Leaderboard

Good one, Bill. If Mantha was 1/100th the player Lemieux was, he would have been on the team 4 years ago. Miller's a plug, and no one has ever suggested otherwise. That he's playing ahead of Mantha says more about what some think of Mantha than it does about anyone's opinion of Miller. I could flip that around and say Mantha has snowed over a bunch of fans into thinking he's the next big thing.

Do I think Mantha can be the difference in winning 10 more games or winning the Cup? No. But in a league where last year the 9th seed Boston had 93 points, and second in our division TB had 97 points, do I think having a guy like him could be the difference in not making the playoffs versus not making the playoffs? Yes I do. If any mistake was made, it was not by Nyquist and Tatar not becoming D and Z. The mistake was fans thinking they were the next D & Z. Both are good players, not elite. Top 6, not top 3.

I think the league got used to both of those players and their tendencies. They're not complete players like Datsyuk and Zettereberg were and are easy to knock off the puck. Blashill is not responsible for Nyquist and Tatar not blossoming. I am, however, disappointed in Marchenko and DeKeyser not seemingly improving. It's easy to blame the coach, but I'm thinking this forum just likes to overrate our prospects too much.

This is exactly where i'm at. I don't think anyone is saying Howard should be the starter over Mrazek, that isn't even really a debate. But the primary point that most of us are trying to get across is Mrazek is not ready to take on the workload of a seasoned established veteran starter when he is still young and trying to establish himself and has the veteran support of another goaltender that is being paid to play more than 12-15 games per season. With our defense in it's current condition, regardless of his play, if Mrazek is thrown to the wolves and given a tremendous workload, the defense will play a large role in inevitably destroying his confidence. A lot of losses are on the D, and not the goaltending, but if he's allowing 3, 4, or 5 goals a night because he's facing 40+ shots, it will reflect in his numbers.

No, the attitude has nothing at all to do with where the Wings are at. We are what we are because eventually all good things come to an end. The whole system is designed very specifically to cause this situation. Literally, not one single team - in any sport - at any time in history - in any system - has stayed great forever. GMs can't just s*** out star players when they want to, no matter how badly the team needs one. That's not how the world works. Deal with it. It's easy to sit on a message board posting ideas you think would be better, making judgements in hindsight based on pure speculation and often false facts. But the truth is there is no right way. There is no secret formula. It's a game of educated guesswork. You list a bunch of things you think will make it all better, and 10 other fans would say 10 different things. Optimal line combos? What exactly are those? You say we should have changed line combos, and in another thread someone else is saying there's too much line juggling. Play the hot hand, you say? Who is that in the next game? You think Howard will be hot forever? Does he have a fire icon next to his name somewhere so we know we should start him? Why is "next game" any less likely than any other to be the one where he goes cold? Lessen Z's icetime when he's still probably our best player, and producing atm? More time to AA? His average icetime is up about 3 minutes his last 5 games. He's played 5 games with 12:59 TOI or more, has 1g and a -3 and the team is 1-3-1 in those games. Stop the dump and chase? How much do we dump and chase, how effective is it and what can we do with our personnel that works better? Stop having Glendening take those faceoffs? Sure, Helm took one last game and we still lost. Let's face facts, we're all just a bunch of assholes who really don't know s***, acting like we have all the answers while we vent because our team isn't as good as we want it to be. We don't have the answers. There likely isn't an answer at this time. The team is just not that good. So if I were to say we shouldn't play Mantha because it seems to me like he's not even scoring in the AHL, you wouldn't point out that the "fact" I'm basing that opinion on is incorrect? I know you're joking about Lashoff, but you know what? It actually wouldn't make much difference, and that's actually a situation where we could be certain that we'd be worse. I'd bet some fans would actually welcome a move like that, in the hopes of getting a higher draft pick. And there is some merit to that philosophy. What you seem to be missing is that I am not as convinced as you are that Mantha would make us better. Why are you getting so bent out of shape because I have a differing opinion? Nor am I convinced that we are particularly likely to finish 9th. Probably won't win our division, or finish as one of the top few teams in the conference, or the bottom few. Anywhere in between maybe. So a relatively small chance that we'll be in a position that a relatively small improvement will be the difference in making the playoffs or not, and uncertainty that Mantha would actually be a small improvement. To me we have much bigger issues to worry about, primarily whether or not Blashill can get the best (or at least better) out of the rest of the roster. If he can, I think we'll be in good shape for the playoffs. If not, I doubt Mantha would help even if he did make us a little better.

Look at Jim Carey, went from winning the Vezina to pretty much disappearing.

I think re-building on the fly can work if it's done the right way. The best example I can give is the Wings in 2008. Of course they still had Lidstrom which was a HUGE help, but that team was completely transformed from the teams of the late 90's and in between they never had to crash to the bottom of the standings. It can work if you give your kids a chance to play with the vets, the issue I have right now with the Wings is the fact that guys like AA, Sproul, XO, Mantha etc. are not getting the ice time they should be getting. I have no issue with having some vets (ie. guys like Helm and Abby), my issue is with guys like Miller, Ott, and E that dont deserve to be on the roster and are not as good as the kids. Make those swaps, pull off a trade for a top D-man (ie. Trouba) and I think this team is in good shape.

While i've been a fan of the Vanek signing from the start (former 30 goal scorer, contract just bought out, wants to show he still has it, picked up for 2.6 million for one season) and it has worked out well so far..even if it didn't, it wasn't much of a gamble for potential huge rewards. Nielson on the other hand is a big risk at 6 million for what is it? 6-7 years? I know he wanted long term and probably wouldn't have signed if he was only offered 2 years, but at this point it wasn't the best move with Dats' cap hit coming off the books at the end of this season. Holland could have waited to sign Dats' "replacement". Well put. Makes sense. Sucks that Yzerman's team has been the source of alot of troubles for the Wings the past couple years though. If only Holland had taken his promotion....

The TSN guys led by Bob Mckenzie are good, I wouldn't question their credibility. Remember, if you go back to that time they didn't know that Stamkos was done taking meetings, in their minds at the time he just hadn't met with the Wings yet. If I remember correctly, he met with the Leafs and TB then realized he wanted to stay in TB. My guess is that after one meeting outside of TB, Stamkos felt like anywhere but TB wasn't right and didn't want to waste anyone else s time. I dont think this was a result of poor approach on the part of Holland or any other GM's, if anything give the credit to Yzerman as he obviously did one hell of a job in his meeting selling Stamkos on TB.

Case and point, you don't hear complaints about the Vanek signing. If that guy hadn't been producing and leading the team in points we'd be hearing things like "See what a waste of a signing that was, we should have just let the young kids play blah blah blah Holland sucks, they're screwing Mantha out of his play time" Instead we see people post "Omg this team needs Vanek back" "I miss Vanek" "Vanek at the Disco baby!!!!"

Why would insiders think he was going to Detroit if Holland didn't even end up getting a damn meeting with him? Makes you wonder where they get this "insider" info from.

Actually there IS hindsight. If Nielsen had 20 points in 12 games and leading the league you or anyone else wouldn't be making this argument. Also let's not start overrating Chych, we don't even know if he's going to be a flub. Not to mention a lot superstar defenseman aren't actually out of the top 5 or 10 talent of the draft. Defenseman are some of the hardest prospects to predict when it comes to how good they're going to be.

Most people think this anyway. What would of been any different. None would of cared once Stamkos resign up TB without even looking our way. At least we would of had Chych, not Nielsen at 31mil over 6 years. No Hindsight about it, doesn't take a hockey insider to know Stamkos wasn't coming here, Chych was a top 5 pick from almost half of last year we had a rare chance to get a top 5 at least top 10 talnet in the draft at our weakest position and pissed it away.

True. But if eating the 7+ million for one season meant getting top ranked D prospect who they'd have for years who is compared to Scott ******* Stevens in regards to how hard he plays and how he hits, you'd think anyone with even the slightest hockey knowledge would see that's something we desperately need. I know I could deal.

Okay but you do realize that if we didn't move Datsyuk's cap hit the fans would be saying "He's such a bad GM, he couldn't even more Datsyuk's contract, the guy does nothing!" Hindsight = 20/20

I've been seeing a lot of "well this isn't as big of a deal as people are trying to make it out to be" style of attitude around here. That's the EXACT kind of attitude that has brought the Red Wing's to the level they're at. "Oh it's not a big deal, we still have Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Lidstrom. "Oh it's not a big deal we still have Datsyuk and Zetterberg". But it is a godam big deal now because the sum of the all the little parts has added up and we don't have anyone to rely on. We don't have star power. And we're not going to be getting it for a while. So how about we start working on the basics and work to make every little thing better? How about we ice a good 4th line without Drew Miller. How about we have more optimal line combinations instead of being stubborn about it for 6 games straight? How about we bench a D-man or two? How about we play the hot hand between Mrazek or Howard? How about we lessen Zetterberg's ice time? How about we increase AA's ice time? How about we stop having Glendening take the most important faceoff with 1 minute left and a 1 goal lead? How about we stop the dump and chase hockey that clearly hasn't worked in a while? I just listed maybe 8 or 9 things off the top of my head on a LONG list of things. EVERY single issue on the list has to be addressed because unfortunately we don't have a superstar to negate all those problems like we once did. When you fix every issue that's possible within your control it can add up to make a big difference. And if it doesn't, oh well at least you tried.

Once again coaching loses this game. Notice it was the same 2 on the ice in the last minute and a half... Ericsson and marchenko. They cost us our lead in philly and they cost us from at least going into ot tonight. Terrible coaching. Oulette and sproul need to be playing.

I will give the Mraz-slappies this: Blashill named Petr 'the starter' and is heir-apparent to the crease. He should get more starts than Howard. BUT... ...until Howard is traded, and until Mrazek starts playing lights out elite level hockey, we've got a 1A/1B situation and if there's one thing that will keep us competitive it's using our goaltending depth.

There's no conflict. It's pretty clear they should be splitting duties 60/40, with Mrazek getting the 60.

We are going to be a bit more open to leaving more specific threads as their own this season to broaden different conversations and not have them all merged into one large bulk one. The Howard thread is primarily about his individual play and whether or not he has a place here or should be dealt, trade options, possibilities, etc.

Howard has taken so much crap because he was a very solid consistent goalie for the first 4 years of his career, but since his injury during the 2015 season, he's showed flashes of his old self, but for the most part he's been bad. Really bad. He's a 7 year veteran making a lot of money and fans are sick of never knowing which Howard you'll see when he's playing, and many want him gone. There's no passes and patience for him like Mrazek sometimes gets anymore. This is only his secong full season in the NHL playing on a team with a suspect D and who couldn't score last season. 2015 he was up because either Howard or Gus were injured. You can't compare the two. Howard played on good teams at the beginning of his career and still couldn't get past the second round. It's not hard t see why there's different expectations and exceptions for both.

Just remember that Carey price didn't become as consistent and as awesome as he is until he was like 27. mrazek will be fine

My fave equation

Jeff Salajko from Grand Rapids replaced Jim Bedard for this season. Mrazek worked with him in GR, and I think the change from Bedard is a partial reason for Howard's improved play.

I think some people are in denial about Mrazek. He's one of the most inconsistent goalies in recent Red Wings history. The guy has already been pulled like 8 times in his career and hasn't even had 2 full seasons yet. I mean I like the guy, he's amazing when he's at his best. But come on, when he's bad... he's REALLY bad. Sometimes goalies have bad games, no big deal, but Mrazek has gone through long stretches of being bad. This is exactly why having Howard actually works out. Yes he should be the #1. No he should not be playing 70 games.