Leaderboard

What is your rationale for these claims? Smith being better than daley is laughable! (And I like smith) I do agree with you on 55 and 52. I think kroner may well be heading for ltir. (Cap problem solved)I think we are justified to expect continued growth from Jensen and Ouellette. Why is it so impossible for Z to have another great yr? It seems as though the pessimists throw this claim out there simply because "he had a good yr so there's absolutely no way to do that twice" Actual evidence shows that Larkin is improving and will continue so again I agree with you there and am optimistic about mantha and AA as well. Sheahan will improve and score 25+ points. If there ever was an occasion to objectively analyze and classify a season as "bad luck" it was Riley Sheahan '16-'17. 14 and 21 contributing 50+ points will not surprise. And again with howard "he will not replicate last yr" why not? There's more reason and facts to support that he will than that he won't. Plus mrazek is an ultra confident, ultra competitive very skilled professional athlete who just b****-slapped in front of the entire league and he's in a contract year. I'd put money on him improving not regressing. The whole pessimism for the sake of pessimism because it's the popular narrative is stale and tiring. Sent from my SM-G930R4 using Tapatalk

Last year they were SIXTEEN POINTS out of a playoff spot. Will things turn around this year? I say yes, they will make it as a wild card. The powerplay won't be that horrendous again, Howard will be the starter and stay healthy and a couple players have bounce back seasons while Z still produces - that will be enough to get us in.

Based on hockeyanalysis.com Daley's CF% (adjusted for linemates and opposition corsi) was 48.65%. Smith's CF% (adjusted for linemates and opposition) was 49.35%. A negligible advantage to Smith of 0.7%. Considering deployment... Daley spent 2.22 minutes on the PK per game, and 1.38 on the PP per game Smith spent 1.5 minutes on the PK per game, and 0.81 on the PP per game (The Rangers only gave him one 41 second shift on the PP, whereas the Wings gave him 1.21 per game) Daley spent a lot more time on both special teams. It's also quite telling that the Rangers did not deploy Smith on the PP at all. Daley has been considered an offensive D-man much of his NHL career, whereas Smith only displayed those qualities in lower leagues.

I think that Holland is doing a great job and that he has earned a lengthy extension. I can definitely see that he has a clear plan for the future and is working hard to see it through. The future looks bright and im very excited to see what happens next!

We already do. His name is petr Mrhasek

Everyone knows the Swedish Mafia is running the show.

Yes, I'm talking if we want to trade for a young elite level d-man.

He has a contract in Finland, if he doesn't make the Wings roster he plays there

Based on CI's comments, the fact that Jimmy hasn't been GM in decades, and that Holland seems to do whatever he feels like.

Quite frankly what I said has nothing to do about whether you gripe about Mrazek or not. I simply don't care. My point was that I think it's more likely that Mrazek rebounds than not. Not to make another Howard vs Mrazek pissing contest.

This I agree with, there are always outliers and Larkin from everything I have read of him appears to be one.

I also think it's important to look at Howard's #'s in his second season as a starter. Not far off of Mrazek's at all, and we had a much better team back then. Howard's weaknesses have been staying healthy and simply not stepping it up in the playoffs. Mrazek has shown he can handle playoff pressure already. If he can avoid the injury luck Howard has had, I see no reason he can't rebound and become a top goalie in this league.

Illitch doesn't seem to pay much attention as long as there's money coming in, and I don't think Jimmy D has had much say in several years. This seems to be the Ken Holland Show.

Totally fair enough. I wasn't referring directly back to everything but was kinda replying generally to a sentiment that's been expressed by many and kinda latched on to your post. I see what you were saying more clearly and I apologize if I came off as an ass. I mean, we're all here talking about hockey and cheering for the Wings as far as I'm concerned, everything I say is should be taken as spirited but good-natured banter at worst.

I don't think anyone would suggest that there isn't a huge maturity gap between those age groups. My only point was that it's very common to come across a 21 year old that is much more mature than a 25 year old. And in this case, I think it's very likely that Larkin is just as or more mature than Mrazek. I also think they're in similar stages of their development, despite Larkin being 4 years younger. Anyway, I think everyone hopes that both have huge bounce back years, along with the rest of the team.

D-Boss dont need a 401K when the snip show is selling out the dungeon

Yeah it would be one thing if our older players regressed and the young guys stepped up (which was my understanding of why Blash was hired, ability to coach the young players) but everyone regressed besides Zberg and maybe Mantha (who had the benefit of playing with Zberg). And Zberg would probably have the same season even if a drunk chimpanzee was coaching him. Playoffs ins't the bar for me, it's forward progress from the guys who will be taking over for the old core. We didn't see that, and in fact we saw mostly the opposite. If we miss the playoffs again but see significant improvements from a mix of Mrazek, Larkin, Mantha, AA, XO, Jensen, Sproul, Sheahan, and possibly even Bertuzzi I will be happy with Blash. Another year of downturns and growing pains will be very disappointing. Though it's hard to imagine it could be much worse.

I dont think the playoffs should be the bar, for Blashill it should be what does he get out of his players. If it's a repeat of last year, I think he will not be renewed. As far as Holland goes, I think that's more wishful thinking on your part as I dont see Holland going anywhere regardless of how we finish.

I agree. Huge difference maturity wise. And between 25 and 28/29 even moreso

You know, even though this case went to arbitration, one could say this is now two decent contracts in a row Tatar signed. I am not going to begrudge him the 5.3 million since it is a fair rate for his production, and, as I said before, if his shoulder is fine and Blashill deploys him correctly it could end up being a bargain. I was just thinking about how his previous contract at 2.75 million for three years and, more importantly, leaving a year of RFA afterwards was a huge deal for the Wings. I am hoping he lights it up in a big way this year.

He's not overpaid. Mike Halford summed it up pretty well: Tomas Tatar has been Detroit’s most consistent goalscorer over the last three years. He’s netted 29, 21 and 25 in each campaign, for a grand total of 75 — more than Phil Kessel, Patrick Marleau and Matt Duchene have scored over the same timeframe. Now, Tatar wants to be paid accordingly. Helene St. James: The 75 goals he has scored from 2014-15 through 2016-17 ranks 31st overall in the NHL. Tatar is a really good top-six scoring winger and a solid (if unspectacular) first-line scoring winger. And, according to the conventional possession metrics, he's an elite possession-driver. $5.3M x 4 is a really good deal for the Wings. He's performed above his pay grade in each of the past four seasons. 2013-14: 19 goals and 39 points in 73 games. Cap hit: $630K. 2014-15: 29 goals and 56 points in 82 games. Cap hit: $2.75M. 2015-16: 21 goals and 45 points in 81 games. Cap hit: $2.75M. 2016-17: 25 goals and 46 points in 82 games. Cap hit: $2.75M. He's been performing like a $5M player, and now he's getting $5M. So, the only "demand" that his new contract makes is "Keep doing what you're doing." The team is bad because we lack top-end talent at every position. That's not on Tatar, it's on the people who run the organization and construct the team. Tatar is not The Problem. Tatar has not been holding us back.

No, it's because Holland thinks guys like Helm Abdelkader and Glendening are more than grinders who are relatively easy to replace Sent by my minions via telepathy