StormJH1

That's a straw man argument. First, there were long stretches of this year where Miller was terrible. He played better in the Playoffs, but entering the season, people forget that it was Miller, not Abdelkader, that most people would've identified as the "banger" more likely to get run with Top 6 forwards. Oh, and we just resigned Miller for about 2/3 of what Tootoo's cap hit is also. Maybe that doesn't matter to some people, but it matters to me, and it matters to the front office. You talk about the "softness of the team" as if it's directly correlated to how "hard" or "soft" Tootoo is. An "agitator", as opposed to a "power forward", does not make your team "tougher". He's basically there for no other reason than to try and disrupt the focus of the other team. That can have a place in the game if that's an overall part of what your team does. Matt Cooke does that sort of stuff. Brad Marchand does too, but just happens to bring a great deal more skill to the table as well. But the post-lockout Wings are not a team that uses gratuitous hits and fights to generate momentum. They're a puck possession skill team that has a very specific gameplan. Throwing a guy on the 4th line that runs people and starts crap is "interesting", but it's also horribly out of place on this team. People said the Wings teams of the mid-90's were soft, too, but it wasn't Stu Grimson and Joey Kocur who were responsible for turning that around. It was a power forward like Shanahan playing 20 minutes a night and playing physical in the corners. It was Darren McCarty playing significant minutes with Yzerman, or on the Grind Line. And, this year, the emergence of Abdelkader allowed us to elevate to a Playoff style of play. 4th line bit players cannot change the underlying character of a team...that just doesn't happen.

Okay. Chris Conner "hustled his ass off" too. He also nearly equaled Tootoo's 2012-13 offensive production in only 8 games played (2011-12). It's also pretty easy to hustle when you know you're only getting 6-10 minutes a night because you're too much of a danger to your own team if you played any more. People perceive Tootoo as "trying harder" because he does things that other players don't do. In Minnesota, I refer to this as the "Cal Clutterbuck effect", except that Clutterbuck is significantly better at hockey than Tootoo. The optics of guy making a run at somebody who no longer has the puck show up nicely on television. Tootoo's entire game is basically designed to make him look like he's more valuable than he actually is. If he didn't do that, he'd have been out of the league years ago. Nobody is actually afraid of fighting him or going into the corners with him. Statistically speaking, there's a good chance that Tootoo won't hurt you in the corners, given that he's on the bench 52 minutes of the game (plus another 2 in the box). He's 5'9". People need to stop talking about his offensive game as if he's Dino friggin' Ciccarelli, or his physical game as if he's Milan Lucic.

13, 40, and 43 have another thing in common, which is that all three of them are excellent defensive centers. I'd rather have a defensively responsible center with good footspeed than a big lumbering guy that just hits people. You can still add size on the Wings, as we've seen with Bickell, Lucic, etc. in these playoffs. Datsyuk frequently played with some combination of Bertuzzi, Holmstrom or Franzen (now Abdelkader) to add "grit" to what he brings. But I guess I just don't know anything about Weiss' defensive game. It's always assumed that players will get out of Florida and blow up elsewhere, but that doesn't necessarily happen (see: Bouwmeester, Jay). Weiss was a high draft pick that was supposed to be a franchise player, and that never actually happened. There are a lot of teams that have 2nd line centers with numbers like his (Matt Cullen on the Wild comes to mind), and I'm not sure those are viewed as "ideal" options. This is also a player that made $4.1 million in salary last year, whereas Filppula (one year younger) made $3.5 million. I would agree that Filppula has more "open market" value as an upside-rich UFA, but anyone thinking we can just sign him as a "cheaper version of Fippula" might want to think again. If the prices were close, I'd just assume have kept #51.

This. Jordin Tootoo makes $1.9 mil per. We just signed Miller for $1.3 mil. Whether based on potential or on what he actually did, do i have to explain why Brunner isn't just "a little bit more valuable" than those guys? People assume that the Europeans (well, unless they're Russian) somehow owe it to the team that gave them a chance in the NHL. It's actually the Wings that owe him money if they want him to play here instead of anywhere else next year. Also, he may be a 2nd year player in NHL terms, but his age and international experience suggest he's due for his "prime contract" very soon. I agree that 2 years for $2.5 or $3 million might be feasible b/c that allows Brunner to build additional value and cash in after 2015.

I dunno guys. He's only signed through age 32, but I'm concerned by how early his hair is turning gray that he might lose a step earlier due to premature aging.

Here's what I don't understand - people who talk about how good Jordin Tootoo could be if he stopped taking dumb minors and learned to "fit into the Wings' system". Huh? Taking dumb minors and agitating the opponent for agitation's sake IS Tootoo's game. He isn't designed to "fit into a system", he's supposed to operate outside of the system to put other teams on edge and prevent them from getting too comfortable. I was never a fan of Tootoo, but if you happen to be a fan of him, then you can't also expect him to stop running people behind the play and taking gratuitous minors. People forget that Tootoo did play the first game of the Playoffs, then proceeded to take a dumb penalty, which led to a critical goal against. He sat after that. (Actually, it was weak call, but that's part of the point - refs are preconditioned to keep an eye on him b/c of reputation). The idea that Tootoo (at 5'9") is an "enforcer" who makes the ice safe for our skill players is absurd. Anyone who watched the Red Wings this year could see that, if anything, Tootoo's presence enrages the other team to the point where the overall hostility and chippiness of the game increases. Fortunately (or unfortunately), he wasn't on the ice enough (often 6-10 mins per game) to do much damage. So, compliance buyouts (of which we have two this offseason) can be used on players with an AAV under $3 million? The pre-season buyouts (like the one used on Redden) required a cap hit of over $3 million. Even so, Tootoo's contract is "bad", but not long enough or expensive enough to cause considerable long-term damage. They might well just have to eat it, or use a traditional buyout and take a reduced cap hit.

That's what I've heard too, and if that's the choice, bye bye Kris Letang. I'm not even sure he leaves the Pens, UNLESS he really wants to be "the guy" and tires of being a 1-2 punch with Crosby. I would not trade for him in a one-year rental. Malkin's a special player, but everything about the way the team acted this year says that we're done chipping away draft picks year by year to "prolong the magic". You'd have to blow up multiple years of assets to get Malkin and then he could still bolt. I guess I hear the KHL criticism, but the same thing could be said about Datsyuk or any other Russian. It's sad that there's eternally a view that Russians are "damaged goods". In the 90's, the perception was that they were soft and selfish. Just when it appeared THAT opinion had eroded enough, now you have the KHL as a home country competitor league that can actually pay decent money for quality hockey players. Still, there's been enough Kostitsyns and Radulovs to suggest that there's a kernel of truth to the "Russian flight" concern.

Haha, YES. I want this to happen for one primary reason - I actually have a Hossa Winter Classic jersey and it would be nice to be able to wear it again in public without being openly mocked like I'm some sort of traitor. I could go on for days about how unreasonable fans are about Hossa - it isn't any fundamentally different than people who still wear Shanahan jerseys (he did play for New York after us, or do people forget that?). Well, it isn't for nothing. We all know that Chicago sold their sole to sign him on a backdiver contract. It got them a Cup, but it did take them 2 years to replenish the role players that were basically gutted as cap casualties. After the 2013 CBA, the arena has changed once again. They can buy him out and save the cap hit problems they'll have later, but there are huge financial disincentives if he retires early either way. I guess what I can't figure out is why people would have a hard time figuring that out. No, they won't get "Filppula" money, but those guys were on rookie contracts. All three of them figure to be regular NHL'ers for us, so they can't keep making "Jake Taylor" money (yay Major League reference). We actually are in kind of a tough position, which is that all these guys are RFA's (Brunner is also a UFA) at the same time, and they're all due for a "bridge contract", probably in the neighborhood of $1.5 to $3 million per. Kindl's resume really isn't much different than Jonathan Ericsson's was at the time he got 3 years, $9.75 million. Kindl's 26 years old and this is the first year he's made more than $1 million in salary. Kindl also hasn't had the luxury of being hidden next to Lidstrom or Kronwall - he's primarily been on the 3rd defensive unit with a slow or terrible partner, yet really took big steps forward this year. I'm a huge fan of Nyquist - he should probably sign some type of 2-year deal and with regular playing time, he could be a $3 - $5 million per year player by the time he's a UFA. You don't HAVE to pay these guys more, but somebody will make a qualifying offer if you mess around with them too much.

Let me get this straight - the Red Wings had to claw their way into the Playoffs to preserve a 22-year postseason streak, they did just barely make it in, then proceeded to a better-than-expected run taking down the #2 seed, and were within 1 OT goal of taking out the #1 seed and making the WCF....and you wish that we had been sellers at the deadline? Why, because we didn't win the Cup? Man, I love this fanbase, but at the same time, it would be nice if it could fully appreciate that it actually does mean something to be a perennial contender and do something in the Playoffs. I like Filppula as a player, whereas I didn't really like Hudler's game, but I think as with any player, it's just a question of price. If it gets to $5 mil/per for significant length, forget it. Part of the reason I feel that way is that I really believe this organization can train, and possibly already has trained, players who could do a similar role, that won't need to be paid like that for several years (Nyquist, Andersson, etc.)

I want to open a thread with a simple question...in almost a decade of hockey since the trapezoid rule was put into place, has anyone ever seen a trapezoid infraction actually called? I don't watch an exceptional amount of hockey, but I can't ever remember it being called. I remember turnovers happening b/c goalies couldn't enter the forbidden zone to play a puck, but no penalties. The point of the rule, apparently, is to deter Marty Brodeur-types from playing the puck behind the net, which was "ruining" dump in hockey. But anyone who's seen M-A Fleury play a game, or watched Jimmy against Calgary this season knows that when goalies play the puck often, bad things tend to happen! Now they are shallowing up the nets a whopping 4" to add additional room behind the net, but I wonder if that will do more to help avoid collisions than it will to actually improve puck possession behind the net. The trapezoid is more of annoyance we've grown used to than an actual "problem", but I still would do without it. It adds subtle complexity in rules that are supposed to be very simple, and it would seem to further encourage players skating full speed after dump ins, which leads to more concussions and broken legs. Agree? Disagree?

You know, I was a goalie when I played (extremely non-professional) hockey, and I always loved everything about goaltending, so I've always been resistant to messing with the equipment. I was okay with 12" to 11" pads (didn't really make an appreciable difference), and some of the things going on in the 90's (like Garth Snow's shoulder pads, or Patrick Roy's mumu-sized jersey) were getting a bit absurd. But after watching PIT/BOS go to 2OT last night, despite what was really a ton of quality chances by both teams, I am starting to get to the point where it seems like more quality hockey plays should result in goals, and that would be good for the product. The thing is, I'm not exactly sure how you do that with equipment. Most goaltending equipment, while bulkier in appearance, really does have a functional purpose in protecting the netminder. This was once a very dangerous job, and it was only really into the early 90's that it truly became "the safest position in hockey" because of Kevlar helmets, chest protection, etc. Yes, there were helmets in 70's and better padding available in the 80's. But guys like Cheveldae, Fuhr, Barasso, etc. were still playing primarily a stand-up style in the 80's and early 90's, and a lot of that was just residual from safety concerns when they were growing up. As ghastly as it is to traditionalists, I'd almost rather make the nets slightly larger than shrink the equipment any more. It's funny to me that people complain about how unfair it is to require visors of position players, yet the league can just mandate radical offseason changes to the actual tools that goaltenders use to perform their jobs (trappers, blockers, chest protector, etc.), and nobody finds that concerning.

There's really no reason to be against this. Yes, visors themselves can cause cuts (usually on the cheek or mouth area, not the eye sockets), but for every one time that happens, there's probably 30 instances where a puck or stick blade was subtly deflected by a curved visor, and nobody even knew the potential harm that would have happened. The same night Mark Staal almost lost an eye, there was a late game involving Vancouver - Henrik Sedin got totally smoked in the side of the head by a shot. It looked just like the Staal thing, except it appears to have caught the visor, and Sedin got up immediately. That being said, this is still a half measure, and a 3/4 visor or full cage would do a lot more to actually prevent serious facial injuries. But it's a good start. 70% of the league had them anyway.

This is a related rant, but in everything I've read about the proposed rule changes, was there nothing bout getting a rid of this stupid over-the-glass rule? http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2013/06/04/hybrid-icing-video-review-for-high-sticking-shallower-nets-to-be-introduced/ OR, if they think it's still necessary to prevent blatant delay of game efforts by the defensive team, why not make it discretionary? If a guy is trying to bounce one off the glass with no pressure on him, and the puck hops up on edge, there's no intent to "delay" the game there or gain an advantage. There's even a built-in disincentive because the faceoff will be in your own zone. Yes, any discretionary rule has the potential for bad calls, but virtually ALL other penalties are already discretionary.

All four of them are "recent Cup winners" so there's really no "give the new guy a chance!" answer. I voted for LA basically because I have no reason right now to personally detest them. They would be the first back-to-back Cup winner since Detroit in 97/98, so that'd be kind of a bummer. I really don't think there's a "wrong" answer to this, though. I have mixed feelings on Chicago, but some fans prefer seeing the team who beat you go on to do well, as some sort of "validation". Really, all the other teams are the "enemy", so if a style of play for one of them appeals to you, sure, go ahead and "root" for them. I go into about a week-long coma after the Wings are eliminated where I just need a break from the NHL playoffs after we're eliminated. After we're out, I get an understanding of why hockey fans in markets like Minnesota love hockey, but don't fully "get" the NHL - the experience is so different when you don't have a horse in the race.

Watching Bickell play against us, I had rotating thoughts in my head, such as: - Man, that guy is crazy - Man, I really dislike that guy right now - Man, he'd be a nice guy to have in a Wings sweater Maybe we don't really need him, but I'm probably just conditioned to think that way after years of the Wings acquiring players that were detested elsewhere and turning them into fan favorites (Chelios, Shanny, Hull, etc.). Unfortunately, he'll probably get a disproportionate amount of attention as a free agent, and will probably be paid more than he's worth. Bickell, unlike Tootoo, has the size and toughness to be a true presence without getting himself stupidly thrown in the box. He isn't a very skilled player, but as he showed against us, you can throw him on a 3rd line and he will get involved on offense.

Wow. First I heard of that. Cleary was a great Red Wing, and yet another example of a post-hype player that the Wings adopted and got more out of than you'd expect. I'll also never forget that without Danny Cleary, we probably don't make it back to the Cup Finals, while Datsyuk, Hossa, and Lidstrom were playing through significant injuries and rendered much less effective. Has Cleary played his last game in the Winged Wheel?

I feel very confident that Brunner will be back. Just the way he interacted with the team and his body language suggested that he felt like a rookie honored to be playing around a lot of other great NHL'ers, even though his age and experience level arguably make him a "veteran". His comfort level with Zetterberg (who played with him on Zug) also helps, and he worked well playing with some of the younger forwards. If it's a 2-year deal, I'm probably okay with anything up to $3 million per year. That might be a bit on the high side, but he's a fringe 2nd-line winger, and there are suggestions in his game that if he figured just a thing or two more out, he could be a 30-goal scorer. Probably more of a 20-25 goal scorer, but certainly a guy we would like back. The total (and predictable failures) of Monster, Sammy, and Tootoo notwithstanding, suddenly a number of contracts on this team look like pretty good deals. Franzen's "value" is well-documented (though will cause problems later), and 3 more years of Abdelkader at $1.8 million suddenly feels like a steal. It might be time for Cleary and Filppula to go, as we will need to sign Nyquist and Andersson.

His career is absolutely in jeopardy, and it horrifies me to write that. He's 26 years old and has virtually no body fat, but already has significant back problems. If you know anything about the spine or work in or around the medical field, you probably know that the back conditions and surgery aren't like UCL's and Tommy John surgery in baseball - with back problems, doctors can delay and improve, but they really can't "fix". Helm is undersized and doesn't have great hands, moves, or shooting ability. What makes him an NHL player, and arguably "elite" in the specific role as 3rd line center/penalty killer, is his speed and defensive ability. His skating is probably in the 90th or 95th percentile. If back problems limit that explosiveness, or keep him off the ice altogether, as is happening at such a young age (and without a known specific injury), it is possible, but not too likely, that this will continue to be a problem for him. He's just had really bad luck, too, including the skate on the wrist last year and getting hit in the face during the lockout. Damn. One of my favorite Red Wings.

Yeah, the underlying premise of this thread is flawed because most people consider the Kings to be a favorite in this series. You can forget about the President's trophy or how the teams played in February. The Hawks sleepwalked through the first half of this season, and got within an OT goal of being eliminated by a Detroit team that probably shouldn't have hung with them. Quick's probably the best goaltender in the playoffs, so I'll consider them a favorite until proven otherwise. I feel like Pittsburgh has best offense and it's not even close. Their defense is inconsistent, at best, and Doug Murray, at worst. They would have lost to the Islanders with Fleury in goal, but Vokoun has been stable enough. But I don't think he can "steal" a game or two, which you'll need him to do against better teams.

People keep saying that it's a "cap friendly" contract, which it is...now. But that doesn't necessarily make it a good contract for the full life of the contract, in light of the new CBA. As people have pointed out above, there are significant penalties in the millions of dollars if he retires early. And he's going to retire "early". Does anyone look at Franzen and think "There's a guy who can stay motivated to stay in NHL shape until he's 40"? I don't. I see a large a guy with a history of knee problems, who doesn't have the cerebral game of a Larionov or Datsyuk that would allow those players to help a team probably until their early-to-mid 40's. People will be looking at him in a year or two wondering where his legs went, just as they did with Holmstrom a few years ago. Even a guy like Brian Rafalski, who nobody accused of being "done", hung it up when he was 37. Franzen is also Swedish, so the allure of being in the U.S. for 82-game seasons where he's no longer a Top 6 forward might not appeal to him like they might to a North American player "just hanging on". I'd have to have a better understanding of the CBA implications to say for sure what I would do, but I think this is a closer question than a lot of people think.

Yeah, totally agree. Today is game day, so I am a "Brendan Smith" fan in the sense that he will play, and I want him and the team to succeed. But there has a forum for fans to express what should be a pretty obvious observation, which is that Brendan Smith has been killing us. Every team has some degree of issues with its 6th defenseman, but it just seems like Smith ends up out there for more minutes and more critical moments than the worst defenseman on other teams.

I don't have a problem with people talking about it, reasonable minds can differ on it. But I agree with @kipwinger that this was just so far buried on the list of "Game 6 storylines" that I'm really not hung up on it. People are fixating on how minor the hook/slash was and whether it actually did anything to impede Frolik's breakaway shot, but that ignores the overall desperation of the play. If you badly turn the puck over, then completely lose a guy to a complete breakaway, and then chase him and make any type of play on the man from behind (either with the stick, or a trip, or a hold), you have to be on notice that you're in danger of giving a penalty shot. That play "felt" desperate because it was, and desperate plays make for easy calls. The combination of that mistake, Smith's two mistakes, and the overall inability of the team to regain composure after making those mistakes are what did us in, not the refs.

That's what makes it more frustrating. The entire defensive corps has been night-and-day better than it was in February. Kronwall was good all year. Ericsson has been a rock. Kindl really improved down the stretch and is playing like a Top 4 guy now. But Smith has yet to mentally find the defensive game. His offensive contributions don't do anything to excuse or mitigate his failure to defend our end of the rink. I was a huge Smith supporter before the season (albeit based on very little information), and I was completely wrong.

My attitude towards #51 is pretty similar to the way everybody used to view Hudler when he was here. I just learned not to expect that much out of him. As a center and a good defender, he's certainly a more valuable overall player than Hudler was, but neither of them seemed to have any consistent role in generating offense. Honestly, you could watch games the past few years, and see more game-to-game impact from Danny Cleary than you would from Filppula. But some team will pay him $5 mil/yr in July, just like countless medicore centers have gotten paid over and over again by mid-tier teams hoping to buy themselves out of having not lucked into a legit 1st (or 2nd) line center. I legitimately believe that Nyquist can replace most or all of Filppula's 2-way game next season, and he won't cost $5 million. We'll need to sign or develop a new scoring center next year, but that was pretty much the case anyway b/c of the situation with Datsyuk. Unfortunately, this feels like a situation like the Ericsson one where fans assume he'll be let go, but the organization might be more intent on keeping him - which will lead to a backlash when he's "overpaid". The Ericsson thing ended up working out surprisingly well, but Filppula is older and there's no indication to me he has another level he can add to his game.

I can't tell on television if he feels bad or not, but I really don't care. What difference does it make to me if he's crying alone in a dark room after the game or blowing up wads of cash like Evander Kane on Twitter? I'm a fan. Watching him piss away Game 1 hurt MY feelings. The fact that we couldn't close out Chicago at home leading 2-1 going into the 3rd period makes ME upset. I could care less about Brendan Smith's feelings right now. You could tell me that Brendan Smith might be a Top 4 defenseman some day, and that this is part of the growing process, and that all might be true. That doesn't change the fact that this is the worst individual defensive performance on the Red Wings since I can't even remember when. Yes, Ericsson has been a goat in the past. There was also reason to expect that he'd be a late bloomer (drafted as a forward, long lanky body more difficult to coordinate, spoiled by playing early with Lidstrom, etc.). Ericsson was never THIS bad. It's basically a running bit me and my brother have this series - you might not even know who's on the ice, but as soon as a complete defensive screw-up happens: "Okay, what did #2 do wrong on that one". I would say that his goal in Game 2 (which happened because he was pinching and in which Zetterberg did all the work) was the "worst thing that could have happened", except that with White as the only available alternative, Smith was never going to sit. White has been pain in the ass since his "60%" comments during the lockout and basically demanding to be traded after they started scratching him. Still, it's impossible to believe that a half-interested Ian White could be this bad. I'm not interested in what happens to Smith right now. We can worry about that in July. I just want to win Game 7, and it seems like the more Smith is on the ice, the less of a chance there is of that happening.