Leaderboard

Griffs now lead 3-1 after a 6-3 win tonight... Game 5 is 8 PM on Saturday Night in Chicago. Callahan x3, Criscuolo, Frk & Lorito scored

If you go back to the 3 Bold Predictions thread, one of my predictions was that Nashville would win the Cup over Washington. The major reason that I thought/think this is because I view this trade in a similar fashion to the Shanny/Coffey/Primeau trade. I believe it is going to go down as the trade that gave Nashville the piece they needed to finally put them over the top. I don't believe Weber is a bad player, and this is in no way an effort to put him down, but I do believe that Subban is the superior player in 2017. I also believe that making a change like this completely changes the dynamic of a team, and I do not believe that if Weber was there over Subban they would still be doing what they are doing this post season. Hockey is not that simplistic, this is not a video game where if you simply take player A out, and put player B is, nothing changes. In my mind, Nashville is the run away winner, and that is not even taking Weber's ridiculous contract into consideration. Montreal got fleeced here.

I think the trade was terrible, but not because Shea Weber isn't a good defenseman. Usually people tend to view trades in terms of Player X vs. Player Y, and I get that, but that's not the reason why the trade was so lopsided. It was a bad trade because it showed that Marc Bergevin has a spectacularly poor understanding of which direction the game is trending. His team was already slow, and had trouble keeping the puck out of his own zone. Carey Price gets shelled all the time, and it's a testament to him that he's been so successful at keeping the Canadiens competitive. Montreal needed MORE guys like Subban, not less. They traded puck moving ability, which it at a premium because of the affect it has DEFENSIVELY, for a few more points and few more goals from one player over the other. That's why it's a really bad trade. Well that and the fact that Weber is older and has a horrible contract. But those things are sorta secondary IMO.

I realllly hope the Caps turn this series around

anyone a fan of this guy? i think he fits the bill on what we should be drafting. Big(6'5) physical and can shoot the puck

http://www.ontheforecheck.com/2017/5/8/15584496/predators-sign-swedish-centers-petterssen-and-ejdsell Apparently they also signed Emil Petterson. Wonder if there's any relation to the Petterson in this draft. They already have more swidish players than us on their roster, so they're definitely out-swedeing us these days. There should be a Swedish mafia war. They'll go to the ikea mattresses.

Was going to watch the game but.....Olczyk...

I mean, it doesn't seem bad at first glance. But then you remember that Xavier Ouellet put up 60 pts in juniors. Sproul put up 66pts. Both seem pretty far ahead of Hague when they were at that level and they don't contribute regularly in the NHL. Granted, nobody is heralding Hague as an offensive guy, I realize that. But chances are his offense will be minimal at higher levels, which makes me very wary of him as a top ten pick (so I agree with you). I'm guessing that if the kid weren't 6'6 he wouldn't even be a first rounder, but as we all know scouts tend to get stupified by the size factor. Hell, Jordan Sambrook put up 40pts this season in the OHL, and Detroit picked him in the 5th round last year.

False. I don't want business-as-usual. But I also don't want the extreme opposite, which is "Blow it up, trade the veterans, load the team with kids (regardless of whether they're ready or not), worship at the altar of the almighty Lottery Gods." I want Holland('s eventual replacement) to be shrewd. I want him to be patient, opportunistic. I want him to make moves when he can, when they make sense. I want him to make sure the team is getting younger, but I don't want him to force it. I'm fine with him aiming for the playoffs, as long as it's not at the expense of the future. I need to stress that we just missed the playoffs for the first time in 25 years. It's not like we've spent the past ten years missing the playoffs and drafting 15th overall at every draft. We're in the early stages of a rebuild. Being bad for a few seasons and getting a few seasons' worth of top ten picks doesn't happen in one season -- it happens over the course of *a few seasons*. We just had our first bad season. My hope is that we're bad for the next several years, without actively trying to suck. I'd be ok with drafting 6th overall in the next two or three drafts and adding a key piece or two via trade or free agency. It remains to be seen how Holland('s eventual replacement) is going to handle things, but I believe the status quo has already begun to change. Holland was a seller at the deadline. Lots of kids saw time with the big club and a number of them established themselves as regulars. The "It's all about making the playoffs. Playoffs or bust. This is a man's league. I don't believe you win with kids" thing probably isn't a thing anymore, even if Holland tells the media otherwise.

No thanks. Doesn't score much, and some scouting reports say skating is an issue. Big, slow footed defensemen, without much scoring are a thing of the past. I'd take Makar or Liljegren first.

I can't really speak about Petersson, having never seen him play (or even bothered to look into the guy), but in general I'm very wary of anybody with dubious skating. That's not to say his skating (if indeed it is a problem) can't improve. But when I look at the teams doing well in the playoffs right now the thing I notice most is speed. Pittsburgh, Nashville, St. Louis, Edmonton, Ottawa, New York, and even Anaheim are all REALLY fast and play with incredible pace. Going forward, in today's game, I'd be really worried about taking someone who doensn't skate well. This is especially true for defensemen (which I realize Petersson is not). Look at what a game changer Nashville's defense is. They're insane. I just don't think there's any future for slower, grinding, type teams. Even if they're HUGE, I think you live and die in transition these days.

So many different directions you went in, I'll stick to just two. To be fair though Frank, changes made in the Leafs scouting really have nothing to do with their turn around. The majority of the players that are turning into stars were their prior to these changes being made with the exception of I believe Matthews. No doubt Babs is a huge reason for the Leafs success, I was not one of the one's who was happy when he left. If we had Babs and Toronto had Blashill. no doubt in my mind they do not make the playoffs and we are a lot closer (possibly slipping in). Why do I rag on Buffalo? Because they have made the playoffs 2 times in the last 10 seasons meaning they have had 8 "top 15" but probably closer to top 5 picks and have nothing to show for it. This is why I use them as an example, if you tank and are bad for a decade, you can still be a bottom feeder in the standings. Tanking is not some pill that just magically makes you a contender, it's alot more complicated that that and to think otherwise is just a simplistic way of looking at things. I am not saying that Buffalo will never be good again, but they are the perfect example of how tanking does not guarantee success. If "tanking" is a 10-15 year process, I want no part in it. We need to make moves, no doubt. But there is a huge difference between making moves and just trading everyone/scorched earth. This is why I constantly bring up the Leafs. Shanny and company got rid of the massive contracts, traded a lot of second tier players/upcoming UFA's, hired a new coach, and have a good mix of vets/kids. This is what I want to do. Doing this they pretty much transformed the team in only a couple seasons. They DID NOT tear it down.

Not to speak for anyone, but I think the point that @Dabura i trying to make is that it doesn't have to be one extreme or the other which is the same thing I keep trying to tell you. I read the initial post and there was nothing about hanging on to the streak (which doesn't even make sense to say anymore), signing vets to long term contracts, or magically hoping for players to get better. That's an extreme argument that you always go to in an effort to make other posters sound stupid. It would be like me saying to you "Well Frank, I dont think we should tank and attempt to be bad for 20 years". Using hyperbole in an argument just makes a person sound like their argument is a weak one. Like I have said, I really like what the Leafs have done. They didn't just blow everything up, they made the right moves that appear to have really helped them turn the corner. I would prefer to be a Toronto then a Buffalo or an Edmonton (pre McDavid).

After he played in Sweden a couple years Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

Really easy? Yeah...it's a picnic going against a team that can roll three good scoring lines out there. Your 230lb D and F's are going to love chasing after guys they can't keep up with for three periods. We need top end C more than we need D. I like our D prospects...guys like Hronek, Vili and Sambrook. I'd keep an eye on Holway as well. If the opportunity arises to come back into the 1st round to snaga guy like Hague..I'd be OK with that. But I'd much rather go with a C with top six potential at 9

Molotov - Improv - Mazeltov

Picking at number 9? This is a good number to pick at. I like this.

It's great that you'd trade our roster for the Leafs' roster. But, tell me: Would you also trade our past ten years for the Leafs' past ten years? Before you answer, understand a few things. First, that the Leafs haven't won a damn thing in the past 500 years. Second, that the Leafs under Shanahan didn't get to where they are now by blowing it all up, trading all the veterans, playing all the kids. In fact, they signed some veterans so that they could flip them for picks at the trade deadline, which would seem to go against your "DON'T SIGN VETERANS. NO VETERANS ALLOWED. ONLY KIDS. THE MORE KIDS YOU HAVE, THE STRONGER YOUR TANK WILL BE AND THE BETTER THE KIDS WILL BECOME. THIS IS SCIENCE" line of reasoning. Third, the Leafs of the past ten years or so were the ultimate example of a team that isn't a contender but won't admit it and is therefore stuck in no man's land. Fourth, most of the Leafs' current leaders were acquired when the Leafs were in denial about their situation and were trying to compete for the Cup. They drafted Luke Schenn 5th overall in 2008 and traded him to the Flyers for James van Riemsdyk in 2012. They drafted Nazem Kadri 7th overall in 2009. They drafted Morgan Rielly 5th overall in 2012. They traded for Jake Gardiner (Ducks, 13th overall in 2008) in 2013. You could argue the Leafs began to accept reality in 2014, but there was no "All kids, no veterans" scorched earth tear-down, and they ended up drafting William Nylander 8th overall. Again, the Wings aren't in a hopeless place. We missed the playoffs for the first time in a quarter century and 9th overall is our highest position since Keith Primeau. Not the pot of gold we'd hoped for, but it's a start. And that's where we are: the beginning stages of a rebuild. Your take on the situation? "Everything is awful, blow it up, trade all the veterans, play all the kids, forget what's best for the kids' development, forget flipping UFA signings for picks at the deadline, all that matters is having a roster full of kids and getting the best lottery odds. Odds, odds, odds, odds, odds. Buffalo knows what I'm talking about. Toronto knows what I'm taking about. Edmonton knows what I'm talking about. Florida knows what I'm talking about. They all traded their veterans and played all their kids and got awesome lottery odds and got awesome young players and they only had to go through maybe one or two years of pain and now they're all Cup contenders and all their fans are like, 'Yep, it's been pretty awesome for us. Thankfully, we've been blessed with awesome owners and awesome general managers who have consistently done awesome things. We pity you, Wings fans. Truly, we do. You've suffered for so long. You deserve better.'"

If we are sellers at the deadline,unless he goes through a huge regression there is no doubt in my mind that he could go for a 1st round pick, or at worst a 2nd.

If you re-read what I wrote, I was telling Frank what I would do, I was not saying what I thought Holland would do.

I did address that. If we moved Glendening, Sheahan, Howard, E, Nielsen, Abby and Green that saves us about 28 million.

You do realize the 2016-17 Red Wings were really bad, yes? ROW: 24 (28th in the league) GF: 207 (24th) GA: 244 (25th) Goal Differential: -37 (25th) Corsi For Per 60 Minutes (5 on 5): 50.1 (29th) Corsi For% (5 on 5): 48.2 (24th) That's the work of a bottom-five team. We want the team to be bad, yes? Well, Bad Team status: attained. Also: We did call up and utilize kids. Not sure which season you were watching. Also #2: Leaning more heavily on kids wouldn't necessarily weaken the team. It's not like Kronwall, Ericsson, DeKeyser, Glendening, et al. don't make costly mistakes and don't have a hand in the losing. Maybe we ice a more kid-heavy team and finish 10th and pick 12th. Would that be something to celebrate? Also #3: Player development is kind of a big deal. Playing for a bad NHL team and making costly mistakes isn't necessarily good for a prospect who's learning the pro North American game. This is exactly the kind of mentality that the league is trying to discourage. And good on them! "Your organization iced a bad team? Well, don't expect to be 'rewarded' for it. And, no, the lesson you should take from this is not that you should've iced an even worse team. You're a professional sports franchise, not Gollum." The Wings aren't in a hopeless place right now. We missed the playoffs for the first time in 25 years, we're picking in the top ten this year, and we have some good young players that aren't necessarily inferior to the average top-ten pick. (Mantha, Larkin, Hicketts, Hronek, Sambrook, Svechnikov, Saarijarvi, Athanasiou. And we might land Victor Ejdsell, who, from what I can tell, is very promising.) The team is getting younger. We're a bad team (but not actively trying to fail, i.e. we're trying to maintain a winning culture, which is indeed important) and we're probably going to be bad for at least the next three years, no matter what we do. It's early days, but next year's draft class is looking incredibly deep. Rasmus Dahlin is phenomenal. Andrei Svechnikov might not even go in the top five. Players who might've challenged for the top spot in this year's draft class could be available in the 5-10 range. Sucking sucks. But burning everything to the ground is a measure of last resort. It's the pinnacle of pathetic desperation and it guarantees you nothing. Indeed, the most likely outcome is many years of pain with no real "reward." The Sabres got Eichel and they're not a playoff team. The Islanders got Tavares and they're not a playoff team. The Hurricanes got Hanifin and they're not a playoff team. The Avalanche have Duchene and Mackinnon and Landeskog and Erik Johnson (drafted 1st overall by the Blues) and Rantanen and they finished the season with FORTY-EIGHT POINTS. The Coyotes suck every year. The Blue Jackets had their first really good regular season in franchise history...and were blown out in the first round. You can blow it up. Just don't be surprised if it blows up in your face. (Because that's what tends to happen.)

Your diverting, I didn't ask you how they acquired JVR, Bozak, Kadri, etc. what I asked you was how do you define what Shanahan and company did as "blowing things up"? They traded 2 players (what you define as their "core"), Clarkson (not a part of their core), and 4th liners/UFAs. They did not "blow things up". Going on about how they acquired players has nothing to do with the point I am trying to make. No need to post links lol, its nothing I haven't already read living in Windsor a million times. Here is an exact list of who they traded last year and the year before, trust me I know the Leafs very well as I follow them much like I follow the Wings. Phil Kessel (core) Dion Phaneuf (core) Shawn Matthias (not a core players) Roman Polak (not a core players, and brought him back anyways) Nick Spaling (not a core players) James Reimer (not a core players) Daniel Winnik (not a mistake, they traded him twice) (not a core players) Carter Ashton (not a core players) Cody Franson (UFA) Mike Santorelli (not a core players) Daniel Winnik (not a core players) David Clarkson (not a core players) Olli Jokinen (not a core players) Korbinian Holzer (not a core players) Funny you talk about how they fired scouts etc. in an effort to make your point. Were you not the one who came on here ranting when they did that? Funny how hindsight is 20/20. As far as your Arizona question. I never said that Arizona had other choices, again you are missing my point. I am not trying to be a jerk Frank, but please actually read what I am saying, you are going off in directions that I am not arguing. The point I am making is that they have had how many top picks, and they still are nothing special. A perfect example of how tanking and acquiring high picks doesn't automatically equal success. I never said the Wings shouldn't trade some players, what I am saying is I dont want them to "blow it up", I want them to go the Toronto route and make a few changes, shed a few contracts and do it the right way. What does that mean for me? Here is what I would like to see them do: - Trade one our young 3 for Trouba - Get rid of Howard, E, Nielsen, Abby (though don't mind if we keep him) and Glendening - Trade Tatar or Nyquist for a top 4 d-man - Make a play for Tavares if he becomes available. Having him-Larkin-AA down the middle would solidy us at the Center position for years. - Trade Sheahan if the rumor of a first rounder is true, trade Green for a 1st as well You see, by not blowing it up, we can still use two of (Larkin, Mantha, AA) as well as some of our vets. I am also open to playing guys like Hicketts, Russo, Cholowski, and Sarijarvi if they are ready. We go with: Zetterberg - Tavares - 9th overall Pick Nyquist - Larkin - UFA/Kid Svechnikov - AA - UFA/Kid G. Smith? - Helm - Nosek Trouba - Top 4 D-man acquired for likely Tatar DD - Jensen (or kids if they are better/ready instead of Jensen) Sproul - XO (or kids if they are ready/better then either) Mrazek I fully realize the chances of all this happening are slim (especially Tavares), but if you are questioning what I want to do, I am laying it out for you. I would like to use Nyquist, Helm, and Z in a similar way Toronto is using JVR, Kadri, and Bozak. to compliment the kids. Blowing it up would mean trading all of these guys which I do not want to do.

You always say this, but please explain to me how the Leafs "blew it up". They traded 2 players, 1 awful contract, and a few players who were mostly 4th liners/expiring contracts but they kept the majority of their team in tact. Most of their young guys were actually acquired when they were trying to be competitive but just sucked (you could argue similar to our past season). They got Matthews last year partially because they traded Pheuneuf and Kessel, but also because half their team was injured, and they won the lottery. They could just as easily have Pierre-Luc Dubois right now, but fortuntely for them luck was on their side (nothing against him, my point just being with him they would not be as good this year). If the Leafs did what you are implying they did, I don't believe they would be close to as good as they are right now because if they did guys like Kadri, JVR, Komarov, Reily, Gardinar and Bozak would be gone. Luckily the Leafs were smart enough to make calculated moves, get a little lucky and not tank like teams such as Colorado, Arizona, Buffalo, and Edmonton. Tanking usually does not work, the Leafs did not tank. What I want is the Wings to make calcualted moves like the Leafs. But anyways, with that being said, if you can explain how they "Blew it Up" go for it.

I think I have a pretty good idea of twhat this team needsa. Hence why I say we need things, like a #1 D and a #1 center, as much or more than "size". And I like Tippett by the way, as I've said before. He has a very high level of skill, which is much more important than his size (he's not even that big). He just wouldn't be my first choice. Pettersson wouldn't be either, I'm just not so myopic and bigoted that I'll dismiss a player because he's from a country I don't like. And I know you're not the biggest fan of math, but I don't really have to explain what majority means, do I? In the last 5 drafts, there have been 70 players selected by lottery teams. The vast majority of them are not significantly better/more promising than Larkin, Mantha, or AA, or some of our prospects. Sure, there are some stars or budding stars (mostly picked 1st overall)...just not that many. Buffalo has been s*** for a decade, finished worse than us this year even. Columbus has been pretty much s*** for their existence prior to this year. Same for Florida. Toronto s*** since the lockout year. Islanders have been irrelevant since Bossy, including the last 8 years since drafting Tavares. NJ is actually doing well, only missing the playoffs 6 of the last 7 years before getting a 1st overall. Tanking has never been the panacea some think it is, and it's now harder than ever to get the first overall pick. Deliberately making your team worse, and giving yourself that much more work to do, and possibly creating a losing culture...all for a very uncertain chance at a star, and even if you do get one (or more), very uncertain success. No thanks.