stevkrause

just because they've made many other marketing mistakes, doesn't mean that removing the SO wouldn't be a bad marketing move... that's very flawed reasoning...

I feel the need to point out that I don't care for the shootout - but people need to be able to remove their own bias for a situation and evaluate it from both ends of the spectrum.

First off, I'm almost 30, so I'd hardly call myself a kid... I hate the idea of a team game being decided by individuals, but you cannot go through OT's forever - and the SO is indeed just a gimmicky solution, but what are some of the ONLY highlights you see on Sportscenter? The SO. This is for the fringe fans, not the die-hards... my point is to keep it, while taking the emphasis off of it, so they still get their little dog and pony show, but the pts are not so heavily relied upon it... need to appease all sides... As for the other thread, I'm not really sure what you're referring to... I just went back and re-read my posts and I don't see anything like that...

god damn a lot of people are ignorant... THIS. IS. NOT. GOOD. MARKETING. It's not going to be a DRASTIC overhaul... be reasonable... at least some of us are trying to offer solutions we think would work and could still appease the marketing aspect of the SO... face facts - it's not going away.

they already do that... at least this way has merit, as you're getting the pt for taking it to a tie through TEAM play (remember, under a tie format, both teams split the pts)- This way, the SO is just there for people to walk away with a winner and a loser and basically the teams that "wins" in the SO gives the pt away for not winning it in OT....

this is marketing stupidity.

I think we're focusing on the wrong thing - taking away the SO is marketing stupidity... they need to figure out a way to just put MORE emphasis on winning it as a team, to take away the appeal to just sitting back and playing for a shootout... As I've said AD NAUSEM: NO team should be awarded for winning in a SO, while another teams gets NOTHING for LOSING in a SO - it is a TEAM GAME The shootout is fun to watch and adds to excitement, and there is no reason to remove it - FOR REGULAR SEASON ONLY, however, simply put - ALL GAMES SHOULD BE WORTH THE SAME CUMULATIVE POINT VALUE. Win in regulation or OT - 3 pts Win in SO - 2pts Loss in SO - 1 pt Loss in Regulation or OT - 0 pts This way teams are still basically docked a pt for winning a team game in a SO, and it encourages more OT wins... 10 min OT (divide however the hell you want) then SO - So even if you win in the SO, you're sacrificing a pt you could have winning in OT... All games worth same point value - Solved Emphasis on team effort - Solved Marketing value still there - Solved problem solved.

agreed 100%. He is only a couple weeks back from a broken wrist and his strength on the puck is amazing... I don't think he's anywhere NEAR peaked... if he can just get some more consistency finishing, he will be a real threat

as much as we'd love the game to JUST be played for the integrity of the game, we need to ALL be able to remove ourselves from the purist standpoint and look at it like a business - people that shell out money for tickets, viewers on TV, etc... want to walk away from a game with a winner and a loser.... this is a sport, but it is also entertainment and that's how the bills are paid at the end of the day...

haha, I thought the same thing... I was getting ready to drink to the topic at hand, I was surprised and delighted how well Bert, Dats and Fil gelled yesterday... never really thought about that as a combo... with that emergence said, when all was healthy, I would roll with this (at least as long as it worked) Franzen-Zetterberg-Holmstrom Filppula-Datsyuk-Bertuzzi Miller-Williams-Cleary Draper-Helm-Eaves Lidstom-Rafalski Stuart-Kronwall Ericsson-Lilja

If I had it my way, it'd just be another 20 minute OT period 5-5, if no one scores - both teams get a pt and it's a tie - 2 pts win, 1 pt tie, 0pts loss... Like it or not though, the shootout attracts attention and is good for the league - the only reason I even suggest the 3-3, is it allows the skill to shine and would GREATLY increase scoring chances, thus making games end in OT more than Shootout and it's still a team game that way... I agree 100% it's gimmicky - but it's also about ratings...

all of this is ridiculous - NO team should be awarded for winning in a SO, while another teams gets nothing for LOSING in a SO - it is a TEAM GAME The shootout is fun to watch and adds to excitement, and there is no reason to remove it - FOR REGULAR SEASON ONLY, however, simply put - ALL GAMES SHOULD BE WORTH THE SAME CUMULATIVE POINT VALUE. Win in regulation or OT - 3 pts Win in SO - 2pts Loss in SO - 1 pt This way teams are still basically docked a pt for winning a team game in a SO, and it encourages more OT wins Go 4-4 for 5 mins, then 3-3 for another 5 - total of 10 min OT BEFORE the SO problem solved.

There's a reason why Jeff Lerg wasn't even drafted after his STELLAR career at MSU... The NHL is a tall, athletic goaltenders league (Brodeur, Miller, Luongo, etc....) Howard is over 6'... Ozzie is only 5'10... Of the top 10 SV% leading goalies in the NHL right now, only ONE of them is under 6' (Halak in MTL is 5'11") it's not a coincidence...

as sad as it is to admit this about that waste of skin... he has SOME value - not much, but we could get something in return for him and if we waive him, he WILL be claimed, guaranteed.... Holland does not like losing guys for nothing...

when everyone's back, I would love to see: Zetterberg-Datsyuk-Holmstrom Bertuzzi-Filppula-Franzen fix the bottom 6 as you like... Miller-Williams-Cleary Draper-Helm-Eaves probably?

MALTBY WILL NOT BE TRADED. How is this so hard for people to grasp?

you know asking this question is just like saying Beetlejuice 3 times in a row, but instead of Beetlejuice, you get another blueadams line combination thread...

that's the way I look at it... he'll DEFINITELY be here for the postseason full time starting next year...

He has played more than 60 NHL games(and is 23) and is no longer waiver exempt... not that it matters anyway, he's been EASILY one of our 3 best players this year and he could have all the waiver eligibility in the world and it'd be a moot point... EDIT: edited for factual purposes

unless he was 7 foot tall and obese, that wouldn't work either, because top shelf would be open all day... to put it simply - an obese goalie would never work... you need to be extremely athletic to be a good goalie

that's not how 2 way contracts work... I feel like we've gone over this a million times on this board - 2 way just means what they're paid depending on where they play - waiver exemption is a completely different story and the ONLY Red Wing that is waiver exempt is Abdelkader

Maltby's not going anywhere... more like May, Abs, Leino and Lebda...

With everyone healthy and here, we are over a mil over the cap and 2 guys over roster limits... the most obvious moves would be to move Leino and Lebda, as this will free up the most cap with the least damage to the roster, then waive/send down May(not a fan of sending him down, but he's one of the only ones we probably won't have to worry about losing to waivers) and we should be clear...

Agreed... he's been one of our best players so far, but what are you gonna do, he has options...

no way, because they would still be able to jam PLENTY of pucks by his feet... as I said earlier in the thread, athleticism is EXTREMELY important, however: Also, what is one of the FIRST things you are taught about shooting the puck when starting hockey? - Aim for the goalies skate blade, because you'll get him sliding from side to side and probably sneak it past him - I've scored WAY more goals on the ice, than I have top shelf... and what wins playoff games? dirty, hard nosed goals...