kipwinger

I'm confused by this Blashill debate. Is the argument that some coaches are better than Blashill, because that's pretty obviously true. Or is the argument that basically ALL coaches are better than Blashill, because that's a stretch. This is sorta revisionist. While plenty of people considered Trotz a top NHL coach prior to last year, plenty of other people thought he was massively overrated given his abysmal playoff record up to that Cup win. Far from any consensus that he was a top coach until now.

Mike Babcock does that constantly and yall can't get enough of that guy. Toronto fans were freaking out about this last week as a matter of fact. Speaking of which, I can't wait until Toronto gets bounced from the playoffs this year so I can point out how it's the third time that Mike Babcock has be unable to win the Stanley Cup with an absolutely LOADED roster.

Our intermission guys are on fire tonight. John Keating called Dekeyser "elite" and Darren said Mantha is better as a shooter on the PP than as a net front despite that being demonstrably untrue using really basic powerplay statistics.

I actually see Jensen as a Daly type guy. Since he's never been all that offensive anyway, there's not much of a fear that his production will drop off. His longevity is almost entirely dependent on how well he can continue to skate and defend. And I don't see either of those things going away. IF we re-sign him, I wouldn't do it for too much money. But I'd expect his value to remain pretty constant for the next 4-5 years because what he does well doesn't go away overnight the way offensive production can.

Too many variables here to really know. In theory I'd be willing to trade Jensen OR re-sign Jensen depending on a few things. Is Kronwall retiring? Do we get an NHL ready defensive prospect at the trade deadline? What term might Jensen want on a new deal? Hypothetically, if the Wings got Fabbro (I'd rather have Toews) as a return at the deadline then you probably need to trade Jensen. If we don't get a defensive prospect a the TDL, and we're not planning on chasing a UFA defenseman, and Kronwall is retiring then we need to re-sign him. This is the calculus Holland and co. need to navigate on this one.

Those are easy: Didn't watch Dragonball Z Batman. Aside from kryptonite, Superman is highly susceptible to rich guys (Lex Luther). Bruce Wayne is rich b*tch. And he's a violent maniac. He's probably already got a plan to take Superman down. Maltby, McCarty is like every washed up druggie from my high school. AA, cuz razzle dazzle all day. Leftwinger. Lefty can be histrionic at times, but Frank was like if you took the most contrarian college freshman of all time and turned him into a dumb hockey fan. Can you just please, please, please, use your magic Veleno voodoo to make sure he turns out to be at least as good as Ryan O'Reilly? That's all I ask.

I'm not really worried about all this Kronwall stuff. Zetterberg said all the same things his final season in Detroit. Sedins aside, most guys don't call it quits prior to the end of the season. Think Rafalski, Lidstrom, Z here.

I wasn't suggesting they were game changing talents. But all those guys were drafted in the 2-5 rounds. You're not EXPECTING game changing talent in those rounds. That doesn't mean they weren't really good picks. They were. Particularly Tatar. If you get a guy who scores 20 goals a year, ever year, in the 2nd round you've done a REALLY good job. I do agree though that we seem to be back on track with our drafting. And it's not even that we're drafting higher either. Trading back for Mantha/Bert, and Cholo/Hronek, were awesome moves that don't get talked about enough. Also, people LOVE to give Nill and McDonnell credit for Holland's successes but I never hear anyone say those guys are on the hook for Kindl, Smith, and Sheahan.

Not really draft duds though. As I pointed out above, from 2005 to 2013 we drafted in the first round 3 of out 8 times. THOSE picks were duds. But elsewhere we did really well in the draft. Guys like Abby, Helm, Nyquist, Tatar, Jensen, and AA all performed as good or better than their draft position would suggest during that period. You could add Shawn Matthias and Calle Jarnkrok to that list as well. They were good picks, we just traded them. We generally got good results from our picks, we just missed on the late first rounders, which hurt us. But considering we didn't pick in the first round for 5 of those 8 years, the lack of high end picks hurt way worse than the three duds. And you can't really blame Holland for trading 1st rounders during our Cup contention years when every other GM does the same thing.

I think that's a fair criticism on a very specific point, but I don't really think it means Holland isn't best to run a rebuild. Starting around 2010-11 we started losing D-men and seemed content to replace them with puds (Cole, Colaiacovo, Commodore) rather than legit d-men. I always thought we should have landed Wisniewski, but Erhoff, Hamhuis, Suter come to mind as well. But mishandling UFA d-men isn't the same thing as rebuilding, which is centered on the draft. And in that area Holland has done very well over the years.

The reason I ask is because from 2005 to 2012 we drafted in the first round 3 times. Kindl, Smith, Sheahan. In 2013 we drafted Mantha and Bertuzzi and what is now considered the "rebuild" was underway. Relying on Nyquist/Tatar/Dekeyser/etc. was less a strategy than it was a function of the fact that we didn't really have anyone else better in the farm system. I think it's fair to criticize how we drafted during that period, thought most of the guys you mentioned exceeded expectations, but I don't think we deliberately chose to "retool" with substandard talent. Secondly, if our window didn't close until 2014/2015 and we were already drafting for the rebuild in 2013, then I'm not really sure what the problem was. It's standard practice around the league to go all-in during Cup contention years, so that's not really something I think you can criticize Holland for doing. Maybe (big maybe) he should have started a few years earlier (2012-2013), but if that's true then we're really only griping about one or two years of mismanagement. Just doesn't seem that acute to me. Here's what I think happened. Holland went all-in starting around 2005 because his team was stacked and he wanted to rack up as many Cups as he could with Dats/Z/Lidstrom/Kronwall. That mean that we didn't draft much in the first round, and the 3 times we did turned out to be late first round duds. That meant that toward the end of our contention period we were pretty thin on the ground, and when it became clear that we just weren't going to get it done again Holland started hanging on to his first rounders (Mantha, Larkin, Svech, Cholo, Ras, Zadina), selling at the deadline (Mrazek, Smith, Jurco, Vanek, Tatar), and stockpiling extra picks (Bertuzzi, Hronek, Veleno, Berggren). What should he have done differently?

Let me ask you this, when do you think our Datsyuk/Zetterberg/Kronwall/Lidstrom/Franzen/Hossa/Rafalski era Cup window officially ended? I mean, I realize that our last trip to the finals was 2009, but even in 2013 we were within 1 win of beating the eventual Cup champions (Chicago). So, like, when do you think that door was finally and definitively closed?

Yzerman never managed a team to a Stanley Cup.

I guess I just disagree with the "stale voice" premise as you're relating it to a GM. If I agreed that we needed a new GM, then Yzerman would be a legitimate option. But I don't agree we need a new GM. Our GM is doing a good job. I think you're reaching on this "stale voice" thing. But that's because I think everybody overstates this. First, GMs are not really responsible for strategic or tactical decisions which affect the game in real-time. Those COULD get stale if the were boring and/or increasingly ineffective over time. But that's on the coach. So maybe a coach's message could get stale, though I really doubt that too. Only in hockey is this even a thing people posit. Nobody says Nick Saban, or Bill Belichick, or Greg Popovich should get fired because their "voice is stale". It's mostly just nonsense, and to the extent it's true would only apply to coaches and not GMs. GMs are responsible for personnel decisions, and pretty much all GMs make the same kinds of decisions in the same kinds of scenarios. It's the reason why there is a general consensus on draft rankings. It's the reason there is a general consensus on the market value of free agents. Hell, Kyle Dubas is considered the "renegade" GM because he uses...analytics! That's how homogenized GM decision making is. I actually think longevity is an advantage for GMs. First, because there are unlikely to be scenarios which Ken Holland has not dealt with and navigated successfully in his 20+ years on the job. Second, because any process that takes a long time to complete is easier when you know as much about where you're coming from as where you're going.

You're making my point for me. Thanks.

If we had every single piece we needed to contend then the rebuild would be complete and we wouldn't be having this conversation. We've got a very good up and coming team, with lots of talent at all positions (maybe outside of goalie). And Holland was able to do so without a single top five pick. That's pretty good work. Next you'll give him credit for building the Canadian Olympic team. Yzerman has done a fine job. But his job was made 100 percent easier by the fact that Stamkos and Hedman were already on the team when took the job. It's also worth noting that people have criticized Holland for years for already having Yzerman, Fedorov, and Lidstrom on the team when he became GM, which is true. But at least he won with the team he inherited. Stevie is still a little light on Cup wins as a GM for people to gush over him the way they do.

I have no idea, other than nostalgia, why anybody would want Yzerman over Holland. Literally every single criticism of Holland is equally true of Yzerman as GM. Plus, in case people aren't paying attention, our rebuild is actually going really really well.

I kinda like Sam Reinhart. He seems like a total assh*le.

I'm never sure who Detroit players are passing to. Seems like they don't care who the puck goes through as long as they clear the zone. Dekeyser and Ericsson are also terrible for just sorta wildly flinging the puck up ice (to the opposing team's defense at the blueline) as well.

It's been a while since I've seen a Detroit player set up a goal off a no-look, backhanded, shovel pass. Datsyuk maybe? But man did Abby ever deliver.

I'm genuinely not talking s*** here, because again, I've never even heard of this kid, but his OHL numbers don't look "elite" to me. He's got 17 goals on the season. 14 all of last year. Tell me more about this guy.

Some interesting thoughts on Jimmy Howard and the trade deadline. I like the idea of a Calgary or Columbus deal, Colorado too, but they've already taken their first rounder off the table so I'm not sure what else they've got to offer. https://sports.yahoo.com/five-teams-call-jimmy-howard-214357918.html

Wait, why do we like Graeme Clarke again? Never even heard of this kid.

I don't care if he ever fights again. But it might be nice for him to not lose puck battles to defensemen half his size. If he does that I'll never say another bad word about him.

He's a good goal scorer and all, I just wish he wasn't suuuuuuuuuuuuch a p*ssy.