Leaderboard

Absolutely. People will always find a reason to be unhappy. Some people just WANT to be unhappy, thus are pessimistic about everything and dislike it when people are optimistic about the team being successful. Not enough toughness has been a drum people have been banging on in this forum for years. Now he's getting toughness in the lineup and people are complaining. Its a no win situation for Holland.

I don't get the semantics here...the guy is an offensive defenseman at this point....period. The better analogy is to look at highly skilled forwards (offensive guys) who are being seasoned in the AHL. Until a top 6 spot opens up for them, it doesn't necessarily make sense to call them up to fill in on the 3rd or 4th line as that would not be their role. You plug them in to the NHL before they are ready, they may produce very little offense....that doesn't mean they are not offensive players. Doesn't mean he'll always be considered an offensive defenseman, but if he's not, it would mean a shift in his game. 28 games at the NHL level being used to assess someone is absurd. However, for the sake of looking at stats, which are somewhat meaningless in this small sample size, he had the 3rd highest PPG stat amongst defensemen on the Wings last season (very, very, very close to a tie at #2).

Good deal for the Avs. I fear that Yakupov going to another struggling team might not be the best for him, but who knows - maybe it's a low pressure situation where he can figure things out.

Do you need people to spell it out for you that everything they say is their opinion? Are we not all adult enough to infer that already?

Re: "...first 28 NHL games, therefore he is no longer an offensive defenseman... Got it..." Zetterberg evolved into more of a two-way forward. He didn't just all of a sudden forget how to score. He developed his game to be more of a two-way forward. So if Sproul isn't an offensive defenseman, what is he? http://forecaster.thehockeynews.com/player/9068 Assets: Excels on offense, but also has very good size and some physicality to his game. Can quarterback a power play and put up very good scoring numbers. Career Potential: Big offensive defenseman with a little upside. http://www.hockeysfuture.com/prospects/ryan_sproul/ Talent Analysis: Sproul boasts tremendous offensive instincts, can quarterback a power play, and no longer is knocked for his skating ability or defensive skills. He has shown vast improvement since being drafted. His defensive game is still developing and he continues to refine the secondary areas of his game. Future: Sproul continued to hone his overall game in the AHL in 2015-16, spending his third pro season with the Grand Rapids Griffins. A durable defenseman with some offensive ability and prototypical size, he is still working to become more consistent in his positional game. Long-term, Sproul is an intriguing prospect with top-four NHL potential.

This is why this conversation keeps going around in circles.

Why bother discuss the Red Wings? Our opinions mean nothing. Shut down the board...

There's not a doubt in my mind that Ken Holland knows more about managing a hockey team than myself or anyone else here. That doesn't mean he doesn't make mistakes, some so obvious, even to mere mortals... I'm not even saying that the Daley signing is one of those. I said several times it's a great signing, just not one that we should have made in our position (my opinion). That's me saying I don't think it was the right decision and being critical of that decision. Some here don't like that though. "Don't ever question the Holland"... "You're just a fan"... "You don't know s***"... I'm not saying we should not make the playoffs, I'm saying that should not be the number one priority for this season (and maybe not the next). The priority should be building this team back into a Cup contender, instead of a playoff contender. Playing young guys instead of signing stop-gap vets, doesn't take too much away from this year, and could potentially make us much better in future years. Again, my opinion. No one is really saying that Rasmussen sucks or will never become an NHL player. What people are saying is that there were better players still on the board at 9. Those same people that evaluate hockey prospects for a living, that had him ranked in the top half of the draft, also had him behind Vilardi and Tippett. I think it was the wrong selection, only time will tell. Regardless, he is a Red Wing now, and I'll be rooting him on every step of the way, hoping he becomes a legit number one center in the mold of a Getzlaf.

He has been an offensive defenseman in the OHL and the AHL (sort of). That doesn't make him anything in the NHL. Stylistically he might be offensive, but if he's not actually scoring or adding any kind of offense (or actually hurting the offense when he's on the ice) then he isn't really an offensive defensemen. It's fine to be optimistic about Sproul's potential, just don't confuse that with what he actually does on the ice. Assuming the team hasn't already given up on him, he will get an opportunity. Won't likely be every game, nor should it be considering how bad he was. If he sucks again, he probably won't get many chances; nor should he. You should be good with that.

Coach decides who plays. Mrazek sucked. Howard didn't Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

So basically, he doubled down on his goal tending tandem. Excellent. Maybe Mrazek just needed a swift kick in the pants. Hopefully this plays out well. If not, lets at least hope that Mrazek raises his trade value. Said it before, will say it again, and going to say it again right now. Goaltending is the least of our issues even with this little DRAMA playing out.

Lol making up s*** now? Okay whatever it takes to talk down the organization. And no s*** sherlock he was a first year pro, if you're talking about that type of debate then yeah it's obvious they have to debate whether or not he belongs in the NHL. This is something ALL Coaches and GMs do throughout the NHL when it comes to PROSPECTS. Especially a FIRST YEAR one. And you got your answer. Their debate concluded the he did in fact belong in the NHL. Unlike Yzerman who debated Drouin did not belong in the NHL for example. This happens in all orgs.

Fans have a tendency to cling to something when it comes to improving their teams. "get rid of Babcock and we will be good again" "if we could just dump E things would change" "All we need is a right handed D-man" etc. etc. etc. Right now the narrative is "when Holland leaves, things will turn around". Personally, I don't believe this is true. If ownership wanted a complete re-build, all they would have to do is tell Holland and he would have no choice. Do I think ownership has anything to do with the minor moves like trading for McCollum, or who they draft etc.? No. Do I think ownership has a say on the big picture? To quote Mr Austin, hell ya. I would put money on it that the task given to Holland by ownership is to turn the team around, while keeping it competitive and maximizing revenues in the process. If Yzerman or any other GM is brought in, IMO this is not going to change. Seriously? Where did you even get this from? They likely discussed it, but in the sports world you should have a discussion about any decision regardless of how "obvious" it may sound. People who make decision without discussions are emotion based thinkers, you don't want that running your team. Your post represents a lot of what is wrong with fan opinion. We as fans are only privy to certain pieces of information, sometimes genuine, sometimes BS, sometimes planted by the organization, sometimes planted by opposing views with an agenda, or created due to a need to sell their voice. You bring up Sheahan/AA, I am not saying I agree or disagree with that, but I will be the first to admit that I don't know what goes on in practice, what goes on in meetings, or that I watch every player, every game, every shift, as that is clearly impossible. Coaches watch the games, re-watch the games, and dissect everything these players do. If they see a future in AA, then now is the time to pick these things apart to maximize the probability of him reaching his maximum potential. To simply say "AA was he has been ready, is ready and the nights he was a healthy scratch in place of guys like Sheahan is a joke" is short sided and likely an opinion you have created due to frustration. I am not even a fan of Blashill, but lets not pretend to know what he or anyone else in the organization knows. If we did, we would be working for a professional sports team.

Lol what? Who struggled on whether Larkin could make the roster?? He played at UM for one year, then became a pro, played in the Griffins playoffs and then went to training camp that summer, showed that he was a good player and he made the roster immediately. Wasn't even a healthy scratch once. There was no debate at all lol. He became a pro and immediately made the Red Wings. I don't even think you know what you are talking about. Larkin had zero issues making the Red Wings and it was never questioned. AA played 64 games last year. 37 before that. He's slowly earned his full time position. Blashill scratched him for being irresponsible on ice. Which is true, he is a bit of a floater. But actually improved upon that towards the end of the season. If you actually watch him play you can see his transition. Hell even I would scratch him for floating around as much as he did at some points of the game. But obviously being scratched helped. He's become better because of it. Additionally, Blashill actually sets AA for success. At one point he gave him some of those most sheltered minutes. As far as not having a defenseman since Lidstrom left. You act as though we're not actively seeking defenseman. We are. We've made pitches to the few defenseman to come here. But they chose other places. On the other hand most defenseman stay with the team they started off with (Cam Fowler just signed a lucrative deal to stay with Anaheim). And which defenseman on the trade block do you see "continually"? You're acting like there's all these D-men out there. Seriously name some. I'm interested to see all the ones we supposedly missed out on. Finally, Mrazek/Howard aren't worth a dam? Then what's your solution? Bring in Carey Price? Quick? Or bring back Hasek out of retirement? This is the exact problem. Lots of talk, whining, but no real volume or justification. I'd hire you as my coach.

That is complete and utter bulls***. To think these guys, who do this job for a living don't see "the big picture". How many interviews do Holland, Blashill have to do where they talk about the godam big picture. The guy spent a godam one hour on July 1st in an interview talking about the stupid big picture to fans; but people are deaf ears because they refuse to listen. For the record, I'm not a Blashill fan and I don't agree with all of Holland's approach. New perpective, new views, fresh start, trade or two. Such superficial words. First of all, people wanted Babcock gone "because of his stale voice". 2 years later, that's not good enough. Holland changes his view from keeping kids in GR till they're 23+ years old to bringing up Larkin when he's 19, Mantha when he's 20 and Svech when he's 19. Apparently not good enough. Holland makes deadline aquisitions with Cole and Zidlicky, everyone is happy, but then Tampa beats us and then everyone says the aquisitions were terrible. Then, Holland trades players at deadline to get picks this past season, literally something he hasn't done like ever and apparently still not good enough. For pete's sake the guy is actively trying to draft bigger players and offensive defenseman. That's a miracle. After years of the Red Wings been called "soft", "too small", and been criticized for forcing offensive defenseman play too defensively, this GM goes and does the complete opposite in the draft of 2017. If these two things don't strike people as a significant change in view, then holy cow. This guy just signed a literal goon to a 2 year contract (Witkowski). So much of the philsophy has changed since Lidstrom left, it's scary. For years we stayed away from big players, powerfowards. The views have changed. Trades have happened, perspective has changed. For better or for worse, I don't know. But they have.

If you listen to that hour long interview, when he talks about Vanek probably not coming back, he specifically says it's because doesn't want to take icetime away from young players like AA, Mantha, etc. So he is thinking about the consideration of blocking young players and that reflects what I think is the right mindset. With this deal, he must not think it's blocking the future defensemen. One way to read this difference is that we don't have anyone on D in the same situation as AA/Mantha. He might just not be optimistic about Sproul either for injuries concerns or maybe due to his rough patches in GR when he a was healthy scratch. Though I really like Sproul, he definitely isn't a sure thing as a player and has had some setbacks, so I would understand not being all in on him. Sproul really is the only one who might get short changed by the addition in my view. The other way to read the difference is considering the questionable status of Kronwall, E, Sproul due to injury. When asked about whether Kronwall would be ready and playing a lot this year, he said he didn't think even Kronwall knew that. Regardless of whether he's ready at the beginning of the year, I think it's pretty certain that he will miss a fair amount of time. And I'm sure other will be as well. If people remember, we started last year with 8 Dmen just like this year, and yet all of the new Dmen, Sproul, Jensen, Russo did get a good chunk of games. Jensen grabbed his opportunity and now seems a part of the regulars - this will have to be case for young guys. And even with the 9 D getting significant games, we still saw Renouf and Lashoff on call ups. So I'm not really concerned about Sproul getting a chunk of games. He was already the 7th dman so it's not like he was going to get every game before this signing. So I'm on board. The biggest reason I'm on board is because I think having a better d corps - and specifically a 2 way puck moving guy - will help the team and help developing the offensive games of young players as well. How often did we hear complaining about offensive guys forced to play defensive style. I think to a certain extent, that's just the way you have to play in the NHL, but I also think we were forcing forwards to compensate for the weak D a lot. If we have D who can get the transition game working as it should I think it'd be huge for us and would allow these guys to focus on offence more. If Sproul or Oulette are somehow pushed out due to this signing, I might change my mind, but that my thinking on it now.

People are in MAJOR denial. "He's not doing the rebuild correctly" , "Signing Daley is stupid if we want a top 3 pick", "Signing Daley screws Sproul over" People need to snap back to reality. There is no rebuild, Holland is not looking to tank (any type of variation), he's aiming for playoffs while maintaining picks, and he certainly does not consider the young defensemen to have the ceiling that some of the posters here do. People here act like they know more than pro-scouts, GMs, coaches. Except that most people here are average joes working regular jobs while the people who made it are running the team. Why? Because they are better than any of us at their job, that's way they made it up there and that's why we're down here behind our keyboards, monitors and a 12 oz pepsi bottle thats flat.

Lmao we don't even have young defensemen to play for us. Literally nobody in the system is being held back because of this signing. This conversation just goes in circles with people bashing Holland for what he may hypothetically do. The rebuild on the fly is happening whether you like it or not. Complaining about a stop gap defensmen that's cheap is such a minuscule problem in the grand scheme of things it's ridiculous this can cause such outrage for so long

What? His 23 goal season came when he didn't play with Datsyuk. Which was in 2013/14. That year Datsyuk played with Helm and Tatar ; aka the Helm - Datsyuk - Tatar line when Tatar scored 29 goals.

Fixed it for you.

I see a lot of people making this argument. Frankly, I don't think it's much of an argument. Hicketts, 21, could use another year in the AHL. Saarijarvi, 20, is at least two years away. Cholowski, 19, is at least two years away. Hronek, 19, is at least two years away. Sambrook, 19, is at least two years away. Mcllrath, 25, is not a high-end defenseman. Sulak, 23, was a no-risk signing who may or may not have what it takes to play in the NHL. Ouellet and Jensen haven't been hugely impressive; at this point, they're serviceable middle-pairing defensemen, and that's probably all they'll ever be. Russo didn't really impress me in his stint with the Wings; I don't think he fits into our long-term plans. If we're being honest about Sproul, he's not likely to become much more than what he appears to be at this stage, which is a bottom-pairing power play specialist whose natural gifts don't outweigh his shortcomings. At this point, we could lose Sproul and Russo and Ouellet/Jensen for free and replace them with veterans and I honestly wouldn't care all that much. I don't see any of these players as true building blocks. And, to me, that's what this comes down to. Basically, our D group is bad. Daley makes it a little more competent (at least until Green's gone) -- and a slightly deeper, slightly more capable D group is a good thing for everyone. People say we need to develop our youth. Well, the NHL isn't really a development league -- but even if that weren't the case, "development" means more than just having a player on the roster and giving him ice time "because we have no one else to give these minutes to." Daley will be eating some minutes that could otherwise be going to Ouellet or Jensen, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The benefits of Daley's presence will outweigh it. A top three of Green, Daley, DeKeyser is better than a top three of Green, DeKeyser, Ouellet/Jensen/Ericsson. Having Daley run our first/second power play unit is better than having Kronwall run it. Having someone who can move the puck like Daley is a good thing. I think a lot of people are unfamiliar with Daley and are looking at his age and assuming the worst. But he's actually a perfectly competent top-four defenseman who can 1) play big minutes without getting caved-the-f***-in (see: DeKeyser), 2) outskate all of our defensemen not named Jensen (and possibly even Jensen), and 3) manufacture offense more expertly and reliably than all of our defensemen not named Green. He's our second-best defenseman. He's a solid stopgap for a team that otherwise has exactly one proven high-end NHL defenseman on its organizational depth chart (Green) and is years away from being a contender. Personally, I'm happy to have him on board. I don't think adding him hurts our youth. If anything, I think it'll help our youth.

You think Daley is gong to help do anything other than make it more likely to miss the draft lottery and get blown out in the first round?

dumb

no es bueno?

eww...