Why is Sheahan playing?

HisNoodliness

The Karate Kid and ASP Kai
Jun 29, 2014
3,676
2,043
Toronto
I voted no, not because I think he's played well but I just don't see the criticism that he's a floater. He's positionally sound and he's trying out there. He just has almost no offensive creativity. He's got some tools and occasionally they come together for a surprisingly good play but most of the time he's just not thinking the game well enough to produce. That being said if you want a defensive 3C he fills that role well enough.

I don't think Sheahan is a problem for this team but because he once had much more promise he's definitely one of the biggest disappointments. If we change our expectations then he's fine. Not good, but fine.
 

njx9

Registered User
Feb 1, 2016
2,161
340
I don't think Sheahan is a problem for this team but because he once had much more promise he's definitely one of the biggest disappointments. If we change our expectations then he's fine. Not good, but fine.

I think he plays a role we've already filled, even if that's true. I don't think there's any reason to have more than two of Sheahan, Glendening and Helm (you could probably add Abbie, if they're not playing at C).
 

Frk It

Mo Seider Less Problems
Jul 27, 2010
36,246
14,755
If we could trade Sheahan for a 3rd rounder, and replace him in the top 9 with Mantha... that seems like a win-win to me.
 

Wood Stick

Registered User
Dec 25, 2015
1,788
6
If we could trade Sheahan for a 3rd rounder, and replace him in the top 9 with Mantha... that seems like a win-win to me.

An injury should be coming soon which will bring up Mantha. I'd scratch Miller. I think Ott has been better than him. Move Riley down, put Mantha in the top nine, and make Zetterberg a defensive line.
 

HisNoodliness

The Karate Kid and ASP Kai
Jun 29, 2014
3,676
2,043
Toronto
I think he plays a role we've already filled, even if that's true. I don't think there's any reason to have more than two of Sheahan, Glendening and Helm (you could probably add Abbie, if they're not playing at C).

It's definitely true that Sheahan is very redundant because we have so many offensively inept forwards but that's management's fault and not exactly an indictment of Sheahan. Honestly this team would be so much better off if we only had 2 or 3 of Sheahan, Helm, Abdelkader, Glendening and Miller. Personally I think I like Sheahan the most of that group simply because he's younger and less expensive but none of them are anything special.
 

Rzombo4 prez

Registered User
May 17, 2012
6,048
2,758
I agree with those that think he is somewhat redundant with the re-signing of Helm. Riley's issue isn't a lack of skill or shot, but his heavy feet and his instance on playing sound positional hockey. He doesn't have quick feet and is slow to accelerate. Consequently, if he isn't willing to cheat his coverage he will always be too late to the play offensively (which is why he looks so unengaged). His problem this year is that he has stopped moving his feet, which exacerbates his existing problems. Quick feet allow players to recover from aggressive plays that go bad.

He will always have a job in the NHL because coaches love players like him. I could see him being included in a package with another player or being lost through the expansion draft.
 

Frk It

Mo Seider Less Problems
Jul 27, 2010
36,246
14,755
I always thought Riley Sheahan was very similar to Brock Nelson (of his same draft class). It stinks that Sheahan hasn't been able to put it together like Brock has. I think they have some similar tools.
 

kook10

Registered User
Jun 27, 2011
4,724
2,829
While I think the 'no value' comment was a bit overdone, I can't imagine any way he returns a decent pick, at this point.

Giving him more ice to figure it all out will increase our eventual return on him. We are not desperate for points at the moment, so there isn't much downside to trying to pump his tires.
 

izlez

We need more toe-drags/60
Feb 28, 2012
4,629
3,518
Complain about Sheahan being in the lineup. Suggest we bench him and hope we lose him in the expansion draft.

Constantly piss and moan about not having Jarnkrok and Janmark.


Makes TOTAL sense.
 

njx9

Registered User
Feb 1, 2016
2,161
340
Complain about Sheahan being in the lineup. Suggest we bench him and hope we lose him in the expansion draft.

Constantly piss and moan about not having Jarnkrok and Janmark.

Makes TOTAL sense.

I mean, it is possible to hold differing opinions about different players all at once.

Giving him more ice to figure it all out will increase our eventual return on him. We are not desperate for points at the moment, so there isn't much downside to trying to pump his tires.

He's averaging about 15 minutes of ice time for his career, how much more should he really be getting?
 

kook10

Registered User
Jun 27, 2011
4,724
2,829
He's averaging about 15 minutes of ice time for his career, how much more should he really be getting?

I meant more as in continue to let him play and not reduce him in favor of someone else. Also more as in more than he objectively deserves - which is that 15 minutes and what people are complaining about. I am a fan of trying to sell lemonade rather than throw away rotten lemons.
 
Last edited:

Henkka

Registered User
Jan 31, 2004
31,215
12,208
Tampere, Finland
Sheahan will be most probably lost in expansion draft.

- Sheahan lost in expansion, replace his roster spot with Mantha
- Vanek extended
- Miller/Ott gone, replace with Bertuzzi

Othervise, same forward corps as this season.
 

Winger98

Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
22,839
4,729
Cleveland
Sheahan will be most probably lost in expansion draft.

- Sheahan lost in expansion, replace his roster spot with Mantha
- Vanek extended
- Miller/Ott gone, replace with Bertuzzi

Othervise, same forward corps as this season.

you forgot the buyouts to try to get cap compliant.
 

obey86

Registered User
Jun 9, 2009
8,013
1,274
He looks good when he actually skates hard on offense....but too often he tries to slow it down and it turns into nothing. I think it was last game....he skated really hard and made a nice move to the net for a solid scoring chance. MOVE YOUR FEET!

Also, I remember his rookie year he had a bunch of very impressive assists on the doorstep of the crease. Haven't seen that in a while.

Not sure what happened to Sheahan, but he's worse now than he was as a rookie IMO.
 

Henkka

Registered User
Jan 31, 2004
31,215
12,208
Tampere, Finland
you forgot the buyouts to try to get cap compliant.

Yeah, Howard gone by buyout and Coreau brought in saves 3M.

Smith gone saves 2.75M.

Sheahan gone saves 2M.

This makes room for extensions and raises.

Akader - Larkin - Nyquist
Athanasiou - Zeta - Tatar
Vanek - Helm - Mantha
Bertuzzi - Glendy - Ott/Miller
(14. bench veteran)

DeKeyser - Green
Kronwall - Sproul
Ericsson - Marchenko
(Ouellet)

Mrazek
(Coreau)

This in my projected 2017-18 Red Wings.
 

obey86

Registered User
Jun 9, 2009
8,013
1,274
Yeah, Howard gone by buyout and Coreau brought in saves 3M.

Smith gone saves 2.75M.

Sheahan gone saves 2M.

This makes room for extensions and raises.

Akader - Larkin - Nyquist
Athanasiou - Zeta - Tatar
Vanek - Helm - Mantha
Bertuzzi - Glendy - Ott/Miller
(14. bench veteran)

DeKeyser - Green
Kronwall - Sproul
Ericsson - Marchenko
(Ouellet)

Mrazek
(Coreau)

This in my projected 2017-18 Red Wings.

It would make much more sense to trade Jimmy Howard and retain money than it would to buy him out and be stuck with 2 additional years of cap hits IMO.

If bought out - cap hit for 4 years to Wings:
1.8M
2.6M
1.5M
1.5M

If traded - retain, say, 2.5/year, cap hit for 4 years to Wings:
2.5M
2.5M
0.0M
0.0M

I have to believe there would be a team out there who would be ok with Jimmy Howard @ 2.7M/year on a 2 year contract. That's the 32nd lowest cap hit among goalies in the NHL. Could easily be a cheap veteran starter for a year or two for a team that doesn't wanna commit to a goalie long term.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad