Kukla's Korner

The Malik Report

A pair of interviews with Red Wings GM Ken Holland

Big Update at 1:45 PM: Here’s Ken Holland speaking to RedWingsTV about the Wings’ additions (via RedWingsFeed on Twitter):

Before I head out the door: Red Wings GM Ken Holland appeared on WDFN on Tuesday to discuss the team’s re-signing of Jonathan Ericsson, goaltending situation and Mike Commodore’s addition to the team, and MLive’s Phil Zaroo posted some of the highlights thereof...

Ken Holland raised some eyebrows when he signed Jonathan Ericsson to a three-year, $9.75 million deal last week. Plenty of observers thought the Detroit Red Wings general manager overpaid to keep a defenseman who has struggled to contribute on a consistent basis over the last couple of seasons. Holland understands, but sees things a bit differently.

“Well, I think if you’d looked at the market, and Jonathan Ericsson had (signed elsewhere), I think he would’ve gotten a much bigger raise than we gave him,” he told Matt Shepard on WDFN-AM 1130 Detroit. “He’s 27 years of age. He’s 6-foot-5. If you look at defensemen, and there’s guys around the league that, really – 29, 30, 31 ... defense is such a hard position – there’s those guys that hit the league at 23, 24. They’re probably going to be the superstars. Jonathan Ericsson is still a work in progress, like most 27-year-old defensemen, and he’s 6-foot-5.”

The Red Wings are confident Ericsson will deliver on his potential, and become a bigger part of Detroit’s defensive rotation. Also, Holland noted, there are some factors which are simply out of his hands.

“It’s all market-driven,” he said of the free agent salaries. “As you saw, what happened from July 1 on, we had to make a decision in advance of July 1, and I think, based on what happened, we’re pretty happy with that decision.”

Once again, here’s the interview…


Download file

And Holland also spoke to WBBL’s Bakita and Bentley this morning, discussing the Wings’ free agency moves and the goaltending situation:


Download file

My apologies for the lack of transcription. I’m headed to Traverse City in a few hours.

Filed in: | The Malik Report | Permalink
 

Comments

red_wings_49's avatar

But… he sucks.

Posted by red_wings_49 from Mad Heights, MI on 07/06/11 at 01:33 PM ET

awould's avatar

Reading between the lines:

“He’s 27 years of age and sucks at hockey. He’s 6-foot-5 yet he still sucks. If you look at good defensemen, not Ericsson, and there’s guys around the league that, really – 29, 30, 31 ... defense is such a hard position for Ericsson– there’s those guys that hit the league at 23, 24. They’re probably going to be the superstars unlike Ericsson. Jonathan Ericsson, who sucks, is still a work in progress, like most 27-year-old defensemen, and he’s 6-foot-5. And he sucks.”

Posted by awould on 07/06/11 at 01:37 PM ET

Modnar's avatar

He’s not even any good at being 6’5” - he plays like he’s Hudler’s size.

Posted by Modnar on 07/06/11 at 01:58 PM ET

Nathan's avatar

Ericsson is the new Lilja.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 07/06/11 at 02:10 PM ET

Avatar

I wish Holland would stop trying to defend the signing.

First off, it’s basically indefensible.  You can’t, on one hand, say that you’re not going to overpay for free agents, then overpay for your own free agent Ericsson, then defend yourself by saying that everyone was overpaying for free agents.

Especially when, after overpaying for Ericsson, you sign two other free agents and not only don’t overpay for them, but you get them both for half a million more than you paid Ericsson, and they’re both better than Ericsson.

And it’s also indefensible because a) I doubt there are many guys who, on the open market, QUADRUPLED their cap hit from last year, and b) while everyone was overpaying on Friday, they were overpaying for guys who have done stuff.  Ehrhoff and Wisniewski were overpaid, but they each put up 50 points or more last year, that’s more than 3x what Ericsson put up.  Hell, even Holland’s own other signing Ian White put up almost double the points that Ericsson did and he’s getting paid almost half a million less than Ericsson is.

And also, don’t defend the signing because frankly, you don’t have to.  Don’t pretend that’s market value for Ericsson, don’t pretend the team would’ve been hurt if you lost him, just say that you see potential and want to give him time to blossom.  That’s all you need to say.  F*ck all the haters (myself very much included).  Sign who you want to sign and let his play decide whether you overpaid or not.

Posted by Garth on 07/06/11 at 02:25 PM ET

Hootinani's avatar

The timing of the timing of the signing, as well as the length of the negotiation before that, suggests that becuase Holland lost out on the chance to sign the bigger free agents (because he was unwilling to be aggressive), he paniced and signed Ericsson to a hugely inflated contract to make sure they had some kind of stability on the back end.  Unfortunately the market has shown that defensemen of any age with limited talent, including the Wings own signings, weren’t going to be overpaid this offseason, and it was a misstep on Holland’s part.

And while it hasn’t hurt the cap this year, it will hurt the Wings’ salary structure down the road when Kronwall, Stuart, and Kindl need new contracts, and if Smith turns out to be as good as he has shown in the AHL, his contract will be affected by this as well.

Posted by Hootinani on 07/06/11 at 02:45 PM ET

Hootinani's avatar

thats just one timing in that last post. Although the timing of the timing should also be looked into as well. smile

Posted by Hootinani on 07/06/11 at 02:47 PM ET

Avatar

Awould:

I could not have said it better myself…but…I wish that I am wrong..that E. will end up ok (meaning average…just not BAD) and that I will be down on my knees asking for Holland’s forgiveness for doubting him by the end of the season. I don’t see it happening, but I honestly hope that our GM…our great GM..has not lost his marbles and just sees some type of potential in this guy..that we cannot see…please let it be so.

Posted by Meg on 07/06/11 at 03:08 PM ET

Avatar

This signing should have no bearing whatsoever on Kronwall’s, Stuart’s or Kindl’s contracts.

Kronwall is already going to be getting a first-pairing contract and Stuart should be getting a raise too,  Kindl is very likely to be the 7th defenseman this year, so he’s not going to be getting a raise any time soon.

And frankly, Ian White’s contract balances out Ericsson’s in terms of salary structure because he is a better defenseman than Ericsson and he’s getting paid less.  And if Commodore works out then it will be even better for the Wings, because if someone points out Ericsson’s deal then Holland can point out White’s and Commodore’s to show how replaceable non-top-two defensemen are.

Was it a misstep?  Yeah, in my opinion it was, but it wasn’t a crazy misstep and it was balanced out nicely by the Commodore and White signings which were very solid and took the pressure of immediately jumping into a top-four role off of Ericsson.

Posted by Garth on 07/06/11 at 03:08 PM ET

Avatar

but I honestly hope that our GM…our great GM..has not lost his marbles

I hardly think one potentially bad signing means that he’s lost his marbles.

Posted by Garth on 07/06/11 at 03:09 PM ET

awould's avatar

My main problem with Ericsson is he has always just been potential. And he demanded money as though he achieved something. His first contract was supposed to be about proving something so that he would be worthy of a high-dollar re-signing. He proved nothing and it is arguable that he actually regressed in some areas.

The only argument I keep hearing is “he’s 6’5” and 27 years old”. Nothing about how that translates to anything good on the ice other than “we still believe in him”.

I don’t see it happening, but of course nobody knows for sure. And Garth is right that the White/Commodore deals balance it out in the overall salary structure but they also highlight how bad it is. White’s contract is as good as Ericsson’s is bad.

In the long run this contract will not hurt the Wings. It is only 3 years. When Lidstrom retires, it will free up all the cash needed to give Kronwall and Stuart what they deserve.

Posted by awould on 07/06/11 at 03:32 PM ET

Leo_Racicot's avatar

“He’s 27 years of age. He’s 6-foot-5. If you look at defensemen, and there’s guys around the league that, really – 29, 30, 31 ... defense is such a hard position – there’s those guys that hit the league at 23, 24. They’re probably going to be the superstars. Jonathan Ericsson is still a work in progress, like most 27-year-old defensemen, and he’s 6-foot-5.”

Holland is making a fool of himself.  Fortunately for him, he has a media full of lap dogs that come with nothing to challenge him on this ridiculous sentiment he is going with:

Dear Ken,

5m over 2 years = 2.5m hit

XO’s
Anton Babchuk
PS - I’m 6’5” and I’ve played 250 career games, nearly 100 more than your guy that you signed for an extra year at 750k more than me.

Posted by Leo_Racicot on 07/06/11 at 03:33 PM ET

Avatar

the White/Commodore deals balance it out in the overall salary structure but they also highlight how bad it is. White’s contract is as good as Ericsson’s is bad.

You’re right, it does, but in Holland’s defense, it is something of a hindsight is 20/20 deal.  If he had known he could’ve gotten those guys for that cheap, would he have agreed to Ericsson’s deal?  Probably not, but that’s not something you can really predict.

I choose to look at it as a precautionary tale.  If Ericsson succeeds, then Holland is a genius for seeing past the roughness at what Ericsson was going to be but if it fails, Holland needs to frame the contract and simply point at it any time a young defenseman with “potential” wants too much money.

Fool me once, shame on you but fool me twice, shame on me.

Posted by Garth on 07/06/11 at 03:59 PM ET

Avatar

I think E got more than he deserved, but i think this contract has a lot less to do with his worth than most people seem to.  If they let Ericsson walk, they would have been replacing 3 D-men.  Replacing half of the defense that played in the playoffs and all of the assistant coaches is a dramatic change for a team that values stability like the wings.

This was the price Holland was willing to pay to not need to sign 3 D-men on July 1.  Did they get a better value in signing Commodore and White, yes. Could they have signed one more without dramatically overpaying?
Was it worth an extra million per season to not have to replace another D-man, not need to rush Smith along, and not take the risk of missing out on UFA signings on July 1? Kenny seems to think so.

They still have plenty of cap space for next season.  If White, Kindle and Smith are everything everyone is hoping for, they should be able to move Ericsson.  Even though we might think its high, plenty of teams will be looking to add defense during the season or at the trade deadline.

Posted by jwad on 07/06/11 at 04:28 PM ET

Amerinadian's avatar

Unfortunately the market has shown that defensemen of any age with limited talent, including the Wings own signings, weren’t going to be overpaid this offseason, and it was a misstep on Holland’s part.

James Wisniewski says “that’s what you think”.

Posted by Amerinadian from Chicago via Toronto on 07/06/11 at 04:42 PM ET

Avatar

James Wisniewski says “that’s what you think”.

Tied for 5th in scoring for defensemen asks what your definition of “limited talent” is.

Posted by Garth on 07/06/11 at 04:50 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Tied for 5th in scoring for defensemen asks what your definition of “limited talent” is.

Posted by Garth on 07/06/11 at 02:50 PM ET

Wait, are you telling me that Wisniewski isn’t overpaid?

5th in defensive scoring would be more impressive if he wasn’t the most defensively sheltered member of the Canadiens’ blueliner corps.

I would say my definition of “limited talent” depends entirely on the talent which is to be expected of a man’s pay scale.  For a $5.5M cap hit, I expect him at least on the outskirts of the Norris trophy talk… to at least show up on one ballot.

Wisniewski will have as much of a challenge living up to his cap hit as Ericsson will.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 07/06/11 at 05:11 PM ET

WingsFaninCO's avatar

Tied for 5th in scoring for defensemen asks what your definition of “limited talent” is.

Posted by Garth on 07/06/11 at 02:50 PM ET

We all know he is talented at charades.  But I still don’t think that balances out his cap hit.

Posted by WingsFaninCO on 07/06/11 at 05:15 PM ET

Avatar

Wait, are you telling me that Wisniewski isn’t overpaid?

I’m saying exactly the opposite.

Hootinani said d-men with “limited talent” weren’t being overpaid Amerindian is using Wisniewski as an argument against that.

I’m saying Wisniewski was overpaid because he isn’t a d-man with “limited talent”.

He may not be a top defenseman, but he’s a talented offensive defenseman, as was shown by his stats.

All I was saying is that I wouldn’t put Ericsson’s 15 points in the same league as Wisniewski’s 51 points.  They were both overpaid.

Wisniewski will have as much of a challenge living up to his cap hit as Ericsson will.

I agree 100%.

Posted by Garth on 07/06/11 at 05:22 PM ET

Avatar

But I still don’t think that balances out his cap hit.

Not what I said.

Posted by Garth on 07/06/11 at 05:32 PM ET

Amerinadian's avatar

Tied for 5th in scoring for defensemen asks what your definition of “limited talent” is.

Outside of last year (his 6th in the NHL), he’s never come close to the 40 point barrier and only scored more than 3 goals once. He flourished on a team (Montreal) that has finished in the top 10 in PP% in 5 of the 6 years since the lockout, and a team on which he scored 16 of his 30 points on the PP. Did he make the Canadiens PP better or was he a product of the system?

I can not believe that Wisniewski is worth $5.5M on any planet, especially when last year (the one year that shows he has any sembalnce talent, let alone “limited talent”) he had 1 more hit and 2 less blocked shots than our own Mr Ericsson, a player blasted for being “soft”.

I say all of this with the disclaimer that I abhor the Ericsson contract and think it was way too much money. My point was simply that Wisniewski was overpaid, as was Ehrhoff, Ericsson, Montador and many others. Wisniewski took advantage of being slightly better than the rest of the scrubs that were available via free agency among defensemen and scored a huge deal. In a year with even a few other decent defensemen, he would barely have made $4M a year. Put quite simply, he’s not that good.

Posted by Amerinadian from Chicago via Toronto on 07/06/11 at 05:33 PM ET

awould's avatar

I think White may be the only defenseman that didn’t get overpaid this past week.

Posted by awould on 07/06/11 at 05:58 PM ET

Avatar

Outside of last year (his 6th in the NHL), he’s never come close to the 40 point barrier

You’re right.  I don’t get the point though, since he’s clearly been improving as he’s played and, by some strange coincindence, the more games he plays in a season, the more points he gets!

only scored more than 3 goals once.

Or twice, if we’re actually counting.  And coincidentally again, the three years he’s played over 60 games he’s had the his biggest goal totals.

Did he make the Canadiens PP better or was he a product of the system?

Godo question, and unless you can definitely say he was a product of the system, you shouldn’t disparage him.

I can not believe that Wisniewski is worth $5.5M on any planet

Once more for the cheap seats, I’m not saying he is.

Put quite simply, he’s not that good.

Fair enough, but relative to the rest of the pack, he and Ehrhoff were the obvious “stars” (along with Pitkanen who chose to stay put), which is why it’s not surprising that he was overpaid in the way that it is suprising and somewhat out of whack that Ericsson was overpaid, and that he was so overpaid in comparison to Ehrhoff, Wisniewski and Pitkanen (and Jovonovski…but I honestly don’t think that any Florida signings should count because those guys were overpaid in order to make the cap floor, not because of talent).

How’s that for a convoluted run-on sentence?

Posted by Garth on 07/06/11 at 06:00 PM ET

Avatar

I think White may be the only defenseman that didn’t get overpaid this past week.

You very well may be right.

Posted by Garth on 07/06/11 at 06:01 PM ET

cowboycoffee's avatar

OMG, who filmed that crap?!?!?!?!?!!

Simple Rules of Interview Production:

1: Sit at the eye level of the person your interviewing, so they don’t have to look UP at you while filming

2: An on-camera light. One that has changeable color balance.

3: Never shoot someone in the middle of the frame, looking into the camera lens UNLESS it’s an instructional video.

This makes me want to move back to Detroit.

Posted by cowboycoffee from San Francisco, CA on 07/06/11 at 06:04 PM ET

Amerinadian's avatar

You’re right.  I don’t get the point though, since he’s clearly been improving as he’s played and, by some strange coincindence, the more games he plays in a season, the more points he gets!

Fair enough. Rather than look at point totals, look at PPG. Only twice in his 6 full seasons has he scored over .5 PPG (last year and 2008-09 when he had 24 points in 48 games with 2 teams). I don’t see a solid track record that indicates he’s clearly improving.

Or twice, if we’re actually counting.  And coincidentally again, the three years he’s played over 60 games he’s had the his biggest goal totals.

Sorry, this was my fault. I meant he only scored over 3 goals once prior to last season (2007-08).

Godo question, and unless you can definitely say he was a product of the system, you shouldn’t disparage him.

I’m simply asking the question. Only time give us the answer. My guess is that the Montreal PP made him look good, but I could be wrong (wouldn’t be the first time).

How’s that for a convoluted run-on sentence?

I understood it perfectly, and I agree with you.

Posted by Amerinadian from Chicago via Toronto on 07/06/11 at 06:09 PM ET

Avatar

My brother is also 6’ 5” and only 26, I’m wagering he would be willing to sign for as little as $2 mil if Kenny is looking for a deal on inches. 

He and Babcock are both strangely enamored with how tall E is.  There is never an interview without it being mentioned as some sort of nonsensical counter-point to the fact that he’s bad.  Holland even did it twice in the same paragraph here.

Posted by Nick on 07/06/11 at 06:32 PM ET

SnLO's avatar

So all this Errorson talk prompted me to look at the numbers a little deeper just to see how bad he sucks. Just so there is not confusion, going into this my position is that I don’t like his future cap hit based on past performace, but there is always a chance (however minute) that he could be good value or even a steal.

I took last years defenseman and included the new additions to better evaluate what we had and what we replaced and what we have going forward.

I decided to look at what stats generally make a good defenseman. Those include Hits, Blocked Shots, GiveAways, TakeAways, AttemptedShots (inclusive of misses and shots), +/-, Goals, Assists, TOI (divided between Even, ShortHanded, PowerPlay, Shift and Total), and number of Shifts. Rather than compare totals of raw numbers because of unequal games played, I decided to average the stats into a per game basis to try and get a better basis of comparison between players. The following table is sorted alphabetically by first name (that’s just the way I have it in excel). Apologies in advance if this gets garbled.

Player   GP   Hit pG   BkS pG   GvA pG   TkA pG   NetG/T   +/-  Att/G   Att%  G   A   ES TOI/G   SH TOI/G   PP TOI/G   TOI/G   TOI/S   Sft/G
Brad Stuart           67   2.0   1.7   0.8   0.2   -39   4   1.7   2.6 %  3   17   17:24   3:32   0:34   21:31   49   26.4
Brian Rafalski       63   0.8   0.9   0.9   0.2   -45   11   2.3   2.8%  4   44   16:38   0:13   3:32   20:25   51   24.2
Doug Janik             7   0.3   1.0   0.7   0.0   -5   -2   1.3   0.0%  0   0   12:24   0:46   0:01   13:13   46   17.4
Ian White             78   0.8   1.8   0.3   0.4   4   3   2.7   1.9%  4   22   16:42   1:04   2:31   19:59   0:48   24.8
Jakub Kindl           48   0.9   0.8   0.4   0.2   -9   -6   1.7   2.4%  2   2   12:44   0:09   0:42   13:36   46   17.8
Jonathan Ericsson   74   1.4   0.5   0.8   0.2   -40   8   1.8   2.3%  3   12   17:17   1:25   0:07   18:50   46   24.6
Mike Commodore   20   1.9   1.3   0.4   0.3   -2   -8   2.3   4.3%  2   4   14:17   2:32   1:43   18:33   42   26.3
Nicklas Lidstrom     82   0.6   1.1   0.4   0.4   0   -2   3.2   6.1%  16   46   16:44   2:40   4:03   23:28   53   26.7
Niklas Kronwall       77   1.5   1.7   0.6   0.3   -23   5   2.4   5.9%  11   26   17:21   2:55   2:35   22:52   48   28.3
Ruslan Salei           75   1.6   1.5   0.5   0.3   -16   0   1.5   1.8%  2   8   15:43   2:10   0:04   17:57   48   22.5


What I found interesting to learn is that despite our gripes of BigE being a 6’5” Hudler, he is credited with being one of the more physical defenseman averaging 1.4 hits per game (right behind Kronwall at 1.5). For being a “big body” he blocks a team worst one shot every two games. He is tied for second with Stuart behind Rafalski for Giveaways at .8 per game. He averages .2 Takeaways per game and has a Net GiveAway/TakeAway of -40 trailing only Rafalski with a team-worst -45 (Interesting that Lids is even and newcomer Ian White is the only plus defenseman at a +4) Ericsson has the second best +/- at +8 (behind Rafalski’s +11). He averages 1.8 shot attempts per game and only 2.3% of his shots attempts result in a goal (I didn’t show but should’ve is that 32% of all Ericssons shots attempts miss the net and is third worst behind White at 33% and Lids and Selei at 34%). OK, that’s enough of boring you with what you can read for yourselves.

Ultimately, what I think this is saying is that either on paper Ericsson is being paid a competitive wage because his numbers relatively in line with the rest of the defense; or maybe this team does not really have that good of a defense and Ericsson is being overpaid. I don’t know…

Fun with numbers!

Posted by SnLO from the sub great-white north on 07/06/11 at 06:55 PM ET

MsRedWinger's avatar

I think E got more than he deserved, but i think this contract has a lot less to do with his worth than most people seem to.  If they let Ericsson walk, they would have been replacing 3 D-men.  Replacing half of the defense that played in the playoffs and all of the assistant coaches is a dramatic change for a team that values stability like the wings.  Did they get a better value in signing Commodore and White, yes. Could they have signed one more without dramatically overpaying?
Was it worth an extra million per season to not have to replace another D-man, not need to rush Smith along, and not take the risk of missing out on UFA signings on July 1? Kenny seems to think so.

Posted by jwad on 07/06/11 at 02:28 PM ET

An interesting point and one I hadn’t seen before. 

Leo, I know you don’t like the BigE contract.  But if Babchuk was so appealing, why do you think Holland didn’t go after him?  Wasn’t he one of the later signings?

Posted by MsRedWinger from Flori-duh on 07/06/11 at 06:57 PM ET

SnLO's avatar

Posted by SnLO from Meeesheegan on 07/06/11 at 04:55 PM ET

Sorry I forgot to include my source data. If anyone cares, 2010-11 Regular season.

Posted by SnLO from the sub great-white north on 07/06/11 at 07:17 PM ET

Red Winger's avatar

Just heard from a very good source that the Wings have an offer on the table for Jeff Blashill, current head coach at Western in the CCHA.

Decision Friday.

Posted by Red Winger from Sault Ste Marie on 07/06/11 at 08:11 PM ET

Red Winger's avatar

That would be an offer to be an asst coach, of course

Posted by Red Winger from Sault Ste Marie on 07/06/11 at 08:12 PM ET

Avatar

Blashill would be awesome. First of all, he’s been a very strong coach for Western and I imagine he’d do a great job. Second of all, he’s been a very strong coach for Western and if he leaves Michigan will have an easier time beating them.

Posted by Seth9 on 07/06/11 at 08:29 PM ET

stonehands-78's avatar

safe travels, GJM

off topic - anyone else had trouble with the paysite?
my subscription was to renew on 07/01/11 but PP has sent a message that the auto donate ‘failed due to problems with (the corp.‘s) account’.

is a “Thanks, Gary. Ass.” in order???

Posted by stonehands-78 from the beginning ... a WingsFan, on 07/06/11 at 09:54 PM ET

HockeyTownTodd's avatar

Posted by stonehands-78

This is not good

Oops! Google Chrome could not find http://www.hockeystreams.com
Try reloading: www.­hockeystreams.­com

I.E. and Ffox the same

I cancelled my cable midseason because these guys were so reliable.

Posted by HockeyTownTodd on 07/06/11 at 11:26 PM ET

perfection's avatar

Garth, I’m sure glad that you aren’t GM of the Red Wings. day after day after day after day, no matter how many ways it’s reworded, you just don’t seem to understand the “market driven salary” concept. You just don’t get it. The fact that you keep saying “overpay” shows you don’t get it. The market is FLUID, in FLUX, RELATIVE… how many different words can I use till you get it? Ericsson is worth however much the market dictates he’s worth no matter what YOU think about it. That’s fact. If other teams would pay him more than we paid him, then we got him for a discount, if we paid him more than other teams would have paid, then we overpaid. What don’t you understand about that? I realize many folks here share in your dislike for Ericsson (I happen to still hold out hope for him) and that’s fine. Seriously, I wouldn’t have an issue with you specifically if I didn’t have to read your naive drivel about this topic every single time I’ve gone to any Red Wings related post for like a week now. I get it, you don’t like Ericsson. Fine. Maybe he turns out to be worth 3mil or maybe he doesn’t. We will see.

We can readdress this topic in three years and decide definitively whether it was a good deal or not (though you don’t really seem like the kind of person who admits your wrong no matter what happens… of course I could be wrong about that), but for now, if you refuse to even attempt to grasp the financial nuances of the salary capped league and how values (or potential values for that matter) fluctuate, please, just stop. you obviously don’t know what you’re talking about.

just stop.

Posted by perfection from LaLaLand on 07/07/11 at 03:57 AM ET

Behind_Enemy_Lines's avatar

E-52 is 6’ 5” all the time?

Posted by Behind_Enemy_Lines from Evanston,IL on 07/07/11 at 12:02 PM ET

awould's avatar

Posted by perfection from Chicago on 07/07/11 at 01:57 AM ET

Ericsson is worth however much the market dictates he’s worth no matter what YOU think about it.

Maybe he turns out to be worth 3mil or maybe he doesn’t. We will see

.

Which is it? Either he’s worth what the fluid, fluctuating (mellifluous?) market dictates, as you so eloquently explained with such nuance that a dolt like me (or even maybe Garth) could understand, or he’s possibly not worth it? According to you, it cannot be both - he is worth what the market dictates no matter what.

Unless the market is wrong.

There is what a thing is worth and what a person will pay for it. Sometimes those are the same thing. Sometimes they get thrown out of wack. If you don’t understand that, take a look back at housing prices over the past 6 years. A feeding frenzy in the first week of free agency isn’t necessarily a good barometer of the market. Ericsson got lucky his contract came up in a seller’s market. It remains to be seen whether he will earn that contract but I do not think he will. It is not wrong to hold that opinion and it is not naive to declare that no matter what Ericsson may have gotten in Florida, he is not worth the hefty raise he just got from Detroit. There is nuance in that idea as it involves understanding worth and value in different ways, your condescending essay about the market actually has none. It is a very easy thing to understand WHY Ericsson got overpaid.

Posted by awould on 07/07/11 at 02:14 PM ET

awould's avatar

E-52 is 6’ 5” all the time?

Posted by Behind_Enemy_Lines from the poopship. on 07/07/11 at 10:02 AM ET


No, only during contract negotiations and press conferences.

Posted by awould on 07/07/11 at 02:15 PM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.

Smileys

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Feed

Most Recent Blog Posts

About The Malik Report

The Malik Report is a destination for all things Red Wings-related. I offer biased, perhaps unprofessional-at-times and verbose coverage of my favorite team, their prospects and developmental affiliates. I've joined the Kukla's Korner family with five years of blogging under my belt, and I hope you'll find almost everything you need to follow your Red Wings at a place where all opinions are created equal and we're all friends, talking about hockey and the team we love to follow.