Buppy

Again, you're really reaching. Broken legs do heal. Whatever Oregon Trail worst case scenario you want to imagine is irrelevant. Fact is Robidas was healthy enough to play in 52 games afterward, plus 3 pre-season games the following year, prior to deciding he wasn't up to playing anymore. Do you really think that if Kronwall says the pain is too much for him to take, and a doctor confirms that he does have a chronic issue (which likely requires surgery to correct), plus the undeniable fact that playing further poses the risk of additional injury, the NHL (already facing a lawsuit for concussions) would say, "Walk it off, ya *****. Either completely ruin your leg like a real man or you ain't getting paid", all in the name of screwing the Wings out of a little cap relief after having not said a word about any of the other LTIR cases, several of which are similar in severity to Kronwall? If the league has a problem with LTIR (and there isn't any reason they should, since it isn't, and isn't likely to become, something that's abused) I'm sure they'll wait until the next CBA to address it rather than try to argue how-injured-is-injured-enough. You're acting like it's just a matter of wanting to get rid of a player who sucks. (And maybe that's all LW is thinking.) But the truth is he does have a legitimate chronic injury, and it certainly seems as though it is having a significant impact on his ability to play. So again, if he says he can't play I can't imagine a doctor would argue, nor that the league would argue with a doctor.

You're reaching. A broken leg is no more life-threatening or potentially-permanently-debilitating than a knee injury, and, unless he had some undisclosed bone disease, less likely to recur. Joffery Lupul retired due to sports hernia. Dave Bolland mostly due to an ankle injury (albeit, complicated by a back issue). While that kind of injury is certainly less likely to cause a player to retire, I don't think there's any evidence to suggest it is any more difficult to get LTIR for them. I think Kronwall will try to play next season, and how that goes will determine whether he tries to finish the contract. But if at any time he decides his body can't it, I really doubt any doctor would disagree with him.

Stephane Robidas

That's why premium prices are so carefully calculated. Why is this even a debate? NHL players have played in the last 5 Olympics. Insurance was one of the major points in the last one. According to Wikipedia, it cost the IOC around $7 million, and they said they won't be paying for it anymore.

Because taking on risk is what insurance companies do. It is literally the entire reason they exist. I'm sure the premiums to cover someone like Ovie would be extraordinary, and not cheap for even an average player, for that matter.

Uh, the entire purpose of insurance is, in fact, to cover that. But insurance is likely to be the determining factor. Assuming the NHL sticks to their guns, they won't be paying for it. I highly doubt players would be willing to pay for it (especially if they'd be facing fines and loss of pay already). I doubt the IIHF or Olympics would pay for it. It would probably fall to the individual national teams, and many would likely be unable or unwilling to pay for it.

Enjoy your chalk W. Maybe your mom will stick it on the fridge so she can show all her friends that you're finally learning how to write.

To be truthful, you wanted him to replace Tatar (which is still an idiotic idea), now it's either him or Callahan.

Last year's lottery was Apr. 30th. Early in the 2nd round. Don't remember if that's normal or not.

I know what he was saying and why. What I was saying is that it was really only two particularly good seasons out of 10. Not so much "every other year really good". And that 3rd best ppg season was also the 3rd worst in total points due to the injury, which would put it in the "hurt or mediocre" category, and break the "pattern".

Oilers model? As if they were trying to stay crap for a decade. And comparing them to Chicago, who was also crap for a decade... Obviously you have no idea how Chicago was built, or how any team is or should be built. The main difference between what Chicago did and what Edmonton did is Chicago picked a defenseman in the 2nd round and he turned into Duncan Keith (and funny enough, that was the draft for the one year they squeaked into to playoffs), Edmonton picked a defenseman in the 2nd round and he turned into Jeff Petry. And Toews and Kane are better than Hall and RNH. It wasn't some magic winning formula. It was a lot of luck. Of all the pieces contributing to Chicago's cup wins, only 3 of them required missing the playoffs (and Seabrook just barely), 4 if you count trading Ruutu for Ladd. You won't find a good team that doesn't have major pieces that were found outside of high picks. So you very obviously can (and will most likely have to) do a lot of your "building" while also being competitive. We have already built what should be at the very least a good supporting cast, and despite all the bitching about contracts, the reality is we have plenty of flexibility. Eventually, you'll probably need a high pick or two. The catch is you never know if that top pick will be Hall or if it will be Kane. In reality, almost everyone hits a few posts before sniping one in the top corner. Getting a high pick is nice; a reason for optimism. But at the same time a cause to be worried. Could get a top 3 pick this year, and/or next year, and have neither end up any better than Larkin. First off, Ilitch Holdings is a multi-billion dollar corporation. There's no such thing as a final word. There are checks on everyone. Even Ilitch could be fired. And multi-billion dollar corporations don't make someone President and CEO if it's a hollow title. So again, Chris has been Holland's boss since 2010. As for elite talent, sure. We all know how to get it. Just look at the top players on all the cup teams in the cap era. All of them are either high 1st round picks, or mid/low 1st round picks, or 2nd/3rd round picks, or later picks, or trade acquisitions, or UFA signings. Every one of them.

"Tanking for a high pick" and "Building a contending roster" are not synonymous phrases. Real experts - you know, people who actually know things about hockey - understand that. Conversely, trying to make the playoffs doesn't mean ignoring the future. You're creating a false dichotomy. Do you think any parts of the current team are worth keeping? Do we have anything that can be part of a contending roster? If yes, then you have to acknowledge that we have been building. And again, Chris Ilitch has been Holland's boss since 2010. Stop acting like it's something new. All I'm saying is that there's no such thing as "Hollandisms". Your interpretation of the comments are colored by who is saying them.

Not sure I understand your logic. The only reason to "worry about" Nielsen's contract is if you want to use that cap space for someone else, which you say we shouldn't do anyway. And if it's further into the future you're worried about, you shouldn't be. Even without clearing any of the supposedly bad contracts or the cap going up, we have some significant flexibility even as soon as the year after next.

What was so candid and thoughtful about Devellano's comments? He said you need stars, and you need to draft high to get them, and we haven't drafted high because we've been too good. Holland has said similar things in the past and been blasted for making excuses. He said we've been trying to keep the streak alive (as if that wasn't obvious). When Holland has said we want to be competitive and get in the playoffs, people here turn it into another idiot meme. Why wasn't it a breath of fresh air then? Or do you mean the, "bit us in the rear this year" part? What does that even mean? Would our losing have been less lose-y if it had been intentional? If anything, I'd say Devellano is pandering to fans. Like I said in my previous post, we have been rebuilding, regardless of what term anyone wants to use to describe it. Devellano says "the rebuild is on", I think he's just trying to say what fans want to hear. Trying to spin our losing into a reason to be hopeful. Kenny 'sticking to his script' at least shows some conviction. I do wish Kenny would stop with the "massive rebuild" talk, since that isn't what fans are really asking for. I doubt there are many, if any, who think we need to gut the team completely and start from scratch. But at the same time, if as a fan you recognize that we don't need that, you should then also recognize that we have been building for the future all along. That we've been able to add what we have without sucking so far is something we should be proud of, not something that should have us breaking out the torches and pitchforks. Chicago was out of the playoffs for quite a while before they landed Kane and Toews, Five top 10 picks, plus a few more in the top half of the 1st round, but none of that really contributed to their Cup wins. Keith was a late 2nd rounder. Aside from that, they didn't "build" any more than we have without tanking, and what they did get were from later picks they could have had without sucking. We need to stop acting like "preserving the streak" was some great organizational mistake.

Not really 36/78 = .46 ppg 40/80 = .50 ppg 35/55 = .64 ppg 39/71 = .55 ppg 66/81 = .81 ppg 17/41 = .41 ppg 58/75 = .77 ppg 48/82 = .59 ppg 31/76 = .41 ppg 40/74 = .54 ppg Couple notably good seasons, which happened to sandwich a sub-par season, but mostly just been a decent secondary scorer, or mediocre if you want to call it that.

Maybe, but ultimately anything he says is going to be "PR". Blah blah blah I want win the Cup every year, blah blah blah Billy's GM let him win the Cup, blah blah blah I hate you, Kenny, dumb doodoohead!

While we'll never know for sure all the details from either side, this isn't really accurate. In 97, he was reportedly offered $11M for 2 years, which would have kept him as one of the highest players in the league. It was certainly a reasonable offer. He didn't like it and at one point said he didn't want to play for Detroit again. Offer sheet from Carolina worked out to $6.3M/yr for 6 years. Probably cost him money in the long run (but since most of it was paid up front, it was probably worth it to him). In 02, the two sides were still negotiating until just before the playoffs. The Wings' offer at some point went from $10Mx5 to $10Mx4. Most likely that was because it had become increasingly obvious that the next CBA was going to include a salary cap. He ended up signing for $8Mx5. Quote from Fedorov: ''It's been a wonderful ride, but everybody in life at some point has to change direction or place or time, and this is absolutely normal for me to change and move on.'' One could conclude that he did in fact want to leave, or even that he was a diva bitter that the Wings didn't think the world revolved around him. Bottom line is twice the Wings offered him fair deals that would have made him one of the highest paid players in the league, and twice he turned them down to sign with another team. It's a mark against him. By itself, it shouldn't be enough to keep his jersey out of the rafters, and ultimately I don't think it will. But let's not pretend he's a victim here, even if his number doesn't go up.

Sometimes I think WIIM exists solely to ensure that the internet doesn't run out of stupid. How many Cups have Edmonton and Toronto won in this century? Maybe we should wait until they have some success before praising their success. Also, Chris Ilitch has been CEO of Ilitch Holdings since 2010. Nothing about his authority has changed. And finally, in regards to the "rebuild" and the comments of Holland and Devellano, you have to look past the semantics. There's no such thing as a "real rebuild". The fact is every single team, whether they want to or not, is constantly evolving. Declining in some ways, improving in others. Whatever label someone wants to attach to the process, we have in recent years been building toward the future. Trying to stay competitive and trying to build for the future are not mutually exclusive. Think about it. What players currently in the system does everyone point to as potential building blocks? Pretty much all the guys we've added in these recent years when Holland was supposedly ruining our future for the sake of the streak. Would we really be any better off if we had Drouin, Bennett, and Strome instead of Mantha, Larkin, and Svechnikov? Even if you get a top pick it doesn't guarantee anything. Johnson, Hall, RNH, MacKinnon, Yakupov...even stars like Ovie, Stamkos, and Tavares haven't won anything or even been good enough to make the playoffs every year. In fact, of the 26 1st-overall picks made in the course of the Wings' streak, only 3 ever won a Cup. That's part of what Holland means in saying there's no guarantees with a rebuild. Ovie is the 2nd best player of his generation, Washington has the 5th best cap-era record, about to win their 3rd PT, and never been past the 2nd round. Every team in the league has "rebuilt" multiple times since the Wings' last missed the playoffs, and most have nothing to show for it. So no guarantee that tanking will get you the top pick, or that the top pick will be a great player, or that a great player will bring you a cup.... meanwhile, the Wings and Boston built Cup winners without really tanking. San Jose and the Rangers haven't won anything, but at least built good teams. There are still very good players, even stars, found outside the lottery picks. Just have to get lucky. Sure, looking at it in isolation, "hope to get lucky" seems like a s***ty strategy, but in the context of reality...where every strategy requires a fair amount of luck, it's not nearly as foolish as people try to act like it is. The one thing we could have done that might have put us further ahead now is the one thing that no one would have wanted. Trade Datsyuk and Zetterberg when Lidstrom retired. We would have been terrible for a few years probably, but maybe now we'd still have all the good young pieces we do, plus maybe a young star or two. Would it have been worth it? I don't know. I think I'd still rather be us than Edmonton, and odds are tanking wouldn't have landed us McDavid. Definitely rather be us than Buffalo.

18th and 31st isn't near enough to give up the 7th. Giving up a top 10 pick, you should get that, plus a high-end prospect or young player, plus a 1st (and maybe a 2nd) next year. You must've done something wrong; we can't get 5th or 6th. According to Tankathon, we have about a 21% chance at a top 3, so not that bad. Too lazy to work out the other odds, but probably about 60-70% of 7th or 8th, 10ish% for 9th, and very low chance for 10th. If we end up 7 or 8, I'm thinking most of the top centers will be gone and we'll take Liljegren or Makar. I could live with that, but if one of Vilardi, Rasmussen, or Glass was still available I'd prefer that.

I'm old enough to remember 1990. End of '89 had been bad enough, losing first round to Chicago then trading Adam Oates just when I was starting to like him. All of Probert's problems... Then got kind of excited when we traded for Carson, even though I liked Klima and still kinda thought Murphy could be good...then we lost like 10 in a row immediately after. Thinking all year, "man, we're better than this", then losing a bunch of games at the end of the year and missing the playoffs. I was thinking our window was closed at that point, lol. If only I had known who we had drafted that year. Probably too much to hope that Cholowski, Smith, and Hronek can be the next Lidstrom, Fedorov, and Konstantinov, I guess.

You can't completely trust the line combo report, especially when counting PP time. I believe it gets a lot of overlap from combos with 4 forwards. For instance, if you look at just 5v4 time, it shows Nielsen with nearly 2860 total minutes, 1673 with Tavares. But NHL.com shows his total PP time over that span to be only 1424:55. WOWY is better.

It's Corsica hockey. Great site, though the performance kind of sucks. Also, you're reaching. You said I was wrong when I said they rarely played together, now after you see the data showing I was right, you want to play semantics. Also also, Gretzky and Messier weren't regular linemates either, and Helm played with Datsyuk about the same relative amount as Nielsen played with Tavares.

What does that have to do with anything? He wasn't making some blanket statement that centers never play with other centers. Tavares and Nielsen didn't play together, other than a few rare occasions and some PP time.

Dallas also won (as did Winnipeg, and Buffalo yesterday). We're still in the same spot. Also, we're 5-4-1 in our last 10. Hardly that good, or even a significant departure from how we've played most of the season. The real reason we've dropped recently is because NJ and Van have just been exceptionally bad.

Can we just put an end to this before it gets to "LW on Franzen/Hossa" levels. For one, let's stop acting like we gave ARI our first to take Datsyuk. We traded the 16th pick, and got back the 20th and 53rd. Not altogether different than a few years ago when we traded the 18th for the 20th and 58th. Or a few years before that when it was the 24th for the 35th and 48th, or before that the 29th for the 32nd and 75th. It was a fair trade even without them taking Dats' hit. We don't even know that Chychrun would have been our pick. We might have wanted Fabbro and felt confident he would still be there at 20, or even wanted Cholowski to begin with, or maybe we didn't really care and just wanted to add an extra pick. In regards to Nielson, he may have been an "impulse" signing, but he was also one of the top players available. His production last year was similar to other top UFAs, and he signed a contract similar to other top UFAs. Oddly enough, his production this year is also similar to the other top UFAs, as all the big names are down from last year. You can call it overpaid if you want, but that's what the UFA market is. And to address the topic; we don't have, and have not had, a problem attracting free agents. We may not get every one we want every time, but no team ever does.