be paired together is a big part of the hiccup there. If there is one thing we can comfortably say about JayBo is that he rarely if ever elevated his D-partners game.

Yes it would be an interesting one-two punch in terms of D-pairings but at what cost? I think the price was too high for what he is and I don't think the player on the Blues is anywhere near what we are seeing. Petro made Cola look pretty good when he wasn't injured in St. Louis.

I think Kronwall is better than JayBo, not underestimating him and Kronwall does make his partners better consistently. Still those two are flat out LDs, that part was a huge stumbling block in terms of that deal, especially with shipping some of our brightest assets.

On the other topic Ehrhoff plays a game that will likely age quite well, I agree with Frk it there, but not everything is as easy as give me this in real life, it just doesn't work that way. They were going to throw big money at Suter regardless, I am not sure that impacted going up to that, he was likely tabbed as special and rightfully so.

 

[InjuredChoker]

Bobby Mac's quote about the involvement of Tatar/Nyquist was a bit more open about who was supposed to be coming back. The quote was something like, "...for JayBo or some other player."

My bet is that for those two we started asking for JayBo+ or we targeted Giordano.

the host said he heard nyquist + tatar for iggy was the offer.

bobby mac: i'd have to double-check but i didn't think it was the iginla trade it was for jaybo or something else.

 

[PullHard]

Jay Bo has never really "succeeded" carrying a pairing in the NHL. He had no help in Florida and was young for most of his stay there, so I can't really knock him for trying. But it was the same in Calgary who were deeper on the blueline. Now that he can be a #2 he looks excellent. I donno how our D pairings would've looked with him on the Wings, and I'm sure it would've made us better in a defensive sense, but I'm really really glad that we never got him. His competitive shortcomings are well documented and he needs a good partner to be effective as a top pairing guy. Let's say we stuck him with Kronwall (already awkward as they are both LD) then what happens on the 2nd pairing going forward? It would minimize Quincey's minutes in a perfect world, which is awesome, but I just don't think it was ever a fit.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

I think you could split DD and Ericsson with the two, or pair them together and create a pure shutdown second pairing.

I don't know, I always though JayBo was criminally underrated.

 

[Henkka]

the host said he heard nyquist + tatar for iggy was the offer.

bobby mac: i'd have to double-check but i didn't think it was the iginla trade it was for jaybo or something else.

I don't remember that. I remember only that rumour where our offer/or Flames asking prize was Sheahan/Jurco + Mrazek + 2013 1st rounder (20th overall, Mantha) for Bouwmeester.

That would have been terrible package to lose. Thank god Feaster was insane and took that Mark Cundari + Reto Berra + 2013 1st (22nd overall, Emile Poirier) + 2013 conditional 4th, if Bouwmeester re-signs (as he did).

LW Poirier is not a bad pick, looks like a productive kid, but their main part was to get a goalie and Mrazek could have turned for a next franchise goalie since Kiprusoff. Berra is already lost in different organization (Colorado).

Also Cundari looks like AhL-defenceman, Sheahan or Jurco instead of him... what a hell was Feaster thinking?

And thank god Holland doesn't get his trades trough. I'm very very happy without Jay-Bouw if it would have cost that much. Even though we still would have to improve our defence. Maybe losing Sheahan would have opened a center spot for Järnkrok and Legwand trade never happens, but who knows. Still losing both Mantha and Mrazek would have a been terrible blow. Just terrible.

 

[InjuredChoker]

I don't remember that. I remember only that rumour where our offer/or Flames asking prize was Sheahan/Jurco + Mrazek + 2013 1st rounder (20th overall, Mantha) for Bouwmeester.

That would have been terrible package to lose. Thank god Feaster was insane and took that Mark Cundari + Reto Berra + 2013 1st (22nd overall, Emile Poirier) + 2013 conditional 4th, if Bouwmeester re-signs (as he did).

that came out just this year, mid-april. one year later. the time was running out on that interview so mackenzie was interrupted, he was clearly still trying to say something. and he mentioned he would have to double-check so he wasn't 100% sure.

i recall the offer being sheahan + jurco + 2nd at the time. holland didn't want to give up on 1st.. or mrazek.

LW Poirier is not a bad pick, looks like a productive kid, but their main part was to get a goalie and Mrazek could have turned for a next franchise goalie since Kiprusoff. Berra is already lost in different organization (Colorado).

well yeah, but they did get second for him... somehow.. that was some fleecing.

they took hunter smith with that pick, though. lol. i'm not sure if i went on record with that but should've seen that one coming. 'truculence'.

i think almost every flames fan would prefer mrazek.

 

[PullHard]

I think you could split DD and Ericsson with the two, or pair them together and create a pure shutdown second pairing.

I don't know, I always though JayBo was criminally underrated.

He played on pretty bad teams until he landed in St. Louis. I don't doubt he would have looked better here than he did anywhere else, much like he has in St. Louis. He would have made our team better. I think from a managerial stand point Holland is happier now to be able to trade "less" (Tatar+, Nyquist, Jurco+, etc. rather than 2 of those guys + a high pick) for a player who might be a better fit in terms of role and tools. That is one "missed" trade that I won't complain about now or ever.

 

[Crymson]

the host said he heard nyquist + tatar for iggy was the offer.

Never. That was the rumored offer for Bouwmeester.

 

[Winger98]

that came out just this year, mid-april. one year later. the time was running out on that interview so mackenzie was interrupted, he was clearly still trying to say something. and he mentioned he would have to double-check so he wasn't 100% sure.

i recall the offer being sheahan + jurco + 2nd at the time. holland didn't want to give up on 1st.. or mrazek.

That's the offer I remember getting all of the talk around that trade. I find it odd that the Nyquist/Tatar idea came up a year later, instead of at the time of the trade. It seems like something that didn't have any legs at the time, was shot down by either GM in a hurry for whatever reason, and only surfaced again because Nyquist started scoring like a machine.

 

[ricky0034]

That's the offer I remember getting all of the talk around that trade. I find it odd that the Nyquist/Tatar idea came up a year later, instead of at the time of the trade. It seems like something that didn't have any legs at the time, was shot down by either GM in a hurry for whatever reason, and only surfaced again because Nyquist started scoring like a machine.

on the other hand gotta think there's at least some truth to it since McKenzie was the one that brought it up

there was probably some other piece coming from Calgary in that hypothetical deal