TigerDan

I've thought about this a lot and after tonight's games, I really need to get this off my chest: the three point disadvantage (or advantage) really needs to be addressed. I've heard a lot about ways to reduce the number of shoot outs, but to me the biggest problem with the shoot out is that three points are awarded in the game. I understand that the NHL doesn't want to go back to the boring 5 minute, no shot OTs where both teams get one point with a tie. My question is this: why don't they make all games worth three points like they do in international hockey? For anyone worried about historical point records, those were obsolete the minute they introduced the three point game. It used to take 80 to 84 points to make the playoffs and only 2-3 teams each year had 100+ points. Now, 98 points could miss the playoffs and 10-12 teams will finish with at least 100 points. Make every game worth 3 points and the anxiety over shootouts, ROWs, etc. will go away.

Dickie was able to summarize my position. In international competition, a regulation win is worth 3, an OT or shoot out win is worth 2 and an OT or shoot out loss is worth 1. And there is a benefit to teams playing three point games with the current system. We saw it last night. The Wings won in regulation, but were only able to gain one collective point on two teams that played each other, who both happen to be chasing them for a playoff spot. So, either way, the Wings should have gained two points. That could be via both Ottawa and Pittsburgh earning one each or Ottawa gaining two while Pitt gets 0. However, since I don't think going back to the boring auto-ties is a good option, I say go for the three point system for all games. In this example, the Wings would have gained the full amount of points a win should normally bring: they would have gotten 3 for the regulation win, Ottawa would have gotten two and Pitt one. Hence, we would gain one on Ottawa and two on Pitt for a three point total gain earned by winning in regulation. Over the course of the season, this would be a benefit to true hockey. The teams that win more in regulation get an advantage, while teams that win a lot of shoot out games are disadvantaged, as that is not a real example of the game of hockey. For those that say this would create more separation and fewer close races, I disagree. There were plenty of close playoff races in the past and there still would be. Based on the games this year, I believe the race we have now would still be in similar shape between the current teams. In the west, I think LA might be ahead of Winnipeg, and the race might actually be closer (it's about over now). I do think Detroit might have a point or two more separation than they currently have, but this current situation is not the reason for my beliefs. I have had these thoughts since they started the shoot outs. Having some games worth two points and others worth three is not a good system, as all games are not created equal and they should be. They should have all games worth two points or all games worth three. My vote is for three. IMO, this would also alleviate some of the current concern in the NHL regarding shoot outs.

Hey Dickie, it's been awhile since I've posted, so I would expect its a coincidence, but, did you steal my handle? Or were you just doing your job as a reporter? "Dickie Dunn wrote this, it has to be true" As for the topic at hand: yes, the wings are a contender. Especially in today's NHL. A team of this stature 10 years ago? Not so much. But these days, it just takes making the playoffs. There's a lot of parity in the league and it all boils down to who's playing best in April / May. That said, a top 4 RH dman wouldn't hurt.

Yes, and that would have been a gamble. It would have been a disaster if he coupled that gamble with another $30M on an aging stay at home defenseman. Just like I think it's a disaster for Washington. I could be wrong, but I think Niskanen is going to have to continue to improve for me to be wrong. Losing out on Suter/Parise a couple of years ago was far more disappointing than missing out on an aging Boyle (who probably made a knee jerk, look at the box score - Rangers just went to the finals, my career is almost done reaction after coming out of yet another shocking playoff exit in SJ - I mean you've got to expect some mental anguish from anyone coming out if SJ) or a possible one year wonder Niskanen. I think I just broke my record for longest sentence, lol.

http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/531033 I this is a pretty reasonable summary. In the end, I think we gave too much money to Quincey, but it's not a complete bust. We could have pulled a Washington and thrown an extra $62 Million at two defensemen, one of whom is aging poorly and the other has had only one good year. Looking at the players that went, I think the Wings missed out more at forward than in a weak D market.

Let all the UFAs walk. Buyout one of the following: Tootoo, Franzen or Weiss. It would be a tough call on Weiss, because you're gambling on if he can produce again. If he's hurt, he doesn't count against the cap. Tootoo is an easy call, but less impact. Better to just bury the $1.9M for one more season. You can't really buy Franzen''s production for less money, but that would be more about the future. His dry spells are getting longer and longer and I don't relish what it might be like to watch him when he's 40. Either way, that will give us over $20M in cap space. Use $5-$6M to re-sign our RFAs Dekeyser, Sheahan and Tatar. Should leave about $15M available. Use that to sign one of either Statsny or Vanek. Then use the rest to sign either Niskanen (long term), Boyle, Markov or Orpik (short term). If any thing is left, re-sign Legwand. Dats-Z-legwand Vanek/Statsny-Weiss/Helm-Nyquist Tatar-Sheahan-Jurco Miller-Weiss/Helm-abdelkader Res: Andersson, Tootoo, Glenny Kronwall-Niskanen DeKeyser-E Smith-Oullete Res: Kindl, Lashof Howard mrazek Maybe re-sign Monster instead of Legwand?

Two games in a row we come out and Howard gives up a soft goal. Both games we respond by playing like we've been shot.

We're done.

I think using a buyout on Carlo is a waste. IMHO, he was one of our top 4 defensemen in the playoffs, and is paid less than at least one guy who he outplayed (Quincy). I think he could and would crack our lineup even with DeKeyser back. Now, we are relying on Smith to step it up and Quincy to play to his potential every night vs. having a guy that came in and played rock solid in our back pocket. And we're doing this why? To keep Samuelsson?? WTF??? I don't have too much of a problem with the Cleary deal, though I wish it was more like 2 years at 2M or 2.5M. I know a lot of people want a star player in his place, but I'd argue that he brings some of the things to the table that we need: he'll go to the net, he plays tougher than his size and he gives 100% every time out on the ice. He's like Rudy - I wish I could put his heart into Franzen's body. I don't have too much of a problem with keeping Bert too. If he's hurt, we can IR him and maybe get someone else (IR doesn't count against cap?). While if he's truly healthy, he can bring some size, grit, toughness and scoring.

Treat the over the glass play as an icing and get rid of the automatic penalty. If you ice it or shoot it out of play in your own zone, no line changes. I have no problem with the coach using his timeout - he only gets one a game. I would also get rid of the trapezoid - let the goalies handle the puck. It won't stop offense. The chip and chase methods that are detracted will be offset by 1. more goaltender puck handling errors and 2. good puck handling goaltenders creating more transition offense for their teams. Allow coaches one or two challenges a game, but only for automatic calls (icing, offsides, too many men, high-sticking, etc.). Referee discretion penalties (tripping, hooking, holding, slashing, interference, etc.) are not subject to challenges. Challenges must be called during stoppages, before the puck is dropped. Oh, and get rid of all advertising on the ice itself - we're only a few years away from becoming Europe or the ECHL if this continues. Finally and most importantly, if we're going to keep the shootouts and have 3 point games, make it International rules: 3 points for EVERY game (all games should be created equal). Regulation win = 3 points, OT/Shootout win = 2 points, OT/Shootout loss = 1 point and Regulation loss = 0 points. At a minimum, this will get rid of the benefit teams have found by tying regular season games. At best, it will create more 3rd period urgency in tied games - getting that 3rd point vs. guaranteeing yourself only 1 point and no more than 2 points should help. For those that think this takes the integrety out of historical records, I argue this: it's already been lost. The very first time 3 points were rewarded in a game shot that history all to hell. Proof? 100 points used to be a great season, now you need almost that just to make the playoffs.

Billins is a local kid (at least for me). He's from Marysville, MI and played his college hockey at Ferris State - helped guide Ferris to the National Championship game last year. The knock on him has been his size. I think scouts realized his offensive abilities but he was doubted as to how well those would translate in the professional game and how well he would keep up in his own end. After this season, he's shown that he definitely has the skills at the AHL level. I think he will at least get some offers for a tryout somewhere in the NHL and, at the very least, some team will put him on their protected roster. He just turned 24 - you never know what could happen with some more time in the AHL.

I agree, great season and great run by the Red Wings. Most teams rebuild with lottery picks. We rebuild by ousting the #3 overall seed in round 1 and taking the #1 overall seed to game 7 OT before losing. Hopefully they can re-up Dats for 3 more years. Z, Dats, Abby, Nyquist, Andersson, Brunner (re-sign him please), Franzen, Helm (hopefully he fully recovers), Tatar, Emmerton, Eaves, Kronner, E, Kindl, DeKeyser, Smith, Lashoff and Howard could all be together for 3+ more years. Add a proven top 6 forward or two to that along with potentially keeping Miller/Quincey/Cola around a little longer. Not to mention some of the other young talent we have waiting and the future looks bright. Can't wait for the East. To show how excited I am, here is my extremely early preseason Eastern Conference prediction: Our division (along with playoff seeds): 2. Boston 3. Montreal 4. Detroit 6. Toronto 7. Ottawa NA. Tampa Bay NA. Buffalo NA. Florida Other division: 1. Pittsburgh 5. NY Islanders 8. Washington NA. Columbus (could sneak by Washington though) NA. NY Rangers NA. Philadelphia NA. Carolina NA. NJ Devils

Well, there are 5 teams left in the playoffs as of right now. They consist of the last 5 Stanley Cup Champions. Red Wings need to win tonight to ensure its 4 of the last 5 still alive and not the last 4. Let's Go Red Wings!!!!

In the end, it boiled down to the penalty shot. Not much we can do about that, but come out more determined than ever in game 7. If anything, we proved in this game that we can play with them when they are fighting tooth and nail. We were all over them for a 30 minute stretch there. Need to focus on what was working in the 2nd half of the 1st and the 2nd period. Bottom line: we're still way ahead of where anyone thought we would be, including me.

I hate to say it, but Smith needs to be taken out of the lineup for game 7. His confidence is shot right now and Chicago is in his head. Send him back to GR to play in their conference finals and let him try to get some work in defensively. The way I see it, this team has 3 options: 1. Put DeKeyser in and tape his hand to his stick. 2. Dig up Ian White from whatever doghouse he's been living in. 3. Put Lashoff back in there and tell him to focus on his end of the ice and making good outlet passes.

OK, here are my thoughts. It's really hard to pin this game on one play or even a couple of plays. We needed to have more urgency throughout the game. That said, there is one play that captures where that lack of urgency was cashed in by the Hawks - and it came on the 3rd goal. Toews roofed the puck on the short side on the Power Play. What does this play tell me? I bank on my experience as a former goaltender and reading Jimmy Howard. This is the exact same shot that Chicago has tried at least 6 times earlier in the series, including Candy Kane in the 1st period, In the 1st period, Jimmy had his glove up by his shoulder and Kane's shot floated harmlessly into his glove. On the 3rd goal, you can see that Jimmy did not want to press his body to the post so he could move if there was a pass across the goal mouth. Instead he kept his body centered to avoid the lean and lost push off power in the event of a pass and Toews roofed it off of his mask. Edit: by keeping his body centered, he had to keep his glove and his arm down to ensure he took away the bottom 2/3 of the net. I'm not saying that the puck wouldn't have still hit him in the mask and snuck in between his mask and glove, but most likely, either Toews would have fired into his glove or the pass gets broken up. Bottom line: The goalie needs to take the shooter and trust the defensemen to take away the pass. Again, I'm not blaming Howard for this, but I get the feeling he was worried about the pass instead of the confident, take away anything to shoot at, play that he demonstrated in the last three games. The good news is that I'm sure he will see this in watching the tapes - I'm not even sure if he realized what he did in real time, it's a feel play for a goaltender. Like I said, this isn't the only reason we lost, but it happened based on what was happening between the lines. Not to mention, I think that after the Hawks go up by two, I think our confidence in our ability to come back and tie it up goes by the wayside. Here's to hoping Jimmy can get his mojo back and the Wings come out with more fire and passion in game 6. I think they can.

Who doesn't and I have not. The person below me's favorite movie is represented in my avatar.

I was about to call you out as an Avs troll, lol. As for trading with them. There is very little I think we'd want. Unless they are willing to give up Duchene or Landeskog or their top draft pick, I'd say f*** 'em. There's nothing we really need from the WORST DAMN TEAM IN THE LEAGUE. I love the youth we have and the youth we have in development. I'd like to see where it takes us. I'll stick to an earlier post I made and say stand pat with keeping who we have and sign a free agent top 6 forward (Horton/Ribeiro/Clarkson or, if they'll sign for short term Iginla/Elias).

I'm actually finding some ways to enjoy Edzo's bias - but only because his team is losing. It's so pleasing to hear the palpable disappointment in his voice when things go wrong for his team. Also, when I yell at him on the TV, it feels like I'm at the game and taunting a Hawks fan. Don't get me wrong, I still HATE this biased crap. If we were losing, his bulls*** wold probably have me breaking my TV. We need to get that 4th win so I can hear the deflation of his dreams in real time. That will make it worthwhile. Sidenote: You've got to be some kind of special level of terrible to make me want to hear Pierre talk instead of you.

Wow! Big win there. I think we just saw the game that we all said Jimmy Howard needed to steal. It wasn't like we were totally outplayed, but that's a game I've seen previous Wings team lose all too often. Great play by Crawford at their end and good chances by the Hawks, but Jimmy was the difference!! (with a big Honorable Mention to the PK!)

Don't mind JR in the intermission. When he first retired and started broadcasting, I thought I would hate the guy. Sad to say it wasn't from his broadcasting that I first learned more about him. I actually sat next to him on a flight to Phoenix (he lives there, I was headed to work) during the 2009-2010 season when the Wings were really down and we had gotten screwed on a few goal/non-goal calls recently (remember those games against Dallas, anyone?). We started talking and he said he felt the Wings were down but (in his own words) said he hated seeing them get screwed and felt the league was really trying to push them out - he said let the play determine where they stand and if they miss the playoffs, it should be because of their play. I was shocked. Here was a guy that played his whole career against the Wings and was confirming what I saw with my own eyes but kept telling myself not to believe anything funny was going on. Anyways, we talked a while - turned out it was his 40th birthday and me and a couple of other passengers had a shot with him for his b-day. From that moment on I realized he is good guy and just someone that speaks what he thinks and doesn't really put agendas against anyone. His reaction on the air after the Hawks won the cup showed who he is. Rest assured, part of him will always root for Chicago, but he gives an honest view. Also, the further he gets from his playing career, I think the more un-biased he becomes. For the record, I hate Ezo and Pierre. Edzo can't hid his bias enough and Pierre just bugs me (although he does show some hype to a few of the Wings). Can't we get ANYONE besides those two?

not sure if I'd want to go the trade route, as we seem to have some big pieces of the future in place. We need to re-sign Brunner and keep him, Andersson, Nyquist, Kindl and DeKeyser. I would like to see them keep Smith, Lashoff and Tatar too. We also need to keep Z, Dats and Kronner and probably Big E at this point. I also think we need to keep Ab and Helm. I'm sure if they were willing to part with anyone, they'd be asking for one or more of these players. It would be nice to see someone take Franzen's contract off our hands, but with the cap declining, I don't think anyone would......and if they did, we'd get nothing in return making it pointless. So, that leaves who? Flip, Bert, Cola, Eaves (or is he a free agent?), Emmerton, Miller (free agent too?), Quincy, teletubby, Sproul, Ferraro and a few other long term prospects. I'm not sure what anyone would really give us for anyone here that adds value right now. I think best case: go after some scoring on the free agent market this offseason (ie. Clarkson or Horton). Keep the youngsters and get them playing. With any luck, they can develop into a solid core before we lose Dats.

OK, I'll weigh in. There are really only 4 SHOTS: Slap, Wrist, Snap and Backhand. Everything else is a hockey move or skill play (dekes, tips, etc.). I think the point of it is, if you have possesion of the puck there are only a four basic things you can do: Shoot, Pass, Deke or dump in (or turn it over, I guess, but that's just a fail of one of these four). If you're shooting, you can take one of these 4 shots. Now, who is a better shooter? here are my thoughts: The thing I think is missing from this argument is weighing the shots. Since they are both forwards, the wrist shot would be most commonly used and therefore should cary the most weight. So, while Z may have a better slap shot, Dats having a better wrist shot carries more weight. If they were both defensemen, the weights would be reversed. This is why Dats pretty much always has a better shooting percentage than Z. However, Z takes more shots, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. In the end, why argue? Just be glad both of these guys are wearing the Winged Wheel.

I always thought Colaiacovo could be a good addition IF he could stay healthy. He had a really nice 3-4 year stretch with St. Louis after the Maple Leafs stopped trying to mess him up and before the injuries took their toll. He is also capable of adding offense, though we haven't seen it yet. Don't be surprised to see him add more in the offensive categories to go with his D if he can stay healthy and keeps getting more and more into form. For his career, he is a plus player and averages over 30 points per 82 games. I just wish he could play 82 games - who am I kidding, the Wings would take 60. Here's hoping he stays healthy and keeps up the good play for the rest of the playoffs.

lol, that post got me thinking of this