RedWings Gone Wild

Here's what another article said about that. [sarcasm] Yea, another smart versatile defensive forward would really be to much, especially in the modern NHL where killing off penalties is a rarity. And this is a Draper that can score too! This is to much for me Holland, u better keep away from him! What we really need is a player that is close to keeling over and dieing (Forsberg, Lindros..Shanny is nearing that point too) or a player with no defensive awareness (Yashin). [/sarcasm]

I've been saying for years that Rafalski would b a great pickup. I'm excited to see him work in our offense. Yea, Rafalski lead the Devils in turnovers, but remember that it is a very very different system in NJ, and he was their only legitimate scoring Defenseman last season. He had no choice but to take risks. Not to mention, with Marty as your goalie, u can afford to take those risks. As far as losing Bert and Calder? Bert will probably spend the entire season on the IR if he takes a decent check to the back, and Calder was scratched most of the time anyways, so there shouldn't be much of a change because of him. As for lang, well I dont consider him a waste of sperm like every1 else, but his spot is certainly replaceable. Even if we dont sign anyone, his goals will be replaced. However, I fully expect Holland to take a risk on an old goat who used to b able to score some goals. If said old goat can stay healthy, we should b able to replace or surpass Lang's contributions for 1/5th the price (I expect some1 like Nedved or Bondra would sign for under 1 mil). However, we do need at least 2 more players. While we do have a complete (and good) lineup, we don't exactly have any room for injuries, and considering our luck the past few seasons, we should brace ourselves for 1-2 significant injuries. If we have even one key guy go down for an extended period, we could be in a tight spot. So, as it stands, this is a so-so offseason. However, making any finite declarations is still very premature.

Yes.

I would have to say that the best all around players in the world would have to be swedish. This is certainly Swedens golden age of Hockey, but I dont know if they have the population or tallent pool to keep developing players like Lids and Forsberg. However, the players that are funnest to watch are certainly the Russians. I expect the russians to be #1 again soon. If Russia can produce guys like Kovulchuk, Datsyuk, and Ovechkin while their system is a mess, look out. The collapse of the USSR screwed up all their programs. Before the USSR broke up I would argue that the Russians produced better players than the Canadians. I cant argue that the Russians had better players per capita (since westerners didnt really see any USSR players beyond the National team), but they had the best team for a long time.

Wait until they aren't one of the top teams in the league like they were this season. Without Vokoun and kariya I expect them to be taking the lowest spot for attendance.

So many people are breaking up the Homer-Zet-Dats line.. r u kidding? Maybe... MAYBE... if one of our younger guys really has a coming out yr that line will b broken up, or MAYBE if they cant regain their chemistry from last yr.. but at least for the start of the year that line must be kept together as our top scoring line. It was our only somewhat consistent line all last season, and when the three were broken up they all became fluky and regular non-factors. For a time (after the weak start to the season, and before Zetterberg got injured), H-Z-D was one of the top lines in hockey. I don't care how badly we need a legitimate 2nd scoring option, it just isn't worth breaking up that line unless proven necessary.

Despite the Rangers bench reaction, I am of the persuasion that Brashear came out on top (regardless of how much of a dirtbag he is). He essentially landed two birds with one stone. He got Jagr, and then he got a chance to take Shanny out of the game for 5 min. Is Brashear being in the box a loss? Hell no. Is Shanny? Yep. So, that's where I am coming from. Besides, A fight, regardless of outcome or participant, usually energizes both sides. The fact is, I didn't see anyone running over the wings last season, regardless of their size. They more than held their own against the Ducks, Flames, and Sharks. Sure, there were lots of cheapshots thrown during the playoffs (especially from the flames), but I'd rather see the league start throwing out suspensions for those rather than have a bunch of useless post-whistle shoving and whining. And McCarty wasn't useless in his prime because u could still interfere with players through the nuetral zone which made him less of a defensive liability. Therefore, it didn't cost the team much to keep him on the ice, but even in his prime he wouldn't be very useful right now. I'm seeing various reasons for adding big men. Such as: clearing the ice for dats + zet, keeping them safe, and making Detroit harder to play against. To accomplish this, u need a guy who is big, not an injury risk (like Bert and shanny), and capable of playing on the top two lines. I just don't see any available player that will be reasonably priced that meets the need (or even comes close to). And also. Stop saying you don't want a goon, because i nvr said u did, you're getting defensive over something I didn't imply. As I said, I was endorsing signing a big bum who we can bring in every few games if a message needs to be sent. I nvr said u were endoring it.

Markov didn't overly impress me. I'd take any D-man on that list over him. I'd also love to have Peca

Don't be so sure that something like this wont happen. Every single season Holland takes a risk on at least one seemed-to-be washed up vet. Remember: Bertuzzi, Hasek, Steve Thomas, and Cheli. Holland continually gives chances to vets past their prime. why? Because they will sign for dirt-cheap and under the correct circumstances they could really contribute. Everyone said Holland was crazy for resigning Hasek and Cheli last season. I would not be surprised to see either Bondra, Nedved, Ozolinsh, or Lindros in a wings jersey next yr for cheap. Also, Mike Peca is still out there, i would not mind having him.

Sigh... you completely missed my point. So i'll try and explain myself better. You listed a number of big guys (some of which were never physical and have maybe 1-2 fights in their entire career.. ie Dandy?), and yea, some of those guys made our team a bit tougher and harder to play against. But the wings still weren't a physical or big team. just bigger than they r now. I simply fail to see how adding a few bigger players, capable of being physical, helps the team. This is the modern NHL and guys like McCarty, Lapointe, and Kocur are simply utterly useless. They are slow, offensively incapable, prone to suspension and penalties (if they try to play their former style), plus they steal roster spots from players with more tallent. I mean, McCarty was a healthy scratch on the flames, and they don't really even have or use a fourth line. Face it, the NHL is trying its hardest to get rid of the physical aspect. Pronger is a star and he was suspended twice in the playoffs, that nvr would have happened before. You want someone who is going to make the opposition aware of the fact that our stars are to be left alone? Well, then the prescreption must be some1 u can afford to lose, a goon. Yes, I am advocating goonery. Hell, even NY is trying to clean up Avery's act since he can actually score on occasion. The super physical forwards of yesteryears are a thing of the past, plain and simple. If the majority of ur team is big, it's a different story, but a few big guys won't do a damn thing in the modern NHL, only a goon.

The irony is that last season was our poorest offensive season of the past 3, and it is also the only time we made it past the first round. I'd rather know we can grind it out and play defensively than put our faith in streaky scorers to win us the cup. As far as Hasek is concerned, i'm actually indifferent to his return. I'd like to have him, but I'm also tired of crossing my fingers every game hoping his groin doesn't implode. It would be much better for my nerves if Howard and Osgood split time (every other team takes the occasional risk on a young goalie, why must we be the exception?).

Why do we need size? The taller/bigger the player the better? Of course not. So, obviously the reason is for protection. Protectors = enforcers = goons. As far as I'm concerned they are practically synonymous. You aren't going to find a 40-50 point guy who can really help protect our younger guys. If he scored those numbers then you wouldn't always be willing to risk the suspensions and injuries that come with the physical play. You seem to want all of our problems solved with one single player (is superman a FA?). Sign 1 or 2 decent offensive players and then get a goon for cheap that can grind on the 4th line (ala McCarty).

I like him, and would be willing to give him a shot on Detroit. I think this is a good time to pick up a few underrated players, since all the big namers are gone (which is probably for the best anyways). Anson Carter is a pretty big guy and puts up decent points. I'm suprised nobody has mentioned him. Sure, he's inconsistent, but if he'll play for cheap enough, why not? Jeff Friesen had a terrible yr with Calgary, but he used to be able to light it up. Maybe it was a fluke yr. Bondra, Lindros, Patrik Stefan, Nedved, Ozolinsh, Mike Comrie, Fedotenko, Peca, ect.. I wouldnt mind having any of those guys (for 1-1.5 mil or less), and they are still all open. Sure, alot of them had some bad yrs the past few yrs, but that just means they are probably available for cheap, so if they don't work out, it isn't much of a loss. There are still lots of options. As for the "big" thing.. which popped into the convo as I was typing.. You can put any caveman into a pair of skates and have him pound the crap out of people. Yea, we need a guy who can throw a few hits and watch out for our top guys, but the more important thing right now is finding some legitimate point scorers.

Eh.. Raycroft has never really impressed me.. ever. But it would be nice to have a goalie that is young and healthy for a change.

I see alot of panic on this message board, which I think is strange. After all the great teams Holland has whipped together for us, can't we finally just trust his instincts? Everyone seems to be worried since we lost lang, calder, todd, and matt. But honestly, were any of them actually essential to our success? (Especially since Rafalski will easily replace schneider, the only one of true value) There also seems to be alot of concern over the fact that a number of the top FAs are already gone. What needs to be remembered is this: In 2005 Detroit was expected to be really hurt because of the salary cap... in 2006 Detroit was expected to be really hurt by the loss of Yzerman and shanny. Each time, we're at the top. I think Holland knows what he is doing. I expect we'll be just as good as last year, if not better. Care to disagree?

I was dreaming of this from the first moment I heard he would be becoming a FA. I would take Rafalski over Schn any day of the week. He's younger, better, and puts up a very similar number of points.

http://www.redwingscentral.com/stories/200...renkoSigns.html It's an older article, but I figure it's relivant to this discussion.

I like Raycroft, but he seems unable to adjust to the new NHL, which is surprising since he is so young. Either the new NHL doesn't work for him, or his rookie season was a total fluke. However, I am kind of tired of putting all of our faith in really really old players. Hasek is my favorite goalie of all time. Period. Even before we traded for him, but i'm tired of worrying about his groin. Not to mention, if Howard doesn't eventually pan through, we don't really have a goalie of the future. Hnidy would purely be a depth move, since I've never heard anything impressive about him. That being said, where did you hear this info?

I'll explain why Messier deserves it and Federov doesn't in a brief and concise way: Messier played for the Rangers, and Federov played for the Red Wings. Here is the expanded version: Yes, both teams are origional 6 teams with long histories, but the history of the Rangers is very average. Perhaps you can remember when the Red Wings were the Dead Wings? Well, that's pretty much how it's been for NY since the NHL began. I mean, Richter was a very average goalie, and Messier is a bit of a ******, but the fact remains that they are all NY has to remember. That cup they won in 93-94 is all they have had since the stone age. The Red Wings, on the other hand, have a long history of dedicated players, players that were both statistically relivant and played hard. In some places, ala St. Louis, a guy like Brett Hull (for example) can play there for a few seasons and score a bunch of goals and accomplish jack s*** (in terms of postseason success), but that jack S*** is all they have ever accomplished, so why not relish in it? However, these 3 cups were not Detroit's only 3 cups, we've won more, SO ACT LIKE IT! Federov was great, blah blah blah, but in Hockeytown only the BEST of the BEST of the BEST get up there. Detroit should only retire a number when there is absolutely no reason or room for debate, like Yzerman. Who would ever have this debate about Steve Yzerman? I doubt u'd even see any debate over Lidstrom. But Federov? Osgood? Shannahan? MCCARTY???? uh... Do you people think this is an expansion team? Let Columbus retire Federov's number, this is Detroit.