Confirmed with Link: Wings re-sign Abdelkader for 7 years 4.25m/yr full NTC in first 4 yrs, partial after

[Cyborg Yzerberg]

This really sums it up well for me. I remember being called a "cheerleader" dozens of times as I could understand exactly where Holland was coming from in his decision making process. There was a logic to it, and he had success with similar moves before, so you could sympathize when they didn't work out. Even if I didn't love what he was doing, I understood why he was doing it.

But as the meandering results continued to pile up and the questionable decisions became harder to understand, well, yeah here we are. I'm now, like many, disillusioned with Holland's recent body of work and my confidence in him to make impact moves is at an all-time low.

There's no singular event that completely makes you question his abilities as a general manager, but it's been a slow build of perplexing decisions that appears to have hit a crescendo with this latest contract.

Fortunately, drafting and development continues to remain a strength under his reign, even if the talent produced hasn't reached the elite level. It is this fact that saves him in many regards, and his ability to continue to feed his NHL team with good players from within keeps the team consistently in the playoff hunt despite the aforementioned issues.

He's getting old, which is slightly advantageous for us. When you're the yacht captain of the country club, like Holland is, your job is as secure as it gets. So we hopefully just have to wait him out, because sooner than later, he will become President of the organization or something like Holmgrem and Lamoriello(pre-Toronto.)

 

[Pavels Dog]

We already illustrated to you that deflections and garbage goals are even more difficult and reflect how a high shooting percentage is more unsustainable than the contrary.

I must have missed that illustration. I don't agree at all that it's more difficult to sustain. Garbage goals will always come around if you park in front of the net and learn to play that role, which Abby has.

Holmstrom averaged a sh% of 16.3. Abby isn't taking many shots unless he's right around the blue paint so it wouldn't be a surprise to see him hover between 10.0-20.0 in sh% most years.

 

[Shaman464]

I must have missed that illustration. I don't agree at all that it's more difficult to sustain. Garbage goals will always come around if you park in front of the net and learn to play that role, which Abby has.

Holmstrom averaged a sh% of 16.3. Abby isn't taking many shots unless he's right around the blue paint so it wouldn't be a surprise to see him hover between 10.0-20.0 in sh% most years.

Holmstrom was a completely different type of player and played most of his career in a different NHL.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Holmstrom was a completely different type of player and played most of his career in a different NHL.

He was a different player but still had a similar role offensively as Abdelkader has had the last few years. The role of "get the puck to better players and take position in front of the net". Homer was much better at the net-front job, but the general idea stands. He didn't shoot the puck from low-scoring areas. It also wasn't that long ago he played, nor was the dead-puck era higher-scoring.

I'm not claiming that Abby will sustain a >15.0sh% but the argument that what he's doing is unsustainable because he was shooting at 6% earlier in his career is completely devoid of the context of how his role has changed.

 

[Chance on Chance]

What if he scores 25 and is asking 5.25M next summer and there's no one else on the market?

Players are stocks (if not cattle) and Abdelkader is a stock which has great potential to be more than 4.25M after Pavel Datsyuk returns to feed him again.

I just laugh how much better Ken Holland is on the map than anybody in here.

What if he score 13 goals this year nd we can get him for 4 years at 3.5?

 

[Henkka]

What if he score 13 goals this year nd we can get him for 4 years at 3.5?

It's a smaller probability. Higher proability is that he produces well and is amlost the best FA on the market and someone will throw Leino money and he's gone.

Now he is signed. With reasonable price. Cut by 1 million if he still overachieves.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

It's a smaller probability. Higher proability is that he produces well and is amlost the best FA on the market and someone will throw Leino money and he's gone.

Now he is signed. With reasonable price. Cut by 1 million if he still overachieves.

What makes you think he will score 25 goals this year when he has only reached the 20 goal mark once and is already passing his expected prime?

If he is looking for 5.25 million after two 20 goal seasons and potentially one 50+ point season, let him chase after the money. Especially since he relied on others to get him to the 20 goal mark last year.

 

[InjuredChoker]

It's a smaller probability. Higher proability is that he produces well and is amlost the best FA on the market and someone will throw Leino money and he's gone.

Now he is signed. With reasonable price. Cut by 1 million if he still overachieves.

reasonable for 2-3 years. bad after that. terrible for the last few years. unless cap balloons to double what it is now.



it's not like he would be that big loss anyway, at least compared to the contract that had to be given to abby to keep him. both datsyuk and zetterberg have scored at near identical rates when they have been on the ice with or without abdelkader. and if we compare dastyuk with/without abdelkader while zetterberg isn't on the ice, red wings scored at better rate when dastyuk was on the ice without abdelkader. swap datsyuk and zetterberg there with each other and we get the same. this for the past few seasons 5on5. he doesn't do any valuable work that would result in increased scoring, at least not compared to the other options wings have had. in fact, he's had the opposite effect overall the past few seasons. last season zetterberg scored a lot more with abdelkader compared to without him but it was small sample without him and had much less ozone starts in those, indicating more defensive role.

it made sense touse abby at top line when he was making 1.7 mil, allowing to load up better on depth. or would have if it hadn't been used on a lot of garbage.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Especially since he relied on others to get him to the 20 goal mark last year.

Who doesn't?

This board in a nutshell:

* Franzen's goals didn't count because he was streaky
* Nyquist's goals didn't count because they were mostly on the PP
* Glendening's goals didn't count because something
* Abdelkader's don't count because he didn't score them unassisted

 

[ArGarBarGar]

Who doesn't?

This board in a nutshell:

Players who deserve long-term contracts.

I never said his goals didn't count. But you have to understand whether or not he is capable of doing so again and by what means it would take for him to reach those marks. Giving out a long-term contract to a 28 year old guy who has had one season even close to worthy of that salary is short-sighted and appears as a desperate move.

 

[Shaman464]

Players who deserve long-term contracts.

I never said his goals didn't count. But you have to understand whether or not he is capable of doing so again and by what means it would take for him to reach those marks. Giving out a long-term contract to a 28 year old guy who has had one season even close to worthy of that salary is short-sighted and appears as a desperate move.

The whole sports world is panning this move as bad for Detroit and a bad sign for the future of the NHL.

But again this shows the severe level of complacency Detroit has right now. They aren't going to be cup contender for at least 5 years at this point. Might as well enjoy a luke-warm season followed by early playoff exits, because we have many of them in store.

 

[Bench]

Players who deserve long-term contracts.

It's going to end up looking a lot like the Burrows contract in Vancouver. Except Burrows had scored 117 goals in the 4 seasons (29 goals a year) before his contract. And hasn't scored more than 20 goals since, after the age of 32...

Like Burrows being the piano puller for the Sedins, there's a shelf-life on these things. You can justify the salary, but the term and timing remains borderline insane given the lack of success Abdelkader has had. It's banking on his maximum upside with no regard for the possibility of regression or outright failure.

Holland's an optimist, I'll give him that.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Players who deserve long-term contracts.

I never said his goals didn't count. But you have to understand whether or not he is capable of doing so again and by what means it would take for him to reach those marks. Giving out a long-term contract to a 28 year old guy who has had one season even close to worthy of that salary is short-sighted and appears as a desperate move.

That's a little naive. 7 years is unusually long for sure, but there are plenty of comparables around the league when you're looking at 5+ year contracts. Guys that are complementary players, not stars that drive the bus on a line. Gallagher, Loui Eriksson, Hartnell, Simmonds, Callahan, Bourque etc. to name a few.

Abdelkader will never be asked to carry a line offensively. He's not paid like someone that creates offense out of nothing or can score 20 goals regardless of linemates. But he may be able to keep fitting in as a complementary top 9 player on a team swarming with soft, skill-first forwards for a long time. Who cares if he needs "help" to score goals? What we should worry about is if we ever have a situation where we need a 4 million dollar player to drive offense on our team. That's when we are in trouble.

 

[Actual Thought*]

It's going to end up looking a lot like the Burrows contract in Vancouver. Except Burrows had scored 117 goals in the 4 seasons (29 goals a year) before his contract. And hasn't scored more than 20 goals since, after the age of 32...

Like Burrows being the piano puller for the Sedins, there's a shelf-life on these things. You can justify the salary, but the term and timing remains borderline insane given the lack of success Abdelkader has had. It's banking on his maximum upside with no regard for the possibility of regression or outright failure.

Holland's an optimist, I'll give him that.

I think you are dismissing that they know the player. They know his conditioning. They know his character. They know him as a person. They have known him since he was 18 years old. All these things are important factors in predicting whether or not a guy will fulfill the expectations you have for him.

I believe the staff thinks he will fulfill the expectations they have for him and they believe if he does he is worth the money they are paying him.

I also think some posters here have an entirely different set of expectations for what he should have to accomplish for $4 mil a year in the next 7 years.

I would rather they sign a guy like Abby than taking another chance on a guy like Weiss. Florida knew him as well and chose to let him walk.

 

[Bench]

That's a little naive. 7 years is unusually long for sure, but there are plenty of comparables around the league when you're looking at 5+ year contracts. Guys that are complementary players, not stars that drive the bus on a line. Gallagher, Loui Eriksson, Hartnell, Simmonds, Callahan, Bourque etc. to name a few.

Some bad examples in there. Mostly due to age. Sometimes due to sheer output. Or in Eriksson's case, both, because he was 24-years-old and got done scoring 36 goals, which Abdelkader is never going to touch.

And putting Abdelkader in the same category as Hartnell and Callahan (both guys traded due to contracts, ironically) is an issue because the latter had multiple seasons of superior output to Abdelkader. That's the difference here. Guys who have got the Abdelkader deal have either been 1) younger 2) had years of superior production or 3) both 1 & 2.

I've yet to see a compelling argument to the contrary.

 

[silkyjohnson50]

reasonable for 2-3 years. bad after that. terrible for the last few years. unless cap balloons to double what it is now.



it's not like he would be that big loss anyway, at least compared to the contract that had to be given to abby to keep him. both datsyuk and zetterberg have scored at near identical rates when they have been on the ice with or without abdelkader. and if we compare dastyuk with/without abdelkader while zetterberg isn't on the ice, red wings scored at better rate when dastyuk was on the ice without abdelkader. swap datsyuk and zetterberg there with each other and we get the same. this for the past few seasons 5on5. he doesn't do any valuable work that would result in increased scoring, at least not compared to the other options wings have had. in fact, he's had the opposite effect overall the past few seasons. last season zetterberg scored a lot more with abdelkader compared to without him but it was small sample without him and had much less ozone starts in those, indicating more defensive role.

it made sense touse abby at top line when he was making 1.7 mil, allowing to load up better on depth. or would have if it hadn't been used on a lot of garbage.

Great work and by no means surprising.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Some bad examples in there. Mostly due to age. Sometimes due to sheer output. Or in Eriksson's case, both, because he was 24-years-old and got done scoring 36 goals, which Abdelkader is never going to touch.

And putting Abdelkader in the same category as Hartnell and Callahan (both guys traded due to contracts, ironically) is an issue because the latter had multiple seasons of superior output to Abdelkader. That's the difference here. Guys who have got the Abdelkader deal have either been 1) younger 2) had years of superior production or 3) both 1 & 2.

I've yet to see a compelling argument to the contrary.

I wasn't saying Abdelkader is directly comparable to all those guys in track record/age/etc, just that long-terms contracts are not something exclusive to star players who produce offense all by themselves and require no help from others.

 

[Shaman464]

I wasn't saying Abdelkader is directly comparable to all those guys in track record/age/etc, just that long-terms contracts are not something exclusive to star players who produce offense all by themselves and require no help from others.

They only comparable insofar as they all play hockey and got long deals.

 

[Pavels Dog]

They only comparable insofar as they all play hockey and got long deals.

So you think Brendan Gallagher or Hartnell or Simmonds are players that score their points all on their own and require no help from good linemates, top 6 icetime or PP?

 

[ArGarBarGar]

That's a little naive. 7 years is unusually long for sure, but there are plenty of comparables around the league when you're looking at 5+ year contracts. Guys that are complementary players, not stars that drive the bus on a line. Gallagher, Loui Eriksson, Hartnell, Simmonds, Callahan, Bourque etc. to name a few.

Abdelkader will never be asked to carry a line offensively. He's not paid like someone that creates offense out of nothing or can score 20 goals regardless of linemates. But he may be able to keep fitting in as a complementary top 9 player on a team swarming with soft, skill-first forwards for a long time. Who cares if he needs "help" to score goals? What we should worry about is if we ever have a situation where we need a 4 million dollar player to drive offense on our team. That's when we are in trouble.

I think that Abdelkader will not be able to get 20+ goals unless being placed on a line with elite talent. If he has to be paired with stars to be somewhat productive, then that is problem considering the money and term he was given. Also it isn't even guaranteed he will be able to do that even if put up with that talent (only did it once so far). That is a huge risk you are putting on a guy who hasn't proven more than once he could score more than 20 goals in a season.

Not to mention "somewhat productive" in Abdelkader's case is a pretty low bar.

 

[Shaman464]

So you think Brendan Gallagher or Hartnell or Simmonds are players that score their points all on their own and require no help from good linemates, top 6 icetime or PP?

Simmons has three seasons in a row of over 25 goals.

Gallagher is under 25, has scored 20+ goals twice in his career and his contract is well under 4 million dollars.

So we are left with Hartnell, which has a contract that has been panned as a bad contract. If that's all you have, you are rearranging deck chairs on the titanic.

Abdelkader's contract is bad because it's long, he's already near 30 when it kicks in, and the price compared to what he brought last season is market value. Now that last point may not seem like a knock but there are two very real possibilities: He never scores that much again, or B he, with age regresses after a couple of seasons of matching previous highs in production. These other contracts, save Hartnall, are for younger players with much more proven track records.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Simmons has three seasons in a row of over 25 goals.

Gallagher is under 25, has scored 20+ goals twice in his career and his contract is well under 4 million dollars.

So we are left with Hartnell, which has a contract that has been panned as a bad contract. If that's all you have, you are rearranging deck chairs on the titanic.

That wasn't what I asked. The question at hand was if they produce offense without good/great/elite teammates and top-6 icetime+PP. If they are the catalyst to the offense instead of complementary players that require help from others to get their production.

Btw Gallagher has one 20 goal season and Simmonds had the same when he signed his deal. Younger yes but not completely different.

 

[Actual Thought*]

I think that Abdelkader will not be able to get 20+ goals unless being placed on a line with elite talent. If he has to be paired with stars to be somewhat productive, then that is problem considering the money and term he was given. Also it isn't even guaranteed he will be able to do that even if put up with that talent (only did it once so far). That is a huge risk you are putting on a guy who hasn't proven more than once he could score more than 20 goals in a season.

Not to mention "somewhat productive" in Abdelkader's case is a pretty low bar.

He is coming out of a drought but he is on pace for 24 this year. Last night's goal was a beauty! A true goal scorer's goal. I suspect he may have been a bit distracted by contract talks and now that is over he should be a little more focused. Most guys who score 20 goals are playing with pretty good players so I don't think it is a knock on Abby that he isn't a one man team.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

That wasn't what I asked. The question at hand was if they produce offense without good/great/elite teammates and top-6 icetime+PP. If they are the catalyst to the offense instead of complementary players that require help from others to get their production.

Btw Gallagher has one 20 goal season and Simmonds had the same when he signed his deal. Younger yes but not completely different.

I didn't say good or great. I specifically mentioned the Wings best two forwards in the last 15 or so years, minus Fedorov who was just inducted into the Hall of Fame.

Let's also not forget he scored a whopping 44 points. Brad Richards scored 7 fewer points last season with Patrick Kane and was considered terrible by the Blackhawks fanbase.

As far as Gallagher and Simmonds. You have to factor in age, as neither Simmonds nor Gallagher will be getting paid this money well into their 30s for a single season's worth of production.

 

[Actual Thought*]

I didn't say good or great. I specifically mentioned the Wings best two forwards in the last 15 or so years, minus Fedorov who was just inducted into the Hall of Fame.

Let's also not forget he scored a whopping 44 points. Brad Richards scored 7 fewer points last season with Patrick Kane and was considered terrible by the Blackhawks fanbase.

As far as Gallagher and Simmonds. You have to factor in age, as neither Simmonds nor Gallagher will be getting paid this money well into their 30s for a single season's worth of production.

Patrick Kane only put up 64 points. That's the new NHL. 44 points is substantial. When you contrast Kane's output with Abby's it looks like Gator's contract is a steal of epic proportion. Just because the Blackhawks fan base thought Richards was terrible doesn't mean he was. Most fans are incapable of judging reality. Richards put up 91 in the past so fans hold him to that standard. He did help them win a Stanley Cup while putting up 14 pts in 23 games so.... I would say he was an asset.