StormJH1

You said there was no litmus test, but then you provided one. Your litmus test is: "A guy should get his number retired (or get into the HHOF) if nobody argues about it." But not everyone is Gretzky, Yzerman, or Lidstrom, and there are people in the HHOF (and with retired numbers around the league) where people did debate it. Dino Ciccarelli is one of my favorite all-time players. I have a signed North Stars puck from him in my basement. Yet, as a 600-goal scorer, he couldn't get into the HHOF until 2010, and none of his 5 teams (to my knowledge, have retired his number). That there was "debate" about Ciccarelli (or about Sawchuk's #1 retirement) doesn't make him any less deserving of the honor - you either are or you aren't. The bottom line about the Fedorov haters is this: They believe, rightly or wrongly, don't believe that that he cares about them or the honor of wearing the Winged Wheel. A lot of that has to do with the Russian thing, but that's not the only reason. But I don't really care what it means to the player, frankly, so long as the accomplishments and dedication on the ice hold up, and I'm not sure why other people do care (or even think they could know that). If that really mattered, then why honor Sawchuk 24 years after he died? Terry wasn't around to appreciate it, and you can't really tell me that you care what it means to his family. Sawchuk's play meant something to the fans and the organization, and to me, that's what should matter.

You don't hear a lot of Achilles injuries in hockey (likely because of the stability of the boot), but I imagine that has to be a pain to come back from as a skater. Ryan Howard's a big guy and on the wrong side of 30, but that doesn't mean Mezaros won't also struggle. Too bad for him, good player.

Yeah! Thank you for clearing that up - I don't want anyone muddying Mike Russo's name. As a Wings fan (and Detroit transplant) in Minnesota, I'm a huge fan of Russo's work. I think a lot of LGW'ers also took note of his reporting and started following him during the Parise/Suter saga. There were a lot of people exposed during this year's free agent period (including Eklund), but Nick Kypreos is the one that irks me the most. He reported that Suter thing like he actually knew something. What a joke.

Every argument against Fedorov being in the rafters is contradicted by the guys you referenced already up there. (1) He needs to "bleed red and white" The Wings won the '55 Cup and then Terry Sawchuk left to play in Boston for two years in the prime of his career. Yes, he was predominantly a Red Wing, but he spent almost a decade until his death playing for Toronto, LA, and the Rangers. Sergei Fedorov was more of a "career" Red Wing than Sawchuk, hands down. (2) Guys like Lindsay were important for other reasons - like pioneering for players' rights and forming the NHLPA What about Fedorov (along with Fetisov, Bure and Mogilny, in my opinion, to a lesser degree) defecting from Russia as a teenager and breaking the Iron Curtain? You don't think Fedorov was an important pioneer for the globalization of the game and the acceptance of players from the former Soviet Bloc? (3) Number Retirements are only for guys who unequivocally belong up there with no debate Really? I think this is an overreaction to the last two guys who are going up there (#19 and #5). Not even getting into the whole Larry Aurie debate (and why the Illitchs should never "un-retire" a number), what about Terry Sawchuk. His number was retired in 1994. He died in 1970. You're telling me there was never any debate about whether he belonged up there? Then why didn't they bring his family out in 1971 or 1972 and do it then? Maybe views changed. Maybe time was needed to recognized the significance of Sawchuk's accomplishments and downplay the fact that most of his final years were spent playing for other NHL teams. Maybe four decades of Dead Wings hockey with no Stanley Cups put into perspective how difficult it really is to win that trophy. I think that views will change and evolve on Fedorov as well. Once the pissy matches and bitter feelings subside, it will be a disgrace that his number isn't up there, despite the fact that we probably don't win 3 Cups, or maybe even 1 Cup without him. We'll never know that, of course. But in the meantime, go ahead and tell yourself that this honor means nothing to Fedorov because he's a lazy Russian. I wonder if it means something to Datsyuk and every other Russian player that has and will wear the Winged Wheel...to know that their accomplishments don't come with a 10% deduction off what they would have been if they were North American or Swedish. It doesn't feel right to me not to honor what I saw with my own eyes for over a decade, but I suppose other reasonable fans might have seen something different than I did.

As someone who disagrees and would retire his number, I can't take issue with a single thing you said, an entirely valid opinion. That being said, if you are of that mindset, then there is no way Brendan Shanahan or Chris Osgood could possibly have their numbers retired either. As long as the Wings are consistent on that definition of "royalty", I could accept Yzerman and Lidstrom, only, as the Wings' definition of "royalty" for this recent era of success. Also, if Yzerman and Lidstrom are the only current Wings players equivalent to Delvecchio, Lindsay, etc. up in the rafters, then I think you have a really hard time arguing that Datsyuk and Zetterberg are deserving of that honor, unless they win more Cups. Part of the reason I struggle with this is you can look at guys like Delvecchio, Lindsay, Sawchuk, and these guys were definitely not the "best", or often even the "2nd best" player on their teams at that time, yet they are in the rafters. And you could argue that the 1950's Red Wings were a great team in an era where it was MUCH easier for one team to sustain success. The Wings ripped off 4 Cups in 12 seasons, and did it amongst 25 to 29 other NHL teams. There's no "right answer" to this, but I don't think you can diminish the value of guys like Fedorov simply because they weren't the "best" guy on a team that obviously needed a lot of really great players to succeed as they did.

Glad to see the positive comments in here about Fedorov. Yes, I think he absolutely deserves the honor. The only reason they won't do it is this perception that it wouldn't mean anything to him because he's a selfish Russian. That's BS. The great Yzerman was a one-way player who didn't even make the Playoffs every year before 91 and 5 showed up. He was an absolute superstar, a great playoff performer, and his numbers were suppressed by his defensive focus and the time he actually spent AS a defenseman. He also played right in the heart of the "Dead Puck" era and still put up MVP numbers. I was talking with a Wild fan and told him that many Wings fans hate Fedorov because of the offer sheet and because he left in '03. He looked at me with bewilderment. "Theyre mad because of THAT? He was basically done by then, why did they want him then anyway?". I thought he had a point. To me it doesnt matter what was going on inside his head or that he played for other teams in the late years of his career. He didn't do that for more money. The Wings hijacked him from Russia during the end of the Cold War, and I think he earned the right to go determine where he wanted to play and live at the end. He was a great Red Wing, and Yzerman wouldn't have won 3 Cups without him. Sent on iPhone using Tapatalk

It's not the particular political views Thomas espouses that are the problem. I don't think anybody's been able to figure out exactly what those are anyway. The problem was that he embarrassed the Bruins organization and drew attention to his own views on multiple occasions during a time when his team should have been focused on making the Playoffs and getting a good seed. I think they were phasing him out in favor of Rask anyway.

Wrong. I know what you mean, but a 1 yr deal of ANY amount is not the same as a long term commitment like the ones given to 13, 40, or even 93. Semin would've been a mercenary no different than Hossa. Sent on iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow. I really felt like there was a good reason for all the other non-moves, but this one stings. Honestly, the roster is basically full - a one-year deal!? If there's some good reason Semin didn't want us then so be it, but I better not find out that we were just "holding out for Doan" Sent on iPhone using Tapatalk

It isn't disrespectful to offer a negative opinion about one's TEAM by prefacing that it isn't opinion against a city or fanbase. The NAS poster has been well-behaved and insightful. But he also wants his team succeed and my (our) team to fail. Disagreements are okay! My opinion was that Nashville doesnt have the will or resources to pay their players. If you don't agree with that, observe that they tried to lowball their franchise player for years, and then apparently did have the money to pay what was essentially open market value for him. It is what it is. Oh, and by the way, they still need other contracts to get even up to the floor of what you are required to pay in salaries to operate an NHL franchise. Sent on iPhone using Tapatalk

This. He got Lidstrom-like playing time and put up Kyle Quincey numbers. Actually, Quincey was more productive than him at LA and COL. After sleeping on this, I have little interest. Especially if we had to give up any of the top 4 trade assets normally thrown around (Flip, Franzen, Nyquist, Smith)

No disrespect for Nashville or Nashville fans, but your team is the Florida/Miami Marlins of the NHL, minus the rings. You absolutely cleaned our clocks in the 1st round, I have no interest in disputing that. But to use that as any kind of argument going forward doesn't make a whole lot of sense because we've seen these "fake surges" from you before. With the exception of Rinne (who seems to be an excellent goaltender, even though I don't really believe in long-term deals for supposedly "elite" goalies) and Martin freakin' Erat who have the Preds actually developed and retained recently? Ownership puts on these dog-and-pony shows for the fans who actually care (yourself included, I assume) by picking up a Forsberg or Gaustad at the deadline. But then those guys are gone, and so is anyone else of consequence. I think Shea Weber is an excellent defenseman. He would have been a terrific building block if he actually wanted to be there. But if I were a Predators fan, I think that I would be of the opinion that it would be better to go find an Eric Lindros-type haul and build myself with picks and assets the way the Nords/Avalance did in the 90's. If that means bottoming out for a few years...even better. You'll end up with a Yakupov or Stamkos-type star on a reasonable contract for the next 3 years. This team WILL miss Suter, and the offense is a lot of smoke and mirrors. They're good enough to hover around and get into the playoffs, which is just good enough to ensure you won't get any top level picks for all those years.

Wow, 31 posts in on this (excellent) topic, and not a single message of the real "Shinguard Assassin", Ian White? Seriously, that guy is the worst at getting shots through to the net, and it's emblematic of a larger problem with the Red Wings' style and the "new NHL", which is only going to get worse now that #5 is gone. Everybody kind of assumed that White was going to be this "poor man's Rafalski", but while they are both RH defenseman who like to shoot low, there are all sorts of elements to not getting a shot blocked, including where you take the shots from and the timing of when you let them go. I hear low slapshots from the point referred to as "deflectable", but they're usually blocked or deflected by the defense, and that's the problem. If you watched film even of the Wings' first modern Cup run in '96/'97, the league as a whole blocks a TON more shots now. Strader/Daniels/Redmond used to talk about about specific guys who "specialized" in shot blocking (Ramsey and Beregevin). To make a comment like that now would be absurd - EVERYBODY blocks shots because they're about as well protected below the face as the goalies were in the 70's. I think that while the first "goaltending revolution" really kicked in after 92/93 season (permanent switch from standup to butterfly), we've seen the overall quality of goaltending across the 30 teams really go up post-lockout. This is despite the fact that there have been technology changes (composite sticks) and rule changes that should specifically improve offense. To answer the question of the thread, getting shots on net is generally better because it increases the chance of human error (or a freak deflection). But that isn't true if you're someone like White or Sammy whose shot isn't good enough to score from more than 20 feet away with any regularity. In that case, you might as well set up a play, or do the Lidstrom/JLA boards thing where you miss on purpose to get the puck through and hope it ricochets into the slot somehow. Interesting. I'm a big Babcock fan, so I don't want to rip him for telling guys something as simple as "shoot the puck!". But for all the talk about the Wings being a "puck possession" team, that would be reversal of the Russian Five era, where the puck was cycled and held almost to frustration. If it's Lidstrom or Shea Weber back there, heck, fire away. But if it's White, Ericsson, or any other defender that isn't really comfortable back there, you're kind of blowing your offensive wad by setting up a hole play just to create a low-percentage shot from the guy furthest away - which usually ends the attack either with a turnover or a frozen puck.

I'm also waiting to see if Weber's contract is actually valid under the CBA. I suspect that it will be upheld given that the NHL only struck down one deal (Kovy) and that involved a "tail" contract extending to age 44, but there are all kinds of legitimate arguments that this deal circumvents the CBA. Then again, since Nashville can't even really afford to be at the Cap, it "feels" less suspicious with them paying it, as opposed to a team like Philly. I'm still not exactly clear how this works that we don't have a functioning CBA for the upcoming season, yet teams are able to hand out 14-year deals without any idea what will happen to the whole compensation structure only weeks (or months) after the ink on the contract has dried.

Here's the problem with that logic - in either scenario, Weber can force a move to another team after one year. So it's really choice between these two scenarios: (A) Signing a 14-year deal now, as a 26-year old RFA whose value really could not possibly be any higher than it already is, OR (B) Agreeing to a one-year deal (again) with NAS, or doing arbitration...playing out the season on what could very well be a much crappier Nashville team without his trusted defensive partner (Suter) who helped him to achieve the offensive numbers he put up, and risking serious injury for an entire season (ACL tear, severe concussion, torn rotator cuff from slamming faces into the glass too hard, etc.), which would cost him tens of millions of dollars as a 27-year old UFA next season. Now, given those two choices, isn't Option A (the "pay me now" option) clearly the one with less risk? And again, if he doesn't want to play for Nashville at some point, there are ways he could make that happen. Heck, it may happen anyway if Nashville draws 8,000 a game and decides it can't afford his 14-year salary. Also (and this is a critical point), if the argument is that Weber was just "using" Philadelphia to get Nashville to pay him...(a) why did he and his agent sign a poison-pill, front-loaded offer sheet with the intended effect of crippling NAS with a matching offer; and (b) why would his agent talk trash against Nashville and its GM, if his intent all along was to help his client get a long-term deal with the Predators? I don't buy it. A lot of the same people here call Fedorov a "traitor" for signing the '98 offer sheet with Carolina, but are willing to view Weber's offer sheet as a mere negotiating tactic, or even a sign of loyalty. That makes no sense.

I'm not sure. Your points are well-taken, but he did have connections on that PHI team, such as Timonen and Hartnell. Perhaps he wanted to get paid and was willing to consider either NAS or PHI if it meant a long-term deal. And the fact remains that the length and dollar amount of a contract, under this CBA, mean nothing in terms of guaranteeing that a player remains with the team that signed him. See Richards, Mike; Carter, Jeff; Luongo, Roberto, et al. As long as a player is good enough that SOMEBODY in the league is willing to pay his pre-negotiated deal, that player can and will be moved if it doesn't work out, if the team takes a nosedive in the standings (or the financial columns), or if the player becomes some type of locker room cancer in that environment. Weber had two offseasons and never agreed to a single multi-year contract offer presented by Nashville, while agreeing on paper to play for Philadelphia for 14 years. This is not over - it's only over for now.

I'm seeing a pattern here with the NHL where the fans and media uniformly seem to assume that something can't happen, and then it does because the players want it to. I think NHL players are evolving and learning to impose their will, not unlike what has happened with LeBron and the NBA. Does anybody seriously think that Shea Weber cannot be traded after next July? Why, because of his contract? Minnesota just added TWO contracts of nearly the same size. What if Nashville is god-awful? What if Weber decides that he really doesn't want to play for Nashville and throws a hissy fit next summer. You're telling me there aren't other teams out there that would throw multiple #1's/prospects/NHL-ready talent for a 27-year old elite defenseman? The drama will play out for a third year in a row.

Wow, I don't know. Most people are going to see this as "Yay, Nashville kept a franchise player, Philly screwed up". I don't see this as a "win" for Nashville at all. From last year to this year, they have no Suter, and have to pay Weber significantly more with a burdensome long-term salary commitment. Plus, this whole "cloud" of "Where is Weber going?" hangs over the team all year again into the offseason. Does anyone trust each other in this whole thing? Weber didn't trust Nashville mgmt to begin with, and they never paid him until they were absolutely forced to. The GM (and the fans) have a player that apparently wanted to play somewhere else because he signed an offer sheet with them. Oh, and the Predators went from "promising young playoff team" to fighting for the 8th spot again with a solid goalie, ONE (not two) elite defensemen, no Radulov, and not much else.

Haven't weighed in on Bouwmeester yet, so here it goes. PROS - The Wings have two things that would make a move like this seem reasonable - (1) A good deal of cap space and (so far) nowhere to use it; (2) A dire need of another Top 4 defenseman after the loss Lidstrom and Stuart. High cap hit ($6.6 million) or not, Bouwmeester's deal only has two years left. Additional deals come off the books next season, including Filppula, Cleary, and White (though some of the UFA's may be re-signed or traded). We could afford this deal and acquire a large defenseman with a history of past success at two seasons of his physical prime (he's 28). Oh, and by the way, he hasn't missed ONE GAME since the lockout. Seriously. Played 82 games from 2005 to 2012. Amazing. CONS - Here's the thing: some people have mentioned that he plays 25 minutes a game as a GOOD thing. While that is true from a stamina perspective, it's pretty frightening that this guy gets that many minutes a game and is only a 24-29 point per year player (with 3-5 goals). One assumes he got plenty of power play time, as well. The crappy Calgary offense could be blamed for part of that, but it doesn't make you feel comfortable about acquiring him... And since it's a trade (and a 2-year, not a 1-year rental), we would have to give up something to get him. Names like Flip, Franzen, Nyquist and Smith were often tossed around for Nash or Ryan, would you want to lose guys like that for Bouwmeester. I don't know. There's also the fact that Bouwmeester's teams have always been BAD, and these are teams where he's asked to play a significant role. I don't think that's coincidental. Look at the impact a Pronger or Chara-type guy had on Edmonton, Philly, or Boston. Instant credibility as Stanley Cup contenders. And those guys were similarly compensated for their services compared to what Bouwmeester makes. So I don't think it's automatic that we could just plug him into a winning team and expect better results.

Reason #138 why I wish the NHLPA hadn't treated realignment like a stupid bargaining chip for CBA negotiations. Anaheim and Detroit don't geographically need to be in the same division, conference, or anything, but they still are... I don't feel strongly like Bobby Ryan gets traded here. This has been the most humbling offseason for Detroit that I can remember as a Wings fan. The only other time I recall feeling close to this was in '03 when Colorado landed Kariya and Selanne on pay cuts. But that was pre-lockout, and it also turned out not to make Colorado any significantly better. Wings fans need to stop taking out their sense of entitlement on Holland. There are 29 other teams in the league, and free agents don't necessarily go ga-ga over the Winged Wheel, as once might have been the case. I think the Samuelsson and Tootoo moves are highly questionable, but there is ZERO evidence that any negligence or carelessness by Holland had anything to do with not landing Suter, Parise, or Nash. This team has lacked tradeable young talent for years by virtue of the fact that we (a) have been pretty darn good and had crappy draft position; (b) end up trading our picks at the deadline often anyway. The NHL system for acquiring talent is set up to cause teams like the Red Wings to slowly regress over time. That is by DESIGN. We need to find the next wave of stars, but nobody "owes" it to us to trade with them. In fact, many teams/GM's likely resent the level of success Detroit has had over the years, and do not wish to be complicit in facilitating our future success.

Wow. What the heck is Columbus doing? So, their three best forwards are now Derrick Brassard, R.J. Umberger, and Brandon Dubinsky. Yeah, that'll sell tickets. I understand why they might not want to trade Nash to US, but why even trade him at all if you can't get an elite prospect out of the deal? Dubinsky has a 4.2 million cap hit for the next three years - that's the type of garbage you overpay for no reason other than to get to the salary floor.

I was at U of M in 2001, also. That's funny you mention people calling their loved ones on cells because that's the thing that always sticks with me. I overslept a bit and woke up at 9:05am (no class until 11:30am). So of course I started watching CNN, but nothing seemed real at all. Then I eventually let to walk through the Diag (not knowing if class would be cancelled), and I saw girls in every direction hysterically calling friends and family in New York, also walking to class. Then it was real. Regardless of how you feel about the death penalty, I hope this guy rots in a jail with a long, unfulfilling life. Death is too easy for some people. It's tough to make sweeping generalizations on people based on where they live, but there are elements of truth in that assessment. But Toronto isn't like that, and they had a shooting there too that she was nearby. Just takes one nut-job I guess.

Wow, yeah! That's just blowing my mind even further. I don't understand how these "signing" bonuses spread out over many years have anything to do with signing in the first place, or how they are anything other than a circumvention of the Cap. Also, I seem to recall that Suter and Parise's contracts had similar provisions that essentially paid $20+ million for one year of hockey (with the second bonus coming due in July 2013). The "100% rule" issue is a separate deal, but if this deal violates the "20% Upper Limit" rule, don't the Parise and Suter deals too? Here's another question...suppose the league/arbitrator/whomever invalidates the Weber offer sheet on one of the grounds mentioned above. Does Weber then go back to RFA status where he could field other offer sheets, or does he head straight to salary arbitration with NAS then? I would think the former...

This was already a tragedy of epic proportions (with the young kids involved, especially), but as with any story, seeing her Twitter feed and reading some of her hockey stuff brought me to an even greater level of personal connection and sadness. She was actually from Texas and was pursuing her career in Colorado. Amazingly, she was nearly involved in the Eaton shopping mall shooting in Toronto not even two months ago. The idea that such an innocent person could be nearly caught up in a public shooting rampage (which are still extremely rare), blog about it, and then have it happen again not even two months later in a different country and thousands of miles away...it just blows my mind. I heard something Chris Connely said about this generation of young people, 9/11, and other tragedies on the B.S. Report (Simmons podcast) that stuck with me. He talked about how a lot of people don't understand the obsession with social media and the need to constantly keep friends, family, and even total strangers "in the loop" about what you're doing at a given moment. And he wondered if it had anything to do with a generation whose formative years were marked by Columbine, 9/11, anthrax, and the War on Terror, and in the face of the constant thought their life could end without warning, young people "document" their own lives as a way of saying "I was here. I lived". Who knows if there's any truth to that, but I'll say one thing, reading that girl's Twitter feed about how she could be tweeting about Shea Weber's contract and excited to see the opening of some movie only hours before her death...there has to be a lesson in there somewhere. A lot of her colleagues and other hockey people who interacted with her in her short lifetime were on Twitter this morning angry, distraught, and destroyed by this. By all accounts, she was an A+ person. All the victims and their families are equally important, but there's always that "one" that seems to hook you. I virtually never cry because of things in the news, even ones as tragic as this one, but I remember watching a Columbine memorial, and the description of one of the victims sounded just like a high school age girl that I was friends with the time, and I just lost it. What a waste.

Good resource. I learned two things I did not know from that: (1) That the RFA compensation (4 1st rounders is divided by 5, not 14 years in this case); (2) The 20% of the salary cap rule for compensation of any kind to a single player. I still think that even with that limitation on front loading, Nashville is hard-pressed to match. Also, in terms of whether they SHOULD match, people seem to overlook the fact that these players agree to sign the offer sheet with another team. (Well, Wings fans haven't, they apparently never forgave Fedorov for so doing in 1998). If you put together how strung out this process has become, the fact that they lost Suter, and Weber's desire to be courted by another team (with ex-teammates like Timonen and Hartnell now there), it sure seems like he doesn't want to play for Nashville any more. So how can you commit such a large amount of guaranteed money to a guy that doesn't want to play for you anymore? This sucks for Nashville, and their GM can and should point to why it sucks over and over again at the CBA meetings, but I think they need to swallow this, take those 4 picks (which could provide a legit NHL starter or two in time) and move on.