Anyone who dislikes the DC is alright in my book regardless of what sweater he pulls on.....

Posted by MoWingsfan19 on 07/23/08 at 07:53 AM ET

If you take what I’ve done in the last three years and take my comparables ... I don’t think by any stretch of the imagination it was an unfair contract.

Oh, I don’t know, Mike. Let’s compare you to Brad Stuart, someone who’s also getting $3.75/year on a long-term contract. In the last three years, you had 13G-41A-54P. Stuart had 25G-63A-88P. That’s nearly double your goals and 50% more assists...all without giving up his physical play.

Anyway, we’ll have six chances this year to see who the better bargain was. Oh, and Mike, don’t spend too much time watching Brad when you’re on the ice. There’ll be another guy out there with him who really doesn’t care that you’re 6’5” and 228. 

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 07/23/08 at 10:21 AM ET

There’ll be another guy out there with him who really doesn’t care that you’re 6’5” and 228.

Yeah - and Jiri Hudler may be small, but he’s fiesty! 

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 07/23/08 at 11:07 AM ET

Stuart’s numbers over the past three years are inflated because he played on the power play, unlike Commodore.  Excluding PP numbers, Stuart was 15-40-55, and Commodore was 13-41-54.  Or you can look at the past two years, where Stuart was 10-23-33, compared to Commodore’s 10-32-42.  Even on the power play those years, Stuart only had three goals and nine assists (Commodore had one assist), barely pushing him ahead.

But that doesn’t even really matter, because signing a defensive player for his points totals is silly.  At even strength, it’s a bit of a mixed bag.  Stuart was better two years ago in Calgary, but Commodore was better last year in Carolina.  After they were both traded, Stuart was better in Detroit than Commodore in Ottawa.  Neither player is good enough to look good on a bad team, and neither is bad enough to look bad on a good team.  Where Commodore is clearly better than Stuart is on the penalty kill.  Granted, Stuart has a better shot and can play on the power play, so there’s some value in his versatility.  But not much, considering he’s not very good when he plays there.

I do think the Stuart signing is probably a better deal, but not by much.  It’s really confused me to see people praise the Stuart contract as a great deal but point to the Commodore one as one of the worst of the summer.  They’re very, very similar players.

Posted by Ryan from Toronto on 07/23/08 at 11:26 AM ET

I do think the Stuart signing is probably a better deal, but not by much.  It’s really confused me to see people praise the Stuart contract as a great deal but point to the Commodore one as one of the worst of the summer.  They’re very, very similar players.

Probably because Stuart is the perfect fit as a number four defenseman in Detroit alongside Kronwall, and Commodore (because of his contract) may be expected to take on a larger role than he is suited for, thus looking much worse than he actually is.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 07/23/08 at 11:30 AM ET

Stuart’s numbers over the past three years are inflated because he played on the power play, unlike Commodore.

Exactly, Ryan. Stuart plays on both the power play and on the PK. Commodore only plays on the PK. And whether Commodore is better on the PK than Stuart is something we’ll get to see firsthand six times this year.

It’s really confused me to see people praise the Stuart contract as a great deal but point to the Commodore one as one of the worst of the summer.  They’re very, very similar players.

I don’t think they’re similar at all. Here’s how Sportsnet.ca lists their Assets and Flaws…

Commodore: Assets
Has tremendous size and strength. Plays a simple game that keeps improving with age and experience. Is well liked in the locker room.

Stuart: Assets
Is a very gifted skater and makes excellent outlet passes. Has a heavy shot that can be very effective on the power play.

Commodore: Flaws
Doesn’t have a lot of scoring upside. Has trouble avoiding the injury bug. Can at times be beaten on the outside by a speed rusher.

Stuart: Flaws
Is prone to mistakes in pressure situations, which has led him into the coach’s doghouse in the past. Doesn’t use his size effectively enough.

I think we all saw in the playoffs that Stuart overcame most of the Flaws listed above. He made very few mistakes. And he used his size very effectively. As Baroque notes, that may be due in part to his linemate, but I don’t foresee Brad spending much time in Babcock’s “doghouse” during his time in Detroit.

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 07/23/08 at 03:04 PM ET

I agree entirely with what Baroque said.  Stuart is likely the best fourth defenceman in the NHL, and Commodore will probably be one of the worst second defenceman, or average at best.  That’s also why we won’t get six chances next year to see which one’s better.  Commodore will be playing against Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and/or Hossa, but Stuart will be playing against Freddy Modin and Raffi Tores.

And that’s really the heart of the whole thing.  Both have looked good and bad at different times in their careers, depending mostly on what team they’re on and how they’re being used.  I just think if Commodore had been traded to Detroit and Stuart to Ottawa, we’d be seeing articles about how lucky the Wings are to get a discount and lock up a Commodore for $3.25 or 3.5m, and how silly some team was to overpay Stuart with $4m or $4.25m.

Posted by Ryan from Toronto on 07/23/08 at 08:28 PM ET

...if Commodore had been traded to Detroit and Stuart to Ottawa, we’d be seeing articles about how lucky the Wings are to get a discount and lock up a Commodore for $3.25 or 3.5m…

I think it’s highly unlikely that Ken Holland would have even attempted to trade for Commodore. He would have had to play on one of the top two lines and, in that role, he’s simply not a Wings-style defenseman. As a Red Wing, he’d be what Lilja is...a stay-at-home defenseman capable of playing on the third pairing and killing penalties.

My original point was that Stuart is a better bargain because, like Commodore, he plays a physical game and he can kill penalties...but, unlike Commodore, he’s also perfectly capable of playing effectively on the power play. And that’s what we’ll have six chances to determine this year...which one is a better bargain doing what they’re being paid to do.

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 07/23/08 at 10:51 PM ET