StormJH1

I wondered about this, thanks for the explaination. The only reason I thought that it might is that the cap is kinda added up over the course of the year, and I thought that the salaries might not count for the times when the players were IR'ed, but that appears not to be the case. It's just tough for me to believe that we lost as much talent as we did, signed nobody over $3 million, didn't make any significant offseason re-signings (well, we did sign Z and Franzen last year), and yet still have this much cap trouble. How the hell could they possibly have kept Hossa? This team would be far more terrible had we done so, particularly while he's out with the injury.

Absolutely right, except that a "physical presence" like Brad May is no tthe one responsible for clearing out guys in front of the net. If ever there were a critical situation late in the game, Brad May's ass is glued to the bench, which makes it difficult for him to improve our play on the ice. Why don't people understand this?

Your timing is ironic. The number one rationale for signing a fighter was that he'll keep our skill players safe. Since May was signed, Franzen and Filppula have gone down with injuries for reasons having nothing to do with fighting or goonery. Brad May plays less than 10 minutes a game, and anyone who thinks he has more of an impact on the outcome than even a 6th defenseman, like Lebda, is a fool. In the 2007 playoffs, Brad May cheapshotted Kim Johnsson of the Wild and knocked him out for the series. The Wild happen to be the employer of Derek Boogaard, who (in anonymous polling) generally ranks as the most feared "goon" in the NHL. The following year, the Wild were in the Playoffs against the Avalanche and started getting cheap-shotted by cowards like Cody McLeod and Jeff Finger, none of which would ever consider dropping the gloves with a guy like Boogaard. Which begs the question: If there's an instigator rule in place and guys cheapshot and injury players regularly even though there's "goons" on practically every NHL team, how does having one on your team help in any way, shape, or form. I don't care what Babcock or the players said in an article...May has no other purpose for being on this squad apart from being a fighter, so what are they supposed to say now that he's here? If he weren't here, I highly doubt they would tell the media "Yeah, we're just a bunch ******* and could really use some help!" Finally, anyone who thinks that the team has played "well" or "better" since May got here....did you watch any games?

I am extremely concerned. The Wings dominated in the regular season last year, but they were doing it by hiding some of the worst goaltending in the league with TONS of scoring depth. The entire rationale for duplicating success this year was that Hossa, Hudler, and Samuelsson could be offset by the emergence of Filppula, Franzen, Leino, and perhaps someone like Helm or Abdelkader. Two of those guys are now hurt for significant periods of time, and the goaltending is arguably WORSE. Moreover, the alternative to Osgood is not a proven NHL goalie like Ty Conklin, but a guy that very may well be fringe AHL talent. Even if you forget the production loss, the biggest issue (as stated above) is that Filppula is a puck carrier. The Wings have always been able to control the flow of the game, and stabilize after defensive errors because they always have the puck, but that becomes a lot harder now. There is no good solution to this, but the Nylander one would probably be the best fit.

I agree only partially with your first paragraph. It's one thing for Wings fans to blindly assume we'll be the best team in the Central (or the West!) year after year regardless of what the roster looks like. Wings fans have been guilty for years of being indifferent to this team until the Conference Finals roll around, and for some fans, the bandwagon label clearly applies. But the Wings are 3-6 including OT losses, and Devellano's timing sucks. Here we are 9 games into the season and you're telling fans of team that was one home victory away from being the back-to-back Stanley Cup champions that they shouldn't be upset that their team is 3 and 6? If these personnel problems were so obvious such as to make this result likely or inevitable, then why did they (a) not do more to correct them, such as axing nostalgically overpriced veterans for younger (and bigger) talent; or (b) why did they box themselves into a corner where they wouldn't have the cap room to address these problems. This front office, which has recevied glowing positivity from the fan base for the majority of the past two decades, needed to have a better strategy for the mass exodus of talent that left here, aside from simply trying to rebuild the 2007 Red Wings. I'm here, I'm posting, I buy your team's apparel, I'm DVR'ing the games from out of market, and following every single game. I'm not bandwagon, and I don't want to hear that I'm supposed to be happy about going from what I saw in June to what I'm seeing now. Pisses me off. (and the guy a few posts above talking about the increase in ticket prices in a city with 28% unemployment also had a GREAT point).

Love Nathan Horton from a size and production standpoint, but I don't know enough about him personally to know if his work ethic/personality fits the "Detroit mold". I know that sounds cliched but you can ask Igor Grigorenko, Uwe Krupp and other former/would-be Wings how that works. I would also trade Kindl for him, but I have no idea what kind of value a guy like Kindl has league-wide. Doesn't hurt that he comes from the Wings' system, which is perceived as "over-riping" players and producing homegrown talent despite low draft position and trading away top picks for years.

I can't even keep track of the number of guys in this league that are having their careers ruined by concussions. This type of thing can't be allowed to happen. It's not like he was caught by surprise and hit his head on the ice...the hit was ON his head and he was unconscious before he hit the ice, which is why his glove flew off like it did. Who cares about "intent'? David Booth could be wrecked for life, or at least for a significant part of this seasons, so personally, I could give a crap if Richards has to sit at least 5 games and lose some money. I'd have to watch the Havlat hit again before commenting on that. If I recall correctly, the puck was in Havlat's feet, he just didn't THINK he had possession of it.

That made me really sad for Phoenix and for the whole NHL last night. To think that the announced attendance for the Wings was nearly DOUBLE what they had for their 2nd home game of the year, and it still looked extremely empty. If they draw like that for the Wings, you can only imagine what will happen when they play teams like Nashville or Columbus that don't travel well. I visited AZ for the first time last year, and I don't think I realized the impact of WHERE they put that stadium in Arizona. Ultimately, I don't think the team could've survived there anyway, but if you're going to put it all the way out there, that's not even giving them a chance. Stupid.

God Bettman's a failure. I love his plea to NHL fans (the ones that are left): "Hey! We need YOU to help bail us out of crappy TV contracts with stations that almost half of the country doesn't get!" You don't suppose more cable providers offer ESPN, as opposed to Versus, do you?

I know there were stretches in the 2008 season that probably felt equally helpless, but I don't like what I see right now. Pretty much everyone assumed that we would have some trouble scoring, but that's not what worries me. I'm more worried about the complete disorganization of the defense, and our difficulty playing the puck-control style of offense we're accustomed to. The score against LA indicates that we won easily, but I thought the team looked awful for the majority of the game. We spent huge portions of the game back on our heels chasing the Kings. If there's one encouraging sign, it's probably that we're already getting secondary scoring, and it seems inevitable that guys like Zetterberg and Datsyuk are going to put up their usual production when it's all said and done. Until that happens, though, it is a little scary looking around trying to figure out who's going to put the puck in the net for us. I don't think Maltby and Holmstrom can be counted on as our go-to guys.

Also, two guys that NEVER come up in these discussions (and shouldn't, given the tough standards of the honor on the Wings) are #8 and #2. No, not Jiri Fischer (although the arguments for Vladdy aren't TOO far superior to the arguments you could make for Fischer, who actually lost his career during a regular season Wings game). But I'm talking about Igor Larionov and Slava Fetisov. Fetisov is not even close (4 seasons w/ Detroit, 2 Cups, unremarkable numbers), but when you consider that he's been said to be one of the 5 greatest all-time defenseman in the world (almost all of which had to do with play outside the NHL), a lesser team might have bestowed that type of token honor on him. Similar argument for Larionov, whose Red Wing contributions were much more significant. No, I don't think either #8 or #2 should even be considered, but I'm simply adding layers of international complexity that underline how complicated the question is.

#16 is a tough call b/c nobody's going to dare to wear that number, probably as long as Vladdy is alive, but there's no way that Vladdy's actual career was enough to qualify him for that honor. The Red Wings (much like the Avalanche) in the late 90's have the problem that there were so many Hall of Fame players that came through here, and might have even contributed to winning teams. You really have to reserve the retired numbers for the guys who spent significant portions of their careers as Red Wings and made long-term contributions. I rank the recent Wings deserving of that honor as follows: #5 --> #30 --> #91 --> #14 But really, you could change the lower three there anyway you like and I'd have a tough time arguing with you. It pains me put Chris Osgood up that high b/c he's clearly the beneficiary of many great Wings teams the way that the 2nd tier Oilers players from the 80's benefitted from that team. But the 2008 Cup (and 2009 playoff run) was a Kurt Warner-esque resurgance that really establishes his contribution to this team over nearly two whole decades. Shanhan is treated as the "missing piece" to the Wings getting a Cup, but the team was only in that position (on the cusp) b/c of Fedorov's contributions. And, of course, without Yzerman, the team wasn't even a playoff team. Actually, Shanahan's a guy that I'm not sure totally deserves it solely on the merits, but I feel like his legacy will be as Wings player, unlike a lot of other great players we've had, like Coffey, Chelios, and Larry Murphy. But I think the only "sure bet" out of all those guys is Lidstrom.

http://statshockey.homestead.com/alltimegpg.html Actually, Mike Bossy is the all-time leader in GOALS per game, which was the stat you were really thinking of. Mario is 2nd, followed by Pavel Bure, and then Gretzky. It's amazing how easily Europeans and Russians are forgotten...Pavel Bure is one of the prolific goal scorers of all-time, but injuries wrecked his career. Still, think about how hockey wonks talk about Bobby Orr and what could've been and compare that to the rhetoric around Euroffs like Bure or Ziggy Palffy. Orr is treated like Sandy Koufax, while Bure is just another whiny Russian. The 1980's in the NHL are the equivalent of the steroid era in baseball, in my mind. That's the problem with throwing guys like Gretzky and Lemieux up there with Howe and guys from other eras. The 80's were a period where you had two prolific superteams (NYI and EDM) that created turkey shoots for offensive players. Also, you had a point in time where forwards and defenseman were using slapshots and being conditioned as modern atheletes, while goaltender equipment still had not caught up to the point where the butterfly could safely be used as primary strategy all around the league. There's a line of demarcation around the time Brodeur came into the league (around '92 or '93), after which outlandish offensive numbers disappeared from the league. It's always been assumed that Gretzky just got old and Lemieux just got sick, but you see the same thing with younger players like Yzerman, Roenick, and Selanne, whose numbers all tailed off abruptly. It wasn't because the players got worse--the goaltending got significantly better in a hurry. Does anybody truly believe that Teemu Selanne got worse after 1993, or that somebody like Ovechkin today isn't as good as Selanne was in 92-93? Then why did Selanne get 76 goals in that year and never come close to that number later on? It was a different league back then.

I heard about this from Bill Simmons' podcast with the Kings' Ransom director, and was stunned. Being three picks away from Pavel Bure was one thing, but this REALLY would've changed the landscape: Detroit Impact: It boggles the mind to think about what would have happened. People assume that Edmonton would've wanted Yzerman, but I'd have to hear more about Gretzky left in the first place. Yzerman was a budding star still early in his career at that point too. My heart tells me that the Wings wouldn't have been the Wings without Yzerman, or with a team where Yzerman is no longer the focal point. But my head tells me that if you can get Wayne Gretzky in 1988, you get Wayne Gretzky. Put Gretzky in a Wings uniform and you have the two greatest players of all time wearing the winged wheel during their prime (him and Howe). The supporting cast certainly would've been better than what he got LA. Even if we had to surrender significant draft picks in the deal, that probably would've made us even more aggressive in trying to hit big with Russian and Swedish players in the later rounds. And if Yzerman and Gretzky could've co-existed, I bet we win a Cup before '97. NHL Impact This is the more interesting question to me, and I struggle with it. Somebody pointed out above that Gretzky going to LA was huge for the "Hollywoodization" of the NHL and the boom in the 90's. Not sure I agree with that. Yes, the difference between being in a major market like LA (vs. Detroit) in the late 80's was a much bigger deal in 1988 than it would've been now. But I've said for years that the '94 Rangers and the corresponding East Coast bias with ESPN interest did more to legitimize this league than Gretzky did simply by BEING in L.A. I don't see what the downside of Gretzky coming to Detroit, a recognizable Original Six franchise with an actual fan base, would have been. I think the fact that Gretzky came to America was significant in and of itself, and he still would've been very marketable. And if he had been more successful from the get-go, he might have been more marketable, in some ways. Gretzky coming to L.A. put hockey "on the map" in the West and established Gretzky himself as a marketable product. But beyond that, I think the impact is overblown. We ended up with a bunch of phantom franchises that never should've happened (including the Kings themselves, which are a disaster now). I think "Hockey Fever" still hits New York/New Jersey in the mid-90's, and of course in Detroit in the mid- and late-90's. And if you add Gretzky to a legitimate franchise within the region actually interested in the sport, we might have had a small, but more vibrant league in places that really cared about it, rather than what we ended up with, which was part of the reason for the lockout and continued problems.

3 week preview? Awesome! My wife is going to be so pissed at me by mid-October it won't even be funny. Haha.

I lived and died with every minute of the 2009 Playoffs, but for whatever reason, losing that Game 7 didn't crush me as much as it probably should have. If you're old enough to have been aware of what happened in the 1995 Finals and the 1996 WCF, those two series were much more devastating, having been without a Cup for 40+ years. The Pens didn't give up in 2008 either, which just leads me to believe that it was a combination of injuries (including hampering injuries to guys like Lidstrom and Rafalski who were still in the lineup) and the fact that a young Pens team wanted it more and had developed that much more since the year before. The assumption that Detroit would win was based on the fact that it was the same Pens team, minus Hossa, but that wasn't true. The improvement in play of Crosby and Malkin from '08 to '09 superceded the loss of Hossa, Malone, etc., and they also had some bit players like Guerin (and freakin' Maxime Talbot) that also stepped up to fill that void. It was a much better, and more poised team that we lost to in 2009, and I guess I kinda felt the writing on the wall as soon as we struggled in Game 6.

Well, I think Jagr still "mattered" when he left, you forgot him. Yes, it's true that we've yet to see an established NHL star bolt in their prime for a European or Russian team, but that's also because NHL teams have been willing to screw themselves over under the cap to dedicate almost 1/5 of their salary figure to guys like Ovechkin, Richards, DiPietro, or whoever for 10-15 years. If they hadn't been willing to do that, money might have been an issue. Also, it's hard to say who really "matters" if you only watch the NHL. You assume that if a Dimitri Bykov type guy goes overseas and is never heard from again, then he wouldn't have been significant in the NHL. But if somebody was absolutely blowing up the KHL as a youngster, and simply never came over here (for whatever reason), that's still talent that the NHL could've had. I assume there aren't too many guys like that b/c they would've been discovered already, but you never know. Ville Leino was the MVP of the Finnish league and he's looking like he could be a legitimate scoring threat, but he's cleary not going to be an NHL MVP candidate in line with the Crosbys, Ovechkins, and Malkins of the world.

I moved to Minnesota and can only see the Wings when they play on Versus or NBC. It kills me, but I don't want to pay for Center Ice, and I frankly don't need ALL of the out of market games, when all I want to see is the Wings. If the Yankees can operate a business model where they charge a few bucks a month for YES network to their OWN FANS, why can't there be an arrangement where I buy only FSN Detroit (or FSN whatever city) for like a $1.99 a month or something? In 2009, I feel like I should be able to pay a small premium to watch out-of-market material, and it shouldn't even be a big deal.

Wow, Sergei Makarov won the Calder as a 30-year old "rookie" in 89-90? I didn't realize that. If you look at the list of Calder winners over the past few decades, it's been a pretty solid predictor of future stars. I'm giving someone like Bryan Berard a pass because he almost lost an eye (geez Hossa). But aside from Andrew Raycroft (2004), which made me throw up in my mouth a little, Barret Jackman in 2003 is a travishmockery. Regardless of how good Z was at that time, I remember hearing Jackman won at that time and thinking it was ridiculous. The guy had 19 POINTS in 82 games that year. Yes, he could throw his weight around, but when your ceiling is somebody like Chris Phillips, how can you look at that type of season and conclude that this guy is the "next big thing"?

Uh oh, someone here is channelling Joshua Jackson from the Mighty Ducks! On the other hand, if Lidstrom's shot would've been an inch to the other side, he would've missed completely! AND he almost lost a ********. Haha. I was uncharacteristically serene watching the Wings piss away a home ice advantage and lose in Game 7 of the SCF, but reading posts like yours makes me feel like I'm going feel worse and worse about us losing that game over time. I suppose some of that depends on when our next Cup win is.

I don't feel the need to take a strong opinion on this issue. For one, I don't know if Jiri Hudler will ever play for the Wings again, but if he does, I don't feel the need to cut all loyalty to him now. On the one hand, you kinda feel like every player should believe that they're capable of being the best guy on their team. You also want to believe that players who pull on the sweater with the Winged Wheel acknowledge that there are costs associated with being part of a perennial winner. If you want to play 24 minutes a game on a top line, sign with the Islanders. You even get an extra two months to work on your golf game! But I'm not even sure Huds numbers didn't BENEFIT from playing on a team like the Wings. He has some skill, but at his size, I'm don't know how much he could create if he were ever the focal point of a line and teams could pound him into the boards all year.

Why do people just accept the "Wrong place at the wrong time" apology at face value? Is he saying that he only got in trouble because he allowed himself to be in a taxi cab at night time? Good people find themselves in bad situations all the time. Sometimes you can be doing something innocent and trouble finds you, and that's when you remove yourself from the situation. It was Patrick Kane's actions (which, obviously, he cannot publicly discuss at this juncture) that led to these charges, not the "situation".

Kane is a D-bag for not just saying "keep the change", and there is absolutely no circumstance I can think of (short of maayybee the cab driver assaulting him first) that would justify roughing him up over such a stupid dispute. You can debate the seriousness of it, but there's no question it's embarassing to the league. If this were an NFL player, it would be such small potatoes compared to the other problems they've had league-wide (and to be fair, there are a LOT more players in the NFL than in any other organized sports league) that it would hardly make headlines. But as the Staal brothers thing up in Lutsen, MN showed, the NHL is a target and the ESPN mainstream media will go out of its way to report negative things about it.

Thanks for the explaination; it's clear that you're getting over my head with your level of cap knowledge. In your Zetterberg example (if he was bought out after Year 8), they get a two year "reprieve" on the cap hit before it actually goes UP in years 11 & 12, and then also extends for an additional 4 years beyond the original contract? I'm not sure that defeats my point--if anything, taking a $1 million cap hit for 4 years of a retired player would be as bad or worse than simply having an overvalued cap figure for a player still on your roster. If you send a one-way player to the minors, he has to clear waivers (and nobody would pick up his salary anyway). If you cut him, you're still on the hook for his salary, and if you buy him out, there's still a cap hit based on the value and duration of the buyout (though I don't understand the details). But Henrik Zetterberg is not going to play for Grand Rapids in 2018. If you did that to him, a la Curtis Joesph, I would think he'd either retire (and go play in Europe) or demand some be waived/released. I don't think "burying" an aging superstar in the minors (to avoid the cap implications) is a realistic option.

This argument is missing the point. The way the CBA calculates salary cap obilgations is wrong and the owners never should've agreed to it. For Hossa's most productive years of his deal, he will be making roughly $7.9 million and his cap obligation will be only $5.2 million. The only way that could NOT be considered a circumvention of the Salary Cap is if Hossa plays out his entire contract, and then has a cap hit of $5.2 million when he's only making (and worth) something less than $1 million. Two problems: (1) It's my understanding that if Hossa simply retired from the NHL (or maybe if he went overseas to play somewhere else when he's older), his NHL deal is over and Chicago never has suffer through the back end of that Cap obligation. (2) Even if Hossa did play out his deal, do we really want NHL franchises mortgaging their future in that way? To put it another way, why is it desirable to have 41 year old players who make close to the league minimum, but COUNT against the cap as if they were $5.2 million/year superstars!?