2012 Off-Season (formerly 2011)

[Rodya]

Just did some quick (hopefully correct) calculations regarding the Red Wings' cap room this upcoming off-season. According to CapGeek, the Red Wings will have approximately $44.5 million in contracts at the end of this season. However, if we are to assume that Lidstrom comes back for another season, similar to his current contract, that number increased to $51 million, leaving the Red Wings with $8 million dollars in cap space.

However, with that $8 million, the wings still need to re-sign some of their own free-agents. I believe in re-signing Howard ($2 per), McDonald ($750k per), Eaves ($1.25 per), Ericksson ($1.75 per). Assuming these hypothetical contracts to be realistic, the Wings would be left with about $3.5 million in cap-space. Now for the fun. Who do you guys want us to go after this off-season?

[ajaX82]

I don't think Nick is a lock to be back. In fact, I think this is his last season. Howard will also want more than 2 million per probably.

I dont have the time this second but I will come back and give some ideas

[Rodya]

Really? Lidstrom is having one of his best statistical seasons yet and his body is still holding up well. I envisioned him playing another 3-5 years, with a increasingly smaller role each year. That being said, I wouldn't be shocked to see him go and hope he stays. But, his $6.5 million coming off the books could be helpful.

[TSE]

There is no way Lidstrom will retire. He's getting a massive pay rate now and he doesn't even have to be that physical to do his job. If Lidstrom retires I seriously would want his head examined for his own benefit. Even if he wanted to not work it would be almost better for him to play at his own risk and donate 100% of the money to charity if he can't figure out something else to do with it or somebody else that he loves in this world that would appreciate him sharing the money. With great power comes great responsibility and one way or another it only makes sense for Lidstrom to play and take the money. I'd be stunned if he wasn't back and I would probably lose a lot of respect for him as a man unless I had full details and explanation as to why he did retire and it made sense, which I can't really see how it would unless he was dealing with a freak health condition that was somehow relevant.

For offseason moves though, I find it to be clear that we have more player resources, upside, and depth at offense and goalie, so the solution is simple, we need young defensmen studs to add to the team, that's it. So whether it's the draft or trade or FA, that's what we need incoming. If not a specific position then anything we can do to lower our team's overall age and salary without losing a corresponding amount of talent would be the next 2 goals to keep in mind. I was REALLY pissed that we didn't take a defenseman with our first pick in the last draft especially considering the prospects that were around (can't think of the name of that big dude offhand but he should have been the pick).

I'm not an expert on NHL players however, as I don't follow the sport religiously, but here is a list of available free agents, and just eyeballing it, a couple names that jump out at me for Defense are Markov and Pitkanen. Looking further...there's quite a few potentials there. I like Wisniewski and Ehrhoff too cause they are the highest total points gainers for the year on that list and both very young. Bieksa is the highest +/- in the NHL this year on defense, gotta like that. Quickly looking I didn't see anybody else in the top 19 +/- that is on the Free Agent list until Ehrhoff who hits number 20. Ehrhoff also plays for VAN who is the best team we have to worry about, so it would be nice to snag him away from them. I heard Shea Weber from Nashville on another rumor as a possible good trading target as well.

http://www.mynhltraderumors.com/2010/06 ... ree-agents

For goalies, it looks like Vokoun and Byzgalov are the best available, but they are also too pricey and I like the inexpensive Howard for now and we need to figure out if our best goalie prospect is going to be a good tandem or we might need to draft a goalie eventually, but we have a lot of youth in Howard's respectable play so that's why I want to hammer in on defense so hard right now so we can have that be a massive strength in the future when it comes time to worry about goalie again. Brian Boucher looks like the best value player on that list, but he also is on a great team that helps him out a lot.

[Rodya]

I agree that we need to sacrifice some of our great offensive depth for the sake of the immediate and long-term future of our defense. But it's difficult to make a case as to who we should sign without knowing how much Howard and Eriksson re-sign for, and more importantly, whether Lidstrom re-signs at all. These three are sure to cut deeply into whatever cap space we may or may not have this off-season. That's, of course, not to say we couldn't strengthen our defense via trade, which I've been wanting for some time now.

In regards to Lidstrom's manhood...I try to resist the urge to judge a man's character and decisions. I believe beyond any doubt that Lidstrom has as much character as any athlete is professional sports. If he decides that he's had enough after almost 20 years of service to the Wings, who the hell are we to judge? He owes the fans absolutely no explanation, he's given more than enough.

That being said, I'd still be disappointed to see him go. Physically, he still has plenty in the tank and the Wings would miss his on ice leadership and sense of calm. But, if he retires, I definitely won't think any less of him and nor should anyone else.

[TSE]

It's not about having enough, the money is too great that his personal choice of it "being enough" isn't a good enough reason to walk away from that money. There are desperate people in the world that could use that money and he could just give it to them if he didn't want it. There are strangers that he could work for and donate money to, but I'm sure he has plenty of family and friends that could use some help too, and to not take a one year contract for ten million or whatever freak rate he can secure is just a selfish thing to pass up, whether he feels like it or not, he should do everything he can to take care of those he loves or to give back to this Earth that has been so giving to him. He doesn't owe an explanation if he leaves, but he should give one if he wants fans like me to give him any chance of respecting him for the rest of his life, because being a good hockey player for a long time is one thing, but to not do the right thing in extremely obvious and multi-million dollar situations like this is another, and without an explanation I would just find myself stuck with feeling like he is a selfish person for prioritizing his own personal interests over the greater good that he could accomplish with an extra massive fortune. That's kind of like the reason you see guys like Brett Favre keep coming back, because they don't really want to play as bad as they used to, and can't as well as they used to, but at the last minute there's always the acknowledgment that they could get by and secure that contract, and that money is worth more than a personal preference or comfort zone. Favre did the right thing and kept taking the giant contracts for as long as he possibly could, and now he has that much more money to do good with for those around him that he cares about. It's the only respectable way to go out in my mind in situations like this.

[Rodya]

^ Yeah, Favre took the money for humanitarian reasons...not due to his ego or vanity, but because he intends on compensating the teachers in Wisconsin for lost benefits. /s

To keep the topic on Lidstrom. How is it possible to argue against the idea that people, who are in positions to make exuberant amount of dollars, shouldn't continue to work and make sizable donations? I'm not going to say that it wouldn't be an honorable thing to do, but your standard of right unreasonable to expect. How is it fair to criticize an individual for not being Saint like? And make no mistake, playing an entire NHL season and donating one's entire salary to charity is bordering one Saint like, regardless of the salary.

Furthermore, you mention that even if the money is kept for his loved ones, that is preferable to retirement. I'm just interested how you feel you have the audacity to make such a claim. I'm sure Lidstrom has his family's interests at heart and if he decides retirement is the preferred route, I highly doubt he's doing it in spite of them.

TL; DR - You're right in that it's honorable to sacrifice one's time and money for the greater good. Nonetheless, your standard expectations of Lidstrom are ridiculous and entirely unfair to expect of any man, athlete or not. We can agree to disagree, I would rather not have this thread depart from the modest purpose of discussing post-season moves. If you'd like, one of us can create a relative topic on the OT board and continue discussing athlete philanthropy there.

[TSE]

Sounds like a boring discussion topic, you are the one that inquired, I just noticed somebody talking about retirement as a possibility and I disagreed and listed what I believe are firmly reasons why Lidstrom won't retire. If Lidstrom doesn't share that opinion then it's a moot point, my philosophy of sticking around to earn that kind of money is what I assume to be Lidstrom's philosophy because to me that is what any logical person would do and how they would look at it, and I just assume that Lidstrom would agree with that sentiment, but perhaps he doesn't. There are only 2 possibilities, either LIdstrom is on the same page with me, or he isn't. If he is, then everything I say is exactly correct and true from his perspective and what's the issue? I just clarified where the both of us stand. If he isn't on the same page with me, then all I'm saying is I wish that I could know his personal thought process to understand the decision, cause absent an explanation I would spend the rest of my life thinking very little of him as a man because of his negligence of the opportunity he had before him and no logical reason existing in my mind to justify his passing of that responsibility, if one does indeed exist as I assume it logically would...

Same treatment I give to Joe Dumars. I once respected him because he was a nice good player, but now I despise the man for what I think are essentially the effect on us as if they were criminal actions that victimized our city. I don't care what his intentions are, I only care about the specific damage that he's done that is INEXCUSABLE. It's like if the world's biggest gun novice started playing with a gun and trying to put one together with another person in the room and the gun goes off because the guy operating the gun had no clue how the thing works mechanically. Yet his friend didnt' worry because he ignorantly believed that he did know how the thing works, and honestly believing you are qualified to do something you are not is one of my biggest pet peeves in the world, I despise people who are so blind to their flaws that they qualify themselves for things they aren't qualified for, I believe those people should go to jail when they interfere and damage communities or economies etc. His intentions were good and to show his friend the cooleset and funnest game in town, but his intentions mean jack, I think that guy should be punished harshly, tarred and feathered, and used as an example to deter such a horrid event from ever taking place again if possible.

So I'd just be disappointed to have a falling out with Lidstrom. It's not like I expect him to use the money for humanitarian reasons, that's not the point. If Lidstrom loves hookers more than sick children and wants to spend his money on that, then he's doing an incredibly terrible disservice to his hooker girlfriends that he should be securing as much money as he can to make sure they are taken care of, to neglect your most important group in your life is just a sick abortion of your own personal agenda. I don't know who or what Lidstrom values, that's his business and we'll never truly know his mind, if it were me I'm looking to use the money towards say running for political office so that maybe I can get a job in politics to then improve the world. For somebody else it may be just to donate the money to a charity or give to their kids, the specifics aren't that relevant and you were missing the point of my post by trying to analyze that, I just picked an example to illustrate the concept of why retiring with 10 mill on the table is a nonsensical thing to do no matter what a person's interests are. But again, if there are other factors at play such as some movie producers offers Lidstrom a lucrative acting contract that he can make more in that then hockey, well then yeah sure go ahead and retire, or maybe he has something else he can do for 5M, so he only loses 5. To retire in the face of losing 10M is much different than 5M, and if/when I learn of what LIdstrom's true economic alternatives are for when he does retire, then well the bigger the money is there, the less of a degree I would disrespect him obviously. I will most likely never know this and thus never be able to conjure up an opinion on this, so it's a moot point anyhow on the actuality of it, but that was never the point. All it was for was justification of the actual decision, it seemed like you got lost so we apparently broke it down to understand what was behind the theory of my hypotheticals. None of this convo was necessary for me at all, I was just going the extra mile in trying to help you understand my post!

[Rodya]

Sounds like a boring discussion topic, you are the one that inquired, I just noticed somebody talking about retirement as a possibility and I disagreed and listed what I believe are firmly reasons why Lidstrom won't retire. If Lidstrom doesn't share that opinion then it's a moot point, my philosophy of sticking around to earn that kind of money is what I assume to be Lidstrom's philosophy because to me that is what any logical person would do and how they would look at it, and I just assume that Lidstrom would agree with that sentiment, but perhaps he doesn't. There are only 2 possibilities, either LIdstrom is on the same page with me, or he isn't. If he is, then everything I say is exactly correct and true from his perspective and what's the issue? I just clarified where the both of us stand. If he isn't on the same page with me, then all I'm saying is I wish that I could know his personal thought process to understand the decision, cause absent an explanation I would spend the rest of my life thinking very little of him as a man because of his negligence of the opportunity he had before him and no logical reason existing in my mind to justify his passing of that responsibility, if one does indeed exist as I assume it logically would...

Same treatment I give to Joe Dumars. I once respected him because he was a nice good player, but now I despise the man for what I think are essentially the effect on us as if they were criminal actions that victimized our city. I don't care what his intentions are, I only care about the specific damage that he's done that is INEXCUSABLE. It's like if the world's biggest gun novice started playing with a gun and trying to put one together with another person in the room and the gun goes off because the guy operating the gun had no clue how the thing works mechanically. Yet his friend didnt' worry because he ignorantly believed that he did know how the thing works, and honestly believing you are qualified to do something you are not is one of my biggest pet peeves in the world, I despise people who are so blind to their flaws that they qualify themselves for things they aren't qualified for, I believe those people should go to jail when they interfere and damage communities or economies etc. His intentions were good and to show his friend the cooleset and funnest game in town, but his intentions mean jack, I think that guy should be punished harshly, tarred and feathered, and used as an example to deter such a horrid event from ever taking place again if possible.

So I'd just be disappointed to have a falling out with Lidstrom. It's not like I expect him to use the money for humanitarian reasons, that's not the point. If Lidstrom loves hookers more than sick children and wants to spend his money on that, then he's doing an incredibly terrible disservice to his hooker girlfriends that he should be securing as much money as he can to make sure they are taken care of, to neglect your most important group in your life is just a sick abortion of your own personal agenda. I don't know who or what Lidstrom values, that's his business and we'll never truly know his mind, if it were me I'm looking to use the money towards say running for political office so that maybe I can get a job in politics to then improve the world. For somebody else it may be just to donate the money to a charity or give to their kids, the specifics aren't that relevant and you were missing the point of my post by trying to analyze that, I just picked an example to illustrate the concept of why retiring with 10 mill on the table is a nonsensical thing to do no matter what a person's interests are. But again, if there are other factors at play such as some movie producers offers Lidstrom a lucrative acting contract that he can make more in that then hockey, well then yeah sure go ahead and retire, or maybe he has something else he can do for 5M, so he only loses 5. To retire in the face of losing 10M is much different than 5M, and if/when I learn of what LIdstrom's true economic alternatives are for when he does retire, then well the bigger the money is there, the less of a degree I would disrespect him obviously. I will most likely never know this and thus never be able to conjure up an opinion on this, so it's a moot point anyhow on the actuality of it, but that was never the point. All it was for was justification of the actual decision, it seemed like you got lost so we apparently broke it down to understand what was behind the theory of my hypotheticals. None of this convo was necessary for me at all, I was just going the extra mile in trying to help you understand my post!

I don't mean to come off as offensive or belittling, but I just want to warn you that I have very little respect for you as a man. You have such an immense knowledge of Basketball, Baseball, Football, and Hockey and yet you waste your time posting these prophetic assessments on a lowly sports aggregate site, not to mention on a forum receiving less than 5 posts a week, tops! You're talents would be better served actually advising one of these desperate Detroit franchises. The fact that you're not fully utilizing your gift, well...I'd just be disappointed to have a falling out with you.

Furthermore, I'd like to apologize that this specific thread was not sufficiently interesting enough for you and that you were practically forced to take in an entirely unnecessary tangent. BTW! Thank you so much for going the extra mile (thats a really long walk!) to explain your post to me, I thought I'd have to call my handler to read it to me.

::Now, to find that foe button::

[TSE]

Ok..well moving on then, i just saw little action in this forum and wanted to try and contribute my offseason thoughts here to give any possible lurkers a couple of ideas to consider, I wasn't looking to play games with somebody that wants to make things personal. It's a question that I thought was fascinating and interesting and I wish there were tons of people making an effort to answer it so I could read some material on the subject and see other possible ideas myself since I'm not that intimately familiar with all of the NHL players. I figured some material is better than others and if anybody can find value or entertainment in hearing out some early ideas from a casual hockey fan, then more power to them.

Besides in my example LIdstrom has complete control and power over his destiny with regard to what I'm talking about, and I can't just simply choose or will myself to have the GM jobs of these teams, that's dependent on other people, plus I dont know why the Wings would hire me considering I even prefaced a declaration in my post that I'm NOT a hockey expert. But whatever, I guess if I'm a foe you won't be able to read this anyhow. I'm sorry for wasting your time and not participating in your thread to your satisfaction level, I honestly tried my best though so at least that's something lol, later dude.

[ajaX82]

I've followed the Wings since i was a wee lad. Nick is my favorite player ever. I'd like to say I know a thing or two about the Wings and hockey. That said...

It's not about the money with Nick. He's won cups and Norris trophies and had a top-5 career in terms of defenseman...ever. He wanted to go back to Sweden back a few years ago IIRC too. And with 4 kids, he probably wants to see them grow up. Why would he stay is the real question?

TSE i can't even begin to sift through your long, drawn out arguments but he has made his money. He has won his titles and awards. And he signed a 1 year deal last offseason...probably so he could retire. I think he is content to go out on top. I am almost positive he will retire after the year

[Rodya]

Finally, back on topic. I know I spent several posts defending Lidstrom's manhood (**** if I know why), but I must admit I can't see him walking away from $6.5 million next year. To draw a parallel to the NBA, that's nearing max money. I've never heard of a player, in any sports, retiring with that kind of money still on the table, especially from a contender. Actually, the only player I can think of is Michael Jordan, but money was never lacking in Jordan's case.

Even in baseball, where players (pitchers primarily) continually play well into their forties - they only retire due to scandal (Clemens & Bonds) or injury (Schilling). With his home being an hour from the stadium, I really can't see him leaving another potential Cup and $6.5 on the table.

Edit: Just to make things interesting, I'm willing to wager a 6-pack of your choice that Lidstrom re-signs, you game?

[ajaX82]

Finally, back on topic. I know I spent several posts defending Lidstrom's manhood (**** if I know why), but I must admit I can't see him walking away from $6.5 million next year. To draw a parallel to the NBA, that's nearing max money. I've never heard of a player, in any sports, retiring with that kind of money still on the table, especially from a contender. Actually, the only player I can think of is Michael Jordan, but money was never lacking in Jordan's case.

Even in baseball, where players (pitchers primarily) continually play well into their forties - they only retire due to scandal (Clemens & Bonds) or injury (Schilling). With his home being an hour from the stadium, I really can't see him leaving another potential Cup and $6.5 on the table.

Edit: Just to make things interesting, I'm willing to wager a 6-pack of your choice that Lidstrom re-signs, you game?

The problem with what you are saying is Lidstrom isn't owed money next year. He signed a one year deal in the offseason...he is a FA after the season. Check the site below (a great site for hockey salary info btw)

http://www.capgeek.com/charts.php?Team=15

And yes I will absolutely wager a sixer on him retiring

[Rodya]

I know Lidstrom isn't under contract for next year, but he might as well be, because Holland will most definitely offer him a contract similar to this year's. In regards to leaving money on the table, I don't see much of a difference between being under contract and having an offer of equal value on the table.

I prefer Oberon, it'll be in season by free-agency period.

[Rodya]

Btw, Ajax, you were right about be underestimating the worth of Howard's next contract. Dallas' Niemi just got a contract averaging approximately $4 million per. We can expect Howard to receive any were from $3 to $3.5 annually.

[ajaX82]

Btw, Ajax, you were right about be underestimating the worth of Howard's next contract. Dallas' Niemi just got a contract averaging approximately $4 million per. We can expect Howard to receive any were from $3 to $3.5 annually.

We actually just gave Howie an extension yesterday for 4.5 million for 2 years, so I was actually kinda wrong. Very good price for him

link: http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf ... _jimm.html

[ajaX82]

I know Lidstrom isn't under contract for next year, but he might as well be, because Holland will most definitely offer him a contract similar to this year's. In regards to leaving money on the table, I don't see much of a difference between being under contract and having an offer of equal value on the table.

I prefer Oberon, it'll be in season by free-agency period.

I also prefer Oberon, a gentleman's beer if i do say. It's on

Holland will certainly offer a nice deal, but like I said earlier, Nick has made tons of money. He doesn't need more. I think he will be content to have family time and rest.

But we shall see

[Rodya]

Btw, Ajax, you were right about be underestimating the worth of Howard's next contract. Dallas' Niemi just got a contract averaging approximately $4 million per. We can expect Howard to receive any were from $3 to $3.5 annually.

We actually just gave Howie an extension yesterday for 4.5 million for 2 years, so I was actually kinda wrong. Very good price for him

link: http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf ... _jimm.html

Wow, we came out pretty well in that deal. I would've preferred something longer than 2 years, but at that price I can't really complain. It's hard to believe a goalie, Niemi, can get a $3.8 million per deal while averaging a mediocre .919 SV% and 2.40 GAA. I'm sure his contract is partially inflated due to his finals performances a season ago.

In a way, we're lucky Howard is having a bit of sophomore slump, it had to have been a deciding factor in constructing the new deal.

[TSE]

Mediocre? Those are fantastic stats for Niemi! He's clearly better than Patrick Roy with those numbers. He's basically a young Domenik Hasek (.922 career). Those are just 2 guys I picked off the top of my head. Maybe name who you think are the top ten best goalies in hockey history and let's look at their stats and see how many of them save that high of a percentage?

[Rodya]

You're comparison is false. First of all, comparing 3/4 of season's stat to another player's entire career is wrong on several levels. Secondly, comparing goalies from different eras is equally ridiculous. This graph shows how since the late 90s and implementation of additional goalie biased rules since that decade, goals per game have decreased substantially. Also, if you try to compare Roy and Hasek's stats during the last 10-5 years, remember that these two were far outside their prime, nearing 40 years of age.

Back to Niemi, in my opinion, his play has been just above average. Currently, without precondition, he has the 25th highest S% and at the same spot in goals against. Excuse me if those numbers don't inspire huge confidence. Currently, the goalies make more than him are Backstrom, Brodeur, DiPietro, Bryzgalov, Fleury, Hiller, Kipsuroff, LeClaire, Luongo, Miller, Thomas, and Voukon. For the most part, these goalies are head and shoulders above Niemi. For god sakes, the team he won the Cup with decided to go with Marty Turco instead of him.