Leaderboard

This is what I meant in saying you don't understand reality and blow things out of proportion. While I'm certain you won't get it, I'll explain some things anyway on the off chance that someone else reading can benefit. First, you acknowledge that you don't have problem with anything that's been done so far, but you're still bitching about Holland, about things that haven't even happened. Much like last year when you were calling Holland an idiot because someone else predicted he might do something, even though that thing (drafting Pettersson) would have been a solid move. Secondly, the basic premise that the Wings need to change any philosophy is wrong. But that debate could be a whole thread by itself, so I won't go any further. Then there's the specifics of your hypothetical manual, which in reality are simply the ways things work in the NHL. It's all but literally impossible to do things any different: College and European UFAs are signed at this time of year, because this is the time of year when they become available. Aside from maybe a few breakout college stars (and since there are so few of those, almost every team misses out almost every year) most of these players are mostly unknown, because if they weren't they would have been drafted and already signed, so thus unavailable. Most of these players, being low-end prospects, will never make it to the NHL, some not even the AHL. But you can't criticize Holland for that. There aren't enough high-end prospects available to do things any different. And you're dead wrong about the "gets buried, never make it and split after their contract" stuff. Take your own advice and go back and look at our history. Coreau, Glendening, Campbell, Hicketts, Russo, Renouf, Sulak...all still with the organization, almost all got at least a couple games in the NHL. Hicketts and Sulak might still become full-timers. Machovsky is the only one who fits your profile. (You have a tendency to exaggerate things that happen once, or even not at all...like your "typical Holland pick" thing. Wait, do YOU have a manual?) Finally, you selectively ignore things that don't fit your anti-Holland narrative. Yes, he's said we need to get bigger and tougher to play against, among other things. Take a look at our recent draft history and try to tell me that size hasn't been a priority. Why would you think drafting one smaller defenseman would negate all the size we have drafted recently? Despite what I suspect is your strong desire to classify Hughes/Boqvist as "European style", they probably have a lot more in common with Bouchard/Dobson than they have differences. Neither of the bigger guys project as particularly physical players. Not likely to be punishing guys in the corners or bulldozing the crease. Nor, if the more in-depth scouting reports are to be believed, should we think of Boqvist and Hughes as defensive liabilities. Basically, your entire "metaphor" boils down to your typical "Boo, Holland! Because stuff!" ridiculous freakout. The one and only page in your book.