Matt

Good point here by Frank Serevalli (@DNFlyers): https://twitter.com/DNFlyers/status/225945730584559617 Spending $26M in one calendar yr, NSH would be forking over 16% of entire franchise net worth ($163M in '11 accd to Forbes) to match offer Good, that's what I thought. With this out there I think it becomes increasingly clear that the offer sheet was meant to force Poile's hand to complete a trade. It's two-fold for Holmgren: He's fine with sacrificing the draft picks if need be, but he's got the assets to get a trade done, too. If Poile was riding the fence on what he wanted to do and dragging it out it's a genius move by Holmgren. Puts the screws to Poile to get it done and a strong potential to land a franchise defenseman that has Norris trophies in his future.

No. When a player signs an offer sheet they can do only one of two things: play for his original team once the offer is matched, or the original club refuses to match and he goes to the team that signed him to the offer sheet. Two destinations for Weber, and two only: Nashville. Philadelphia. That's it. Under the previous CBA (at least), the original team could match, they could refuse and get compensatory draft picks relative to the contract, or the two clubs could work out a trade during the 7-day "grace" period. That trade option between the Predators/Flyers is something I'm not sure is possible or not under the new CBA.

Besides.... It seems clear Weber wants out of Nashville, if what Dreger's sources told him was true. Either Poile wasn't offering good enough contract numbers or he just wanted to play elsewhere -- that's the only way to explain why Poile was in trade talks with the Wings, Flyers, Rangers, and Sharks. He's gonzo. I see massive issues if Weber's offer sheet is matched by Nashville and he just wants out of there. Only way around that is that Holmgren is simply a pawn that got played in this game and Weber used the Flyers as a means to force Poile's hand to get a contract he wanted out of Nashville. But you'd think Holmgren would be smarter than that, right?

No, it was wise for Weber to act this summer. The shot the owners put across the players' bow over the last week was message enough that there will be major changes to contract term. Weber has a guaranteed contract for 14-years and over $100-million. The way the talk is he'd be lucky to get half that if he waits until next summer -- even less if there is a 5- or 6-year cap on contracts. He needed to get in before the lockdown on contract length, and he did. Good for him, it just sucks the Red Wings weren't in on it. He's a franchise defenseman and there aren't many out there, far fewer that ever become available.

I know it was possible under the previous CBA, but I had a quick look at the current one and couldn't find it: Can't Weber still be traded to Philadelphia during this period (and only Philadelphia)? As I said, I know it was possible pre-2005 (I remember plenty of stone-age LGW day discussion of what the return for Fedorov could be from Carolina if Detroit worked out a trade after the offer sheet was signed), but not sure now. Philadelphia could solve some cap-issues there, but they've really got until the exhibition season to solve that. Oh, I agree totally, but I also believe Philadelphia front-loaded the hell out of this contract to at least make the decision very difficult. Otherwise there's no point in Holmgren spinning his wheels on this whole thing. Plus, we have to consider Weber's feelings on the whole thing: If he sees the writing on the wall and wants out, matching the offer won't change that. He'll be miserable and locked in for a year and then you've got a a Nash-2.0 PR fiasco. If Poile knows that and matches anyway.... yikes. Bad fallout from that.

Except the CBA forbids it. If Nashville matches, they cannot trade him for one calendar year. Period, no exceptions. Hence the mountainous financial commitment they'll have to make right out of the gate.

Well, this sucks. Am I the only one with the growing feeling that I'd rather just not hear that Detroit was "in" on someone? This summer has been nothing but a 'Greatest Hits' collection of "Hey, you guys were thisclose, but... no." Stop teasing me. I need a coffee. I'm assuming this deal is massively, massively front-loaded the first two years. It's going to be a big pill for Nashville to swallow. Weber will NOT be traded next year if Nashville matches unless he outright demands it. I can't see Nashville committing over $20 million to him this upcoming season (and something potentially north of $35 million the first two years) only to trade him away a year later after spending so much out of the gate. That's another reason -- potential 'poison pills' aside -- that I makes me wonder if Nashville will match it. If they can get through the financials the first two(-ish) years, then they're home free. Have to get that blessing from ownership.

Shin pad assassin returns! Details to follow... 2 years, $6 million total. Full no-trade clause. @GMillerTSN Gord Miller ‏@GMillerTSN Det signs Mikael Samuelsson to a two year deal. @TSNBobMcKenzie Mikael Samuelsson is getting $3M per year on his 2 year deal. Full no trade. ___ See ya, Hudler...

FlashyG -- That's a fantastic post. In fact, I had to look up the piece you quoted, and found it here: http://nirmukta.com/2010/09/08/trolls-and-other-disrupters-a-pragmatists-guide-to-moderating-online-freethought-groups/ Great insight there.

I signed up months ago through the Leafs' site just because they had info up before the Red Wings did. It's been weird getting things in my e-mail box from the Leafs, to say the least.

You insinuated that I had edited the guidelines to add the "contact Matt" portion recently, but I hadn't. So yes, in that instance you failed to properly read them -- and that's not the fault of anyone but yourself. I didn't ask you to "call out" a moderator on the forum, but if you had a problem with one to mention it privately via PM. You didn't do that either. There's no sense in making sour grapes claims months after the fact. I called you childish because of the manner in which you brought it up -- not the fact that you did. Big difference. Reading comprehension in play there. Do I trust the moderators here to make the right decision? Yes, i do -- otherwise they wouldn't be moderators. The lesson for you to learn here is this: Use the methods here at your disposal to report a problem. If you don't agree with an action a moderator has taken, bring it up with me. Simple. That's the case with virtually any forum -- not just this one -- and I repeatedly mention it as a reminder here. Whining about it on the forums months after the fact and calling moderators "elitist" and alluding to their "stupidity" will get you nothing but terse responses back. "You get more with sugar than vinegar" and all that jazz. Your behavior does nothing but further affirm the original action the moderator had taken. *sigh*... Again, reading comprehension. The original report was from four years ago, there have been dozens of software and feature changes since then, so some of the old fields may have been dropped, brought back, or removed altogether. I do know that you were "warned" for a personal attack and I'm 100% sure it was justified at the time. So, the amusing part here is that you claim to remember that it "didn't alert me at the time" (four years ago, mind you) but you've failed to properly remember the forum guidelines at any point during the span. Worth repeating: Yes, I trust the moderators here or they wouldn't have the positions they do. Again, simple. Do the moderators and I make the occasional mistake? Yup, and we'll do the best to fix them. Your situation, and the way you've handled it, convincingly shows me they handled it appropriately. A word of advice: Handle any future problems appropriately and tactfully and you'll get more than just "condescendingly" picked apart in a reply.

Concerning the member in question here: the warning in the thread causing tonight's ruckus has been made. Anything further from him will result in removal. Be patient, it'll take a week for him to respond to that.

@HeleneStJames https://twitter.com/...464998429687809 #RedWings have inquired about Rick Nash, but CBJ doesn't want to trade him to Detroit. Wings would have to blow Blue Jackets out of water. _____ For what it's worth. Holland isn't shy about making the rounds. Due diligence or more?

It's been there from the beginning. You've got no one to blame for your lack of reading skills but yourself. No, but you felt the need to whine about it publicly on the forum like an offended child rather than taking a route available to you. Oh, that's right -- you failed to read about that part. Again, this feeds into your persecution complex you've laid bare here. So right around the NHL Trade Deadline. Right. No traffic increase there. As far as the "condescending tone" is concerned, I will reply in kind when the moderating staff is called "elitist" or "stupid", so get used to it. Since this one occurrence has offended you so, may I ask what the topic pertained to (since I don't recall seeing it)? I'm virtually 100% confident the moderator that removed the topic did so correctly, but the event has left an ugly scar in your mind since then. Again, you think quite highly of yourself, which is amusing -- but sorry, I have no need to make up "BS attempts" to call you out. What's the point in that? Unfortunately the forum software from four years ago handled warnings a bit differently and there's no specifics other than a record of whom assigned the warning, the date, and the reason. That fancy print-screen effect below: What exactly have I not been honest about? Is this not an open discussion? Your attempts at trying to skew the discussion are laughable, at best. Argue/debate/discuss all you want, I'm game and I always have been. I don't believe I've ever been known to shun open discussion of site policies as long as it's done so with respect from the start. That isn't how it started here. If there's one thing that all moderators need to accept it's that you can't keep everyone happy. Someone will always be put off about one thing or another, will take something personal when it's not, etc.. You ARE a Booster -- so you know that there's been a two-year long thread on the first page of the private Booster forum specifically discussing the moderator policies of the forum. What have you contributed to it? Nothing. Zero. Not one post. (But let me guess, you didn't see that either, and I magically made that appear, too?) No disrespect for regular members here, but I do give the opinions of Boosters more weight when it comes to the discussion of moderator policies on the forums here: after all, they have made a contribution to the site and I consider it an "investment" in the site's growth and future. Does that mean they decide policy? Absolutely not, but I do listen to what they have to say. The moderators and I are not infallible. Things get missed, some things are edited/moved/deleted when they shouldn't be. It happens, and we try our best to fix it on the random times it does happen. And for those that feel that something was handled incorrectly than can always talk to me -- the buck stops here. I can't improve things if I don't know about the problems to begin with.

Enough. The line is drawn in the sand right here. Reply tactfully -- and to the topic at hand -- or find your stay here permanently shortened. This also applies to all others dragging this thread though the mud.

I have stated plenty of times in the past that if anyone has a problem with any particular moderators to personally message me through the forums here. You failed at that, so I don't quite see how you were "ignored" when you didn't even attempt to contact me about the problem. Moderators are not obligated (but encouraged) to let members know when content is removed -- in 99% of the cases the post/topic has broken an obvious forum guideline and in such cases the poster should have known better before posting it. This may come as a surprise to you, but all of the moderators here have lives outside of the site and are volunteers. So there are periods during the year -- shockingly -- where the traffic double or triple "normal" levels and during such periods, yes, the content added to the site is quite a task to keep up on. But I can simply turn that on its ear: Are you saying, Louisville, that you and your fellow members need to be babysat? That the moderating staff has to studiously comb through every page of every thread? I would like to think that the community here is mature enough to sense when something stinks and isn't appropriate and uses the "Report" feature. It instantly notifies all moderators/admins, most via e-mail. The last time you had a warning point will be four years ago on the 24th of this month, ironically for what constituted a "personal attack" -- so you can just quit sensationalizing. You're not the first poster to feel that having a post/topic removed is some sort of "elitist mod's" personal affront to your sense of self-importance, and not likely the last. Most just handle it better. I know this was made in jest, but it has to be said: Those that continually abuse the "Report" system for what it is not intended for (being upset with a differing opinion, etc.) will also be up for discipline as well. I doubt, however, that anything would get to that point -- but the notice is there. I will say that there's been no hesitation to use it when it concerns spammers. One (non-bot) spammer got though over the weekend and within 5 minutes my e-mail had blown up with a dozen reports related to the spammer. (It was dealt with quickly.) I can't stress enough how important the above is. The updated Report system that was part of the most recent upgrade allows all moderators/admins to see reported content, who acted on the report, what was sent to the member that reported the content and an additional note from the acting moderator to the other moderators. Follow vladdy's advice here: If it's blatant trolling or an obvious personal attack please report it! Blatant trolls have always been dealt with swiftly and harshly, but I encourage fans of other NHL teams to come here and discuss the Red Wings and hockey in general. Just because some of those other fans have comments that may have lesser opinions of the "home team" doesn't mean they're trolling (again, I'm willing to allow a gray area here for people that skirt the line seeing what they can get away with based on past posting history). I don't want to make this place an unwelcome one for fans of opposing teams -- they help breathe fresh air into the forum from time to time and offer different perspectives that some fans looking through Red Wing-colored glasses may have yet failed to see. To close out here: Again, if anyone has problems or questions regarding policies here, moderators, etc., etc. please feel free to PM me through the forums here. It's that easy. I don't bite.

This is an absolutely ridiculous comparison. So, in effect, you're saying the Wings are "cheap" for not paying a player $24-million for these players when they did for a team in another sport they own? Or it'd be "cheap" if they didn't spend $30-million per year on a player because someone did with Joe Johnson in the NBA? This is ludicrous on all fronts and I feel dumber having to even respond to it. What the Tigers do in baseball has had nothing to do with the Red Wings spending habits in hockey. Nothing.

How do you figure that? Were the Wings offering nearly $180-million to two players not enough? The Wings made incredibly strong offers to both players -- the fact that Ilitch also owns the Tigers has nothing to do with it. Being $17-million under the cap isn't because Ilitch doesn't want to spend -- it's that Ilitch trusts his front office team to spend it on the RIGHT players, not spend it for the sake of doing so. Huge difference. He wanted to be overpaid and he got what he wanted. Now he'll roll around in his $100 bills (when he's not suspended) and languish in Columbus for it. Good for him.

I recall reading on Twitter (from a reputable media member -- not a fly-by-night hockey "insider) that Fedorov is openly courting him to join his KHL team. We'll see. ____ And count me as one of those that thinks that Suter would've been absolutely worth the money if the Wings matched his offer from the Wild. He is a rock-solid all-around defenseman that contributes in all situations and those players, especially in the era of "lifetime" contracts that teams hand out like candy to those they deem franchise players, hardly ever hit the market. If you think Suter's contract is "bad" just wait until you see what kind of cheddar Weber gets if he signs his offer sheet and goes UFA next July 1. Depending on the outcome of the CBA (if it remains remotely status quo), you're looking at a contract nearing $9-million per season just because franchise defensemen of that caliber do NOT hit the market anymore, the "Crosby cap" be damned. People will scream and yell that he's "not worth more than Crosby" -- but someone WILL pay it and there will be a line to sign him.

I'm all for trading Filppula if it's part of a package for an elite defenseman or winger. We already have two elite centers in Datsyuk and Zetterberg and only a part-time elite offensive talent in Franzen riding shotgun with Datsyuk. Filppula is regularly being shifted to the wing to get him on the top 2 lines and his time centering the third line is over. I'd feel better dealing him for a scoring winger (Bobby Ryan or -- if on some far away planet a Nash trade is even feasible within the division -- Rick Nash) and then biding time to see if there's something that can be worked out with Semin (meaning: no long term, no prohibitively high cap figure, but high enough to dissuade him from signing with the KHL). That would help plant two elite-talent wingers on the top two lines. I think Nyqvist will "replace" Filppula on this team. He won't be able to pick up the slack this season, but over the following year or so I would expect him to. Wings management has to be willing to take that chance and have faith in their prospects while also being daring enough to make the trade(s) that need to be made. The defense.... well, the defense. I have no idea now that Suter's gone how to manage that. Time will tell. Easier to bolster the offense right now when comparing it to defensive options.

As you've undoubtedly noticed, things look a bit different around here! The LGW Forums have underwent the biggest upgrade since 2010 and there are a lot of significant changes -- far more than I think I could meaningfully gather into this post. Many you'll notice as you continue to surf the forums as many of the enhancements are functional. Bullets: There are currently two "main" template skins, labeled "White" (the default one) and "Red" You're free to switch among them as you see fit by clicking on the "Change Theme" link at the bottom of the page. Removal of profile pictures IP.Board opted to merge the two into one avatar, and as of the last update I believe that remote-linking of images for avatars is no longer permitted (security risk). Speed The forums should show some significant speed improvements. Some of this is due to inline updating: Posts can be added to threads seamlessly. I'll continue to try to make as many speed improvements to the forums as I can. More integration with social media You'll see the ability to add topics to your Facebook/Twitter accounts. Rep System replaced with "Like" button No more +/- functionality as it has been replaced with a "Like this Post" button. Topic Preview When viewing the forum index (like 'General Discussion' here), you can mouseover a topic and see a dark gray down arrow icon appear to the right -- click it to expand the topic to view the first few posts before going to the topic page itself. TapaTalk functionality is BACK Some members have been clamoring for it to return as a mobile viewing option, so here it is. TapaTalk is now compatible with the forum (in addition to the standard Mobile theme that's also available if you're still looking for an easy mobile browsing solution.) Custom Topic Tags Options vary by forums and by member group, but there are now customized topic tags (or 'badges'). In the past it was limited to "PINNED" and "POLL", but I've expanded that to include "GDT" (for Game Day Threads), "SIGNED" for *official* signings, and "TRADE" for topics discussing an official trade. (Do not abuse this ability! It's a great visual aid for visitors of the forums and those that abuse it will be promptly suspended/banned.) Better Spam Protection All new registrations are IP checked against a known spam list remotely hosted and updated. This should help eliminate a large number of spammers that manually attempt to register and stops them before even seeing the registration form. New Profile "Statistics" Tab Just what it says: No see just how addicted you are to LGW by looking at your recorded posting habits by time of day and by forum activity. Gallery Link added to Profile A new "Gallery" tab has been added to your User Profile, for quick access to see what user's have uploaded and shared with the community. Topic "Tags" These replace the the topic subtitle (the smaller, gray text that was present on the last version). You can enter up to 10 per topic, separated by commas. Use vital keywords describing the topic, like a player name, team, etc., and it'll help catalog forum topics more efficiently to help search engine spiders and the search feature here work more efficiently. There are plenty more, and I'll add to this thread as I can -- right now I'll be tending to little bug fixes here and there that tend to pop up following a major upgrade like this. (Also, if any members see something I didn't mention, please feel free to add it here!)

I should've instituted an IQ test in order to allow you to post.

Technically Chicago and the Devils would be still in on this... but since last night I mentioned on Twitter that all signs really started pointing toward a Wild/Wings showdown for a package deal. That seems to have gathered significant steam overnight.

What boggles my mind is if this is purely a hockey decision it's Detroit -- no brainer there. The Wild ownership/coaching staff can talk up a storm but all the organization has been good at doing is treading water, losing prized free agents, etc... Outside of bluster, what have you proven? Detroit has proven everything with a 20-year long track record. We have it in spades. Even *with* Suter and Parise the roster looks like it'll struggle to even make the playoffs.

With the Pittsburgh news it looks like we'll be finding out soon if Detroit is still a suitor or not. *crosses fingers*