Leaderboard

Perfect And since there's some sensitive people *points* up there who can't handle some levity in the thread, let me be painfully on topic in sharing my opinion on The State of the NHL: The game is changing. The league is changing. The way the game was played 30 years ago would be a bad fit for the current situation on multiple levels. As someone mentioned before, players today are faster, bigger, and stronger than ever before. Gear is more high tech. And we have knowledge now regarding health and safety issues that was not widely available before. The league would be foolish and unprogressive if they dug their heels in and refused to develop the game in a way that addresses these challenges. Do I like every change that is made? No. But I also have no misconceptions that me raging against the machine is gonna make a rabbit's fart of a difference. "Pretend we have an audience.". We *do*. Social media has developed to a point where officials ABSOLUTELY know how fans of the game feel about each and every little thing. They just don't *care*. Because here's the kicker, and if I have to pick the one thing that bothers me the most it would be this: WE are not who the league is reaching out to. The die hard, post on a hockey team's message board, donate money to charity based on playoff performance, contemplate homicide of other players not on our team who are probably pretty nice guys otherwise type people are going to follow our team /the league *anyway*. Our $ is not the growth, because it has always *been there*. These changes, the outreach, the people pleasing (if any) will not be directed at us. It will be directed at Joe Non-hockey Schmo whose ass they're trying to pull into a seat. Trying to pull into the NHL shop. Trying to pull into buying that cable package or GCL. So the game is gonna change. Because hockey is not very accessible to people who aren't familiar with it. Do I like it? Not necessarily, but in a way that mirrors why my grandpa doesn't like it that he can't find a doctor with a name he can pronounce. There are some changes the league is looking into that I think will be beneficial like 4-4 overtime and video reviews, but to opine that the league is "changing" because it's not like it was 30 years ago is short-sighted, unnecessarily nostalgic, and unprogressive. Time marches on. Things change. And now I've forgotten my larger point. Which is why "old man yells at cloud" sums up my feelings perfectly, and isn't as sarcastic as you thought. You...should probably step away from your keyboard for a minute.

I think it was less Stamkos sucking and more the Wings being awesome.

I believe they prefer to be referred to as "Ouverrated Gutteaur Trash du Montreál"

Totally agree. Anyone who thinks that hockey can go back to the way it was 50 years ago is either completely clueless to how much faster/stronger/skilled the players are now a days, or just refuse to accept it. Anyone who thinks the players of 50 years ago are "tougher" then today, have no clue. If Jacques Plante gets hit in the temple with a Shea Weber Slap Shot, he's not shaking it off, he's unconscious. I would even argue if it hits him in the wrong place, could result in death. The reason why the guys from years ago played through injuries is because the guys from 50 years ago were not being hit even close to as hard as the guys from today. Sure guys back then played through broken fingers and toes etc. but so do the guys now a days (ie. Abby). Plus, if all these guys from years back thought that the way it was is better then today, they wouldn't be suing the NHL in 2015.

When you're under the microscope it doesn't matter how much good you do, one small mistake and you're "losing your touch" two small mistakes and "OMG FIRE HIM NOW." Nobody's perfect, but Holland's closer than most.

Blame Holland? Absolutely. He deserves a ton of credit for supplying us with the deepest crop of prospects in the league and great cap position. Kudos Holland.

Sounds like something Crosby would say.

Montreal is overrated gutter trash

I love seeing Montreal losing like this. I don't care who is winning. I just like watching them lose.

Lots of teams? Like who? The first one I can kind of think of is Carolina. And they at least had Staal. Quenneville had an 88 point player in Kane, a 68 point great two way forward in Toews, and a Norris winning defenseman in Keith. And Hossa. So he had three superstar forwards and a great #1 d-man. Quenneville hadn't been to the Cup finals until he coached a team with that talent. Sutter didn't win the Cup until he had Kopitar, Doughty, Quick, along with Brown, Richards and Carter. Sutter had several great forwards, a great #1 d-man, and a great playoff goaltender. Are you really saying those two teams won the Cup without players of the calibre of Datsyuk and Zetterberg?

Soo Babcock and Holland are going to the worlds to talk to Dylan Larkin about his upcoming decision on whether or not to go pro.... Could we be seeing a fast track to the NHL?

I like it, white is generic, let the away team be the generic team and home team show their colors.

Yeah I got that, But in order to cash in on that value, you have to actually be willing to let go of the player. Like I guess what I'm saying is, Crosby has enormous trade value. But if you are unwilling to actually trade him, his trade value is effectively zero. It only becomes actual value when you are willing to sell it. Does that make sense? haha

The product is still very enjoyable to me. Transparency in suspensions would really be my only gripe. The NHL's inferiority complex really shines through here. With having to compete with the NBA playoffs and early MLB schedule, suspending Subban, a marketable star, was out of the question. Meanwhile, Kronwall, is given a game for a hit where the shoulder was the primary point of contact, but his opponent had his head down. I get that Kronwall has a "history" for these kinds of hits, but taking those out of the game are a mistake. The playoffs are known for the increased intensity and harder style of play. With this suspension, I doubt we see a hit like this from Kronwall anytime soon. Hell, it's been sometime since we saw one before game 7. The NHL has been a niche sport nationally for quite some time and they should embrace it. Canadian and true US hockey cities keep the game going and that's what I love about it. I cringe every four years when the Olympics thrusts the game into a national talking point (outside of the 4 seconds allocated on ESPN) and people immediately flag me down at work to talk about players they just discovered because they know I'm a "hockey guy." Keep suspensions and rule enforcement consistent despite the type of player. At least you'll have the respect of the players and the diehard fans that continue supporting the league.

Lightning giving the Habs an a** kicking! Good

Mike wonders who's gonna replace Pav? AA and Larkin. Give it time folks, there gonna be good.

I don't know, did they really not have it? I wasn't around then but I've talked to people who were and even read some things that suggested that there were a lot of players back in the day who were less than ethical, as it were. It's easy to think of those times as the glory years because we are so far removed that we only know them from the exceptional moments that still get talked about. The majority of games weren't televised, there's limited footage and almost no way to interpret what does exist. I mean, even our golden boy Stevie Y had a Crosby like reputation for a while. I could even buy that there was less whining, but we know the cheap shots were worse! They were brutal, Redmond always talks about Gordie's famous elbows! Again, I wasn't there, so this is just a mildly educated guess, but I would bet embellishment happened frequently, (I mean, it's not like these people are known for being the bastions of morality) and if it didn't, it seems logical that it had more to do with how the officiating handled diving. It's likely that if fewer penalties were called, there would be no benefit to embellish. That's my issue with the games that I see, (which unfortunately aren't many) players are being rewarded for diving by the resulting penalties to the opposing teams. It's in their best interest! The league needs to put their collective thinking caps on and find the best way to solve these problems. ( for the record, I think the league does a great job overall, with the increase in speed and skill comes an equal increase in the challenge to maintain a fair balance of officiating on the ice.)

I totally agree that there's a lot of inconsistency in how the game is officiated, but we can't ignore that the players are getting stronger, faster and more skilled. That above all else is the cause of change we see in the NHL. They did put restrictions on goalie equipment size, while still keeping them protected. Remember, not a single goalie would've been ok being maskless with Weber shots flying by eye level at 100 mph.

Agreed. The kids showed a lot of improvement over last year, and I do believe next year they will take it even further. This year they learned how to win in the playoffs. Next year they must learn how to deal with finishing blow in a series. Against Boston they were overwhelmed. This year the started off the same way, but begun to fight back, and fight for space. I thought the kids got better as the series went. With a deeper blueline we'd still be playing right now.

Him being a better all around player. I don't understand all the flack he's getting I thought he was one of our better players these playoffs. There's more to his game than just points. He's developing as a good playmaker and his defensive game is getting better and better. I think the franchise views him as the more valuable asset as well. Tatar was the most disappointing player these playoffs for me

nyquist is too small. he's the guy i would trade and he has plenty of value, especially in a more elaborate package. i'd do a huge splash with the leafs. phaneuf/jvr for nyquist, smith, weiss and a pick. i'm giving the pick because while jvr and nyquist score about the same currently, jvr is big and can hit the dirty spots. by them taking weiss we'll take all of phaneuf's cap hit. sort of reminds me of the shanahan deal. that leaves us searching for a second line centre still. sheahan isn't offensive enough yet to take on that role. i'd have him as the 3rd line centre instead. if sheahan is the 2nd line centre then this... Z, D, Abby jvr, sheahan, Tatar jurco, helm, pulk miller, glend, ???? dion, kron deke, quincey broken toe, marchenko??

And what, if not an attempt to rag on Babs, would make you assume that "Datsyuk and Zetterberg" means specifically Datsyuk and Zetterberg at their absolute peak? Some believe Babs may be looking for that kind of player because he specifically mentioned those two (and Kronwall). Then he said, "You've got to have big-time players up the middle and on the back to be successful". Big-time players. Not "90+ pt Selke finalists and generational defensemen". I'll bet you won't find many successful teams that didn't have big-time players. Look at Zetterberg in terms of his whole career rather than just his best year and you could argue that Kopitar and Toews are at a very similar level. Crosby and Malkin aren't as good defensively but much better offensively, and most would say they're better overall. Getzlaf, Seguin, Giroux, Tavares, Stamkos, and I'm sure several others could be considered close or even better. Same goes for Datsyuk, really. Maybe not a lot will reach their peak point totals, maybe none who are also Selke candidates the same year, but you're the only one taking it so overly specific. Teams are rarely successful without superstars. Replacing ours is a legitimate concern. Most likely isn't going to happen until we get much worse. I'd be surprised if that concern isn't a major factor in Babs' decision. Fortunately, there aren't likely to be many teams that are better off in the "star" department and also looking for a coach.

To just look at it from just Babcocks perspective is only telling half the story. Patrick Roy took a team that was 2nd worst in the NHL the year before, and got them in the playoffs at 2nd seed. I don't see how that is less impressive then what Babcock did (not taking anything away from Babcock). Its almost as if your holding the team improvement against Roy. The coach of the year should be given to the coach who got the absolute most out of his players based on his players skill set on paper and their previous year's performance. The reason why most coaches dont get Jack Adams Award when their teams win the presidents trophy is because usually the team is stacked and is doing what it should be doing. I agree it shouldn't automatically go to the most improved team's coach, but typically the most improved team is improved because of either additions from the GM or coaching. I think Babcock did a hell of a job in 2014, but I think what Roy did was more impressive. Think about it like this.....if Babcock went to Edmonton next year and they ended up the #2 seed, I guarantee you he wins the Jack Adams.

Not too mention the new arena coming soon and all that.... Detroit is only going to get better. I'm excited for it.