What is blashill doing with Howard and Mrazek?

[Run the Jewels]

Howard has been expendable for a long time now. This is not a contending team no need for two starting goalies. Move Howard for some futures or to shore up D.

Yep, setting $5.3 million on fire for a middle of the road backup goalie. We used to lambaste other franchises for dumb decisions like these. SMH.

 

[WingedWheel1987]

Yep, setting $5.3 million on fire for a middle of the road backup goalie. We used to lambaste other franchises for dumb decisions like these. SMH.

IDK. I have a tough time blaming the Wings for giving Jimmy that contract.

It's a pretty standard contract for experienced starting goalies, and every organization puts a premium on stability in net.

Now if the Wings end up not finding anyone to take on his contract and end up holding onto Howard for the life of the deal, THEN you should crucify the Wings for that kind of stupidity.

 

[Claypool]

Yep, setting $5.3 million on fire for a middle of the road backup goalie. We used to lambaste other franchises for dumb decisions like these. SMH.

That contract was a risk, just like betting on Mrazek being a capable starter down the road is a risk. Our favorite GM in Dallas is currently paying over $10 million for two backups, so it's not all bad.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

Yep, setting $5.3 million on fire for a middle of the road backup goalie. We used to lambaste other franchises for dumb decisions like these. SMH.

Either pay Howard a decent amount of money or take your chances on the GA market.

I'm not sure how that is a dumb decision.

 

[HockeyinHD]

Yep, setting $5.3 million on fire for a middle of the road backup goalie. We used to lambaste other franchises for dumb decisions like these. SMH.

Come on. At the time did that deal seem bad? I've been tepid on Howard since his days in GR and even I thought 4ish for 4 wasn't a bad comp level in the moment.

Yes, it's turned out to be a bad contract. That happens. Bleeping all over the front office for that deal without also giving them simultaneous credit for getting Mrazek isn't being particularly fair.

 

[Heaton]

Come on. At the time did that deal seem bad? I've been tepid on Howard since his days in GR and even I thought 4ish for 4 wasn't a bad comp level in the moment.

Yes, it's turned out to be a bad contract. That happens. Bleeping all over the front office for that deal without also giving them simultaneous credit for getting Mrazek isn't being particularly fair.

Yes. The deal was bad from the very beginning. He had proven nothing in the playoffs and everyone knew Mrazek was coming up soon. Same way we knew the Kindl contracts were bad, the Cleary contracts were bad, the Ericsson lifetime deal was bad and now the Abdelkader lifetime contract is bad.

Holland has had some great contracts and some terrible contracts, lately more terrible than great. Don't forget we're still paying for Weiss.

 

[Henkka]

There was nothing wrong on Howard extension at April 2013. He had two strong seasons behind and was 7-4 at playoffs after that. One win away from beating becoming Stanley Cup Champions out of the WCF. Injuries started at next season and then his level dropped.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Howard deal was fine at the start bit too long

But then the real howie started to show without lidstrom

 

[HockeyinHD]

Yes. The deal was bad from the very beginning. He had proven nothing in the playoffs and everyone knew Mrazek was coming up soon.

That's an interesting way to directly contradict yourself in the space of one sentence.

Again, I'm not a Howard guy and haven't been, but if the idea that he hadn't proven anything was a valid limiter of expectations... how in the universe would that not have applied to Mrazek in spades?

At that moment there was evidence lying about that Howard was a good to pretty good NHL #1. He was carrying a career 2.39 and .917 for the team at the time, and while his overall record sucked he had 3 of 4 decent to good playoff performances.

Mrazek was a GD cypher. By 4/13 he had had one AHL year, which was fine.

My position on goaltending the past 5+ years has been just get a competent guy and spend the money on skaters, but I'm not going to stand around here like Hindsight Man and say the singing was nonsense.

Holland has had some great contracts and some terrible contracts, lately more terrible than great. Don't forget we're still paying for Weiss.

Here's the post where you complained about the Weiss signing at the time:



Did it turn out badly? Oh baby. That's the downside of the activity in the FA markets lots of people blast Holland for not having more of. Sometimes... boom.

 

[Heaton]

That's an interesting way to directly contradict yourself in the space of one sentence.

I don't think you understand what contradicting means. There was no reason for Holland to lock up Holland into almost elite #1 money when he had faltered numerous times in the playoffs and a prospect with potentially more skill and ability than him would be up on the team within a couple years. Now Holland is going to be in deep trouble when Mrazek needs to be paid and continues to force the organizations hand in playing him the majority of games over his 5.3m/yr counterpart.

We've seen too many times in the NHL that good to great NHL goalies are available more often than not, and Holland really should be putting money into good defensemen and not just 'any' defensemen.

Here's the post where you complained about the Weiss signing at the time:

I liked the deal at the time, but that still doesn't excuse Holland from making bad signing after bad signing since only compounding the issue. Holland (like a lot of GMs) view a lot of their current players are irreplaceable. That's a big reason why so many teams end up in cap hell.

 

[14ari13]

I don't think you understand what contradicting means. There was no reason for Holland to lock up Holland into almost elite #1 money when he had faltered numerous times in the playoffs and a prospect with potentially more skill and ability than him would be up on the team within a couple years. Now Holland is going to be in deep trouble when Mrazek needs to be paid and continues to force the organizations hand in playing him the majority of games over his 5.3m/yr counterpart.

We've seen too many times in the NHL that good to great NHL goalies are available more often than not, and Holland really should be putting money into good defensemen and not just 'any' defensemen.



I liked the deal at the time, but that still doesn't excuse Holland from making bad signing after bad signing since only compounding the issue. Holland (like a lot of GMs) view a lot of their current players are irreplaceable. That's a big reason why so many teams end up in cap hell.

But it is not only signing for what is right money. It is also outbidding war with other GMs. Therefore he had to overpay.

 

[Heaton]

But it is not only signing for what is right money. It is also outbidding war with other GMs. Therefore he had to overpay.

I'm not sure which player you're talking about, but if it's Weiss - I don't think it was an over-payment, it just didn't work out.

 

[Claypool]

We've seen too many times in the NHL that good to great NHL goalies are available more often than not, and Holland really should be putting money into good defensemen and not just 'any' defensemen

Which of these great goalies are you referring to that are widely available every offseason? Name some examples.

 

[Heaton]

Which of these great goalies are you referring to that are widely available every offseason? Name some examples.

I didn't say great goalies were available every offseason, I said 'good to great'. Let me re-phrase, there are Howard level type goalies available quite often.

 

[chances14]

blues jake allen suffered a major knee injury tonight and the blues have been in a long slump and could use a shakeup

they need a goalie, we need shattenkirk.

I can dream right

 

[Flowah]

Yes. The deal was bad from the very beginning. He had proven nothing in the playoffs and everyone knew Mrazek was coming up soon. Same way we knew the Kindl contracts were bad, the Cleary contracts were bad, the Ericsson lifetime deal was bad and now the Abdelkader lifetime contract is bad.

Holland has had some great contracts and some terrible contracts, lately more terrible than great. Don't forget we're still paying for Weiss.

Only part I didn't like was the term. You couldn't just not keep Howard for a year or two. That'd be incredibly risky. But yeah, even at the time a lot of us knew that was a long contract since Mrazek would probably be ready within 3 years.

I don't think the Howard situation is as bad as the Kindl/Cleary contracts though. Cleary especially was just objectively mind boggling. Even Holland could only keep saying "I made a promise" as justification for those.

 

[Heaton]

blues jake allen suffered a major knee injury tonight and the blues have been in a long slump and could use a shakeup

they need a goalie, we need shattenkirk.

I can dream right

I wonder if Holland believes that Green is enough for our defense or if he wants to improve the defense even further, but that's another discussion for a different thread.

 

[Heaton]

Only part I didn't like was the term. You couldn't just not keep Howard for a year or two. That'd be incredibly risky. But yeah, even at the time a lot of us knew that was a long contract since Mrazek would probably be ready within 3 years.

I don't think the Howard situation is as bad as the Kindl/Cleary contracts though. Cleary especially was just objectively mind boggling. Even Holland could only keep saying "I made a promise" as justification for those.

I agree, I don't like paying most goalies over 4m regardless, but the term, like usual, was terrible.

 

[HockeyinHD]

I don't think you understand what contradicting means. There was no reason for Holland to lock up Holland into almost elite #1 money when he had faltered numerous times in the playoffs and a prospect with potentially more skill and ability than him would be up on the team within a couple years.

Right, but you're just doing the game where 'not winning the cup' = failing, which is a dumb game. Howard was fine in 3 of 4 playoff runs. Not spectacular for the most part, but fine. The other dumb game you're playing is the one where mystical upside is more valuable than actual performance. Were that kind of thinking accurate we'd be celebrating the 5th straight Cup win of the Edmonton Oilers.

If the absence of proving himself was a detriment to a guy with 200+ NHL starts it absolutely was that 10 times over for a guy who had ~50 AHL starts. That is your point of internal contradiction. If it disqualifies one as an option it should disqualify both as options.

Now Holland is going to be in deep trouble when Mrazek needs to be paid and continues to force the organizations hand in playing him the majority of games over his 5.3m/yr counterpart.

That's true, but it's also being Hindsight Man. Had Detroit let Howard walk rather than lock him up, they'd have been in worse shape the past three years than they were anyway. Had Mrazek then not turned out to be very good they'd be screwed totally.

So sure, if you're functioning in a version of the multiverse where you can be 100% certain that Mrazek's a bonafide 1a and you know this in 2012, obviously that has an effect on the pressures surrounding what sort of deal to make Howard.

Over here, however, there was a not-insignificant group of people making the case that Mrazek hadn't shown enough to be the starter out of camp this year. In 2016. 29ish months after the Howard deal was signed. I disagreed with them, but it wasn't just three guys named Daryl.

We've seen too many times in the NHL that good to great NHL goalies are available more often than not, and Holland really should be putting money into good defensemen and not just 'any' defensemen.

I agree with your position on roster-construction but we are, for the most part, alone on that. If a team finds a goalie they think they can trust that team then employs the time-honored strategy of 'a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush' and locks them up.

Honestly, even with Mrazek blossoming behind him had Howard maintained his pre-contract level of play I wouldn't be as averse to his contract. Heck if he was still a 2.39 .917 guy I think Mrazek would be an amazing trade piece that could bring back a bonafide #1 or #2 dman. As a 2.66 .910 guy, the team has to keep Mrazek.

I liked the deal at the time, but that still doesn't excuse Holland from making bad signing after bad signing since only compounding the issue.

Enh. I think you're being a bit hyper-critical on the natures of the signings. The bad contracts on the team right now are, in order: Howard, E, Franzen. We're kind of edging to the point where the Z contract will start being a problem.

The other contracts on the roster are either values or neutrals.

Holland (like a lot of GMs) view a lot of their current players are irreplaceable. That's a big reason why so many teams end up in cap hell.

Well, when a GM signs a guy to a contract it's typically because they think that guy was worth that contract. By definition this creates an environment were a GM is unlikely to move off that player barring something substantial happening. A new GM doesn't have that investment, and changeover at that position is where you tend to see long term contracts moved.

To be fair, Holland has walked away from Fil and Hudler and Tootoo and Weiss and Brunner, among others, so it's not like he welds himself to every player, nor do I think you are suggesting (or should) that a team commit themselves to no players and just run their prospects out the door.

In order to have a successful team you have to be able to have a continuance of identity, and that's not something you can have by turning over 10+ roster spots every year or so.

Detroit has all of 9 contracts that run to the year after next. That's it. And 3 of those they just signed (Green, Nyquist, Abdelkader) with a 4th being Larkin's ELC. It's not like the team is extending a bunch of guys out into the sunset.

10 forwards expire either this year or next year. 5 dmen expire either this year or next year. Mrazek's up after this year. 16 guys (I guess 15 if you remove Kindl) on or around the teams active 23-man are up within 18 months.

 

[InjuredChoker]

holland didn't walk away from filppula. he left. holland made him an offer of 7 years at 4.75 mil per just before UFA. can't remember what kind of offer they made for hudler but iirc, it was more hudler wanting to leave. and iirc, holland made identical or similar offer for brunner as he got from the devils. brunner/his agent made a bet that they could get more on the open market.

also abdelkader should be on the bad contract list.

 

[Claypool]

I didn't say great goalies were available every offseason, I said 'good to great'. Let me re-phrase, there are Howard level type goalies available quite often.

Coaches and GMs don't want to do the goalie carousel every offseason. You sign the guy that you're winning with. Or you can try taking short term bets on Martin Jones, Devan Dubnyk, or the Kari Ramos of the world, which isn't a very good idea.

 

[Frk It]

Coaches and GMs don't want to do the goalie carousel every offseason. You sign the guy that you're winning with. Or you can try taking short term bets on Martin Jones, Devan Dubnyk, or the Kari Ramos of the world, which isn't a very good idea.

Dubnyk has been great for the Wild. He's the reason they made the playoffs last year.

 

[Claypool]

Dubnyk has been great for the Wild. He's the reason they made the playoffs last year.

Yeah he hasn't been nearly as good as he was last season, and they had to lock him up for six years.

 

[Frk It]

Yeah he hasn't been nearly as good as he was last season, and they had to lock him up for six years.

.922 SV % and 2.29 GAA this year. Those are still really good numbers. His numbers last year weren't going to be repeated.

 

[Actual Thought*]

Dubnyk has been great for the Wild. He's the reason they made the playoffs last year.

He had a peak year last year. Prior to that he sucked. If the Wings would have signed him when they signed Howard he would have gotten universally panned for it.

The Howard deal was a good deal when it was signed. Health has been his biggest problem and there is no way to guarantee health. I would bet Howard would still be very good if he were played more. Sitting a goaltender who is used to playing a lot just makes him flat.