Leaderboard

Take it for what it's worth, but I noticed a number of favorable mentions regarding Saarijarvi and his play during today's camp on Twitter earlier today. Malik did a write-up on him, too.

Why would you assume that Smith and Quincey would be a bad pairing based on their play together 2 years ago? Neither player are the same player they were back then, both have improved drastically. Quincey was a complete wreck, no matter who he was paired with and Smith was a turnover machine. I'm not saying that they would all of a sudden be money together, but I wouldn't assume they wouldn't be either... I think they could potentially be a very solid bottom pairing this season, if that is what Blashill elects to go with... I also agree on Ericsson. He's much better than he gets credit for around here in my opinion...

Ericsson gets too much flak. He'll never be the best #2 guy in the league, but he's solid. I think Last year was a bit of a write off because of his hand/finger injury. Anytime he gets brought up by other fans, they rave about him... the hardest part about trading him would be him waiving the Ntc(that I'm not 100% sure he has, I'm just assuming) He's a top four defenseman on practically every team in the league, if we make a move to where he ends up on the bottom pair playing next to a kid, we'd have a great defensive committee. I'm real curious to see how things shake out, it does seem like a trade is almost a necessity at this point.

When Datsyuk and Zetterberg play together, sure Hank takes a fair share of faceoffs and I'm completely okay with that, but there is no question in my mind that Pav is the better center and Hank benefits much more from playing on the wing. If they're playing together I have no problem with them switching duties as they have in the past, I just don't want to see Datsyuk on Richards wing and Zetterberg centering another line. It would make no sense...

Quincey was one of our best d-men last season, him and Dekeyser were a really, really good second pair.

I never understood that narrative, Suter&parise went to minny because they wanted to play together, every time someone brings up suter and/or parise as evidence that we can't attract free agents I get a bit annoyed.Also. I like that last part.

No truculence either

Well, Babies do have glass jaws bro.And that weird reset button on top of their heads.

Because Abby played with Z and Nyquist and scored 23 goals with that line, a career high for him. Abby no longer plays with Pav unless he's playing with Z and Pav together. (Abby - Pav - Zet) The Abby and Z chemistry is better than Abby/ Pav chemistry from 2013. Abby only created space for Pav. But Z actually turned Abby into a goal scorer. I'm not saying Pav can't do the same but this is just how things turned out to be and it worked pretty well. No reason changing that unless it no longer works.

^ Not true.John Tortorella was ranked LEAST likely to play for and Mike Babcock was ranked SMARTEST NHL coach by a poll done by ESPN with 50 NHL players. Players like Caps coach Bruce Boudreau and Pens Dan Bylsma (each received 16 percent). But they love the Wings' Mike Babcock (22 percent). When asked about the last coach they'd want to play for, Rangers coach John Tortorella took the dubious title (18 percent). "He's always yelling and calling out guys in the media," says one Western Conference wing. http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=5028185 The whole "Babcock must not be drawing attention" rumor started when Holland failed to land Suter and Parise. Always easy to point fingers at the coach when s*** goes down the drain. That's why the Maple Leafs have been a great soap opera to watch for me. Edit - That same poll showed that players voted the Red Wings as the Best NHL franchise. 60% of the votes.

Nope. You're right. Not an animal.

Because of people like me? Sadly I don't own an NHL team I'm just a wings fan but I will always side with the players. Why should he do that? As shown with the Saad and Hamilton contracts they are worth much more so signing a "prove it"contract that's way beyond market value doesn't make sense. People really have to realize now how pissed of the players were with the last lockout the time of taking under market contracts and being forced into bridge deals is over. Fans are crazy if they think Nyquist will sign for anything less than a long term north of 5 contract. Which like it or not is his market value.

What's not to like a young big upcoming star getting paid well. Would have been over the moon if Holland offered him that hell I would have been happy with 7 too.

A couple good reads: http://www.wingingitinmotown.com/2015/7/2/8881379/ken-holland-says-NHL-red-wings-will-make-moves-trade-rumors http://www.wingingitinmotown.com/2015/7/2/8886619/red-wings-roster-is-kyle-quincey-the-odd-man-out I would be ok with trading Kindl or Quincey or Smith to a team that needs to reach the cap floor and giving the vacant spot to Ouellet or Marchenko. Both Ouellet and Marchenko are clearly NHL-ready. Hell, Babcock wanted Ouellet on the roster straight out of last year's training camp. These are not players who need to make major strides in Grand Rapids to prove they belong in the NHL. The only reason we're having this conversation is because there's a logjam (and the only reason there's a logjam is because Kenny rewarded Kindl and Ericsson with dumb contracts and now the two are pretty much untradable). Sure, Quincey and Ericsson are veteran NHLers and Ouellet and Marchenko aren't, and, in theory, a veteran is "better" than a kid. But we're getting dangerously close to Catch-22 territory. "You need to be an NHLer for me to even consider rating you higher than a veteran NHLer, and until I rate you higher than a veteran NHLer, you can't be an NHLer. Grab dat cheez tho!" I know, I know - better to have a veteran and a largely unproven kid than just an unproven kid. And that's fair enough. But, at the same time...if we're not planning on re-signing Quincey next summer, and we're not going to make a trade for a young stud defenseman, and we're going to continue to preach the need to get younger and quicker and how vitally important it is that the young players all take a step forward this season...maybe, just maybe, having Ouellet (probably the most promising of all our D prospects) on the third pairing instead of Quincey wouldn't be such a bad thing. Is it the safe play? No. Is it the smart play? Honestly, it probably isn't. But we have one of the weaker D groups in the league, and that's largely because we have a spectacular lack of young stud defensemen on the roster. If we're going to build ourselves a Cup-worthy D corps without the aid of a big trade, that means at least one of the Griffins prospects is going to have to become a stud NHL defenseman. Ideally, that happens while Datsyuk and Zetterberg are still elite, which gives us...two years? This may be a situation where "Eh, another year on the farm never hurt anybody" is not the right call.

Whatever the lines we field at puck drop off in october it's gonna be exciting. Different configurations are possible. I won't speculate about lines except that I'd really like to see Zetterberg - Datsyuk - Franzen as the top line in January, when Dats should start firing on most cylinders and Franzen very hopefully is healthy and has 20+ games under him. One last push with the vets.

The difference in cap hit is surely worth the minimal lower point production, and huge raise in so%.Oh. Wait.

Q was actually very solid last season. He's easily the most physical of the Wings d-men. Neither Q nor E provides anything offensively, but Quincey was far less turnover prone than Ericsson last season. I like Marchenko, but he isn't better than Quincey right now and he might never be. Jensen is a complete unknown still. I want to give both Smith and Kindl a shot under Blashill, so I'm fine with sending everyone else for another year or at least to start in Grand Rapids.

Future Ken Daniels give-and-go call: "Ahn, Ehn, Ehn, Ahn -- IN!"

How about this perspective: Since 1950, Every Hart winner has had their number retired by a team, except: Al Rollins: No Hall of Fame, Never played for a team for more than 5 years Jose Theodore: No cup, No Hall of Fame (also self explanatory) Lindros: No cup, No Hall of Fame Fedorov?: Because of contract disputes? Historical Footnote: Before 1950, it's definitely a much different era. The majority of early MVPs are actually not retired. Retired numbers only really became a thing in the late 70s. Before it was just seems to be for players who had horrible accidents or died during their careers. When they did start retiring number they are rarely from earlier times. (I think this has to do with the growth of the games popularity around this time, and that mass media (HNIC started 1952) made certain players into heros or icons)

I get that Blashill wants to have his own approach but I doubt he puts Helm back at center just to put Sheahan on the wing. There's no need to change for the sake of change... I think Helm is a much better winger than he is a center, and I also think Sheahan wouldn't be half as effective on the wing as he is at center. I also heard Ferraro talking about Datsyuk on the wing, but I'm pretty sure he just meant to say Zetterberg. I highly doubt Pav has any interest in playing the wing after playing down the middle his entire career. He's still one of our best at winning draws and once he gets back and is fully healthy, I fully expect him to go back to our number one center, and Sheahan and Richards battling it out for the number 2 spot...

This probably never would have happened in the first place if she had a guy like Anthony Peluso with her.

The more it sinks in that we have Mike Green, the more excited I'm getting for the season.

Another couple Holland off-season gifs.

Yea, but it's a nice break from the usual grinding that goes on around here. Sometimes this forum makes me feel like a compulsive mass debater.

http://www.mlive.com/sports/flint/index.ssf/2015/06/flint_firebirds_select_detroit.html