kipwinger

Zadina is definitely not NHL ready. I'd leave him in the AHL. Kid needs some time.

Art Regnar doesn't know any of our prospect's names despite being a Wings reporter. "Jarri" Saarijarvi and "Jason" McIsaac.

Put advertisements on the uniforms in the bottom video and we'll no longer be able to tell them apart. It's a slippery slope my friend.

Hockey and soccer are basically nothing alike. Aside from the fact that both have goals, they starkly different. If anything you'd think ice hockey fans would be deathly afraid that the sport would become more like field hockey or something.

I wonder if fans of other sports are as pathologically insecure as hockey fans are when it comes to soccer? Like, I wonder if baseball fans keep themselves up at night worrying that their beloved game will become too much like cricket? Or if the existence of rugby just gives football fans the vapors?

I've basically used that same argument to suggest that ads on uniforms is not a big deal. It seems like it now, because we aren't used to them, but the minute you become used to them you don't see them. Like tattoos.

If showing up to games, even when the team is terrible, meant anything then Detroit would be called Footballtown on account of idiot fans' dedication to that dumpster fire of an organization.

I think they have to be local if they're going to be on LTIR. Franzen stays in Detroit every season despite the fact that he'll never play again. Part of the charade I suppose.

That wasn't a third was it? I thought that was the original?

I actually like the black sweater with the red flag logo. They should stick with that, get rid of the cyclone, and not worry about a third logo (which is typically a lame stunt anyway). Only third jersey I like is the Caps.

I think I'm probably one of the few who sees the bright side in this. Zetterberg was a good pro and he had a good long career. But he was never going to be good again. Who wants to see him slowly devolve? Plus, for the first time in a long time I'm excited about what's going to happen to this team. I'd rather we be bad for another year or two, and get excited about this group coming up, than watch prolonged mediocrity. I'd be excited about our team in two or three years based on our prospects right now, I'm super excited knowing that we're likely going to be a lottery team again this year.

Guess I'll write this here, but for those of you with an Athletic subscription there's a really good write up on Rasmussen today. https://theathletic.com/491908/2018/08/28/michael-rasmussen-the-once-every-10-years-kid-may-be-ready-for-red-wings/

I'm less concerned that they're all offensive. I mean, you could always just start them in the o-zone. But AA is tricky because he's best in transition, and when blowing the zone, so that he can get up to speed and beat defenders. So you can't really start him in the offensive zone. Honestly, if Zadina and Vanek are on the line I'd rather they play with Neilsen. Assuming Larkin, Neilsen, AA, and Glendening are our centers I'd go for something like this: Bert-Larkin-Mantha Vanek-Neilsen-Zadina Ras-AA-Nyq Helm-Glen-Abby This is just for next year. In the long run I've got much different ideas about how I'd set my lines.

Yeah, I mean if you can get a player of Tavares' caliber you should, but it doesn't mean it'll work out. If Matthews can become a dominant 200 ft. player then it's no issue, but I don't see it working if they're both trying to be a big minute, all offense, type of center. It'd be like if you had Tyler Seguin and Conner McDavid on the same team. One of them is going to fall off a bit.

Another big thing with Toronto is going to be how Babs utilizes Tavares/Matthews. I'm predicting that one or the other of them will have a down year this season. Tavares pretty much needs ALL of the minutes to be at the top of his game, but that would take away top minutes from Matthews (who projects to be better in the long term). And it's not like a Crosby/Malkin, Kuznetsov/Backstrom, or Kopitar/Carter situation where both guys are really good at everything so their usage doesn't matter. Tavares can't really be a defensive, matchup, center. He's all offense, and in order to get that offense he needs lots of minutes. Minutes that probably should be going to Matthews.

Toronto is in a really strong position going forward. They're STACKED at forward and have good goaltending. Their defense is good, but not great, and they've drafted TONS of defensemen the last two years. They're legit Cup contenders. The only thing stopping them will be how good other teams in the East get over the next few years. They'll be a top team for sure, but it's entirely possible they'll be one of those top teams that's always overshadowed by another team that's just a bit better.

It'll be a good indication of how willing AA is to embrace an opportunity and capitalize on it. He's (potentially) being given a chance to anchor his own line, with decent enough linemates, and some real minutes this year. There's no reason he can't use this as an opportunity to bring his game up a notch if he's willing to be coached. If he doesn't, then it'll be pretty clear what kind of player we've got in AA.

Yeah, it's a lazy argument. You're only in "cap hell" if you're a team like Chicago who wants to win one or two more with your current core before rebuilding. Cap constraints don't really matter for a team like Detroit because all the bad contracts will be off the books by the time we're ready to compete again. For a lot of lazy pundits, having bad contracts has become synonymous with "cap problems" when they aren't really the same thing. Sure we've got bad contracts, but they're not really stopping of from doing anything we should be doing (re-signing our FAs, adding quality depth, integrating entry level contracts), so who cares?

We're positioned to have a really big draft again next season and we're already pretty stacked prospect-wise. If I'm Holland I'm content to be mediocre this season, have a huge draft, and slowly replace older guys with up and comers via attrition. Next offseason we lose Frk, Vanek, Nyquist, Kronwall, Jensen, and Witko. Year after its Green, Ericsson, Daly. And that's without trades. All Kenny needs to do is draft well, stay the course, and be a lottery team this coming year and we're back in the thick of things. And finally, FINALLY, the glory days Red Wings will be behind us and we can get on to being a modern hockey team.

I mean, with Zetterberg done it's basically a throw away season as it is so I don't see a problem in trying anyone who factors into your future plans at center. I genuinely couldn't be happier about this. It gives a couple of kids some much needed minutes, and still ensures we'll essentially be a lottery team. One more year of solid drafting and I'll feel very good about our future (I actually do already).

I like it. Give AA the reps and see what he's got. Maybe it'll force him to commit to playing a full game. If not, you can always move him back to the wing.

I don't really see any argument for Fedorov. He wasn't more skilled than Yzerman in any meaningful way, he scored less over the course of his career, and was less of a factor in all 3 Cup runs. He was definitely more athletic though, I'll give him that.

My bad, I was genuinely confused and so I misread your position on this. All this time you were saying that A) there's nothing wrong with Mantha's deployment on the powerplay, B) he's successful at it, C) his talent isn't wasted, and D) you're fine with that? Ok then, I agree. Edit: Also, I think you're getting former and latter mixed up in the post above.

There are currently 17 first overall draft picks still playing in the NHL. Of those, 4 have won Stanley Cups (Ovechkin, Crosby, Fleury, Kane). So while drafting someone like Hughes or Dahlin is exciting, and there's no reason not to take them if you get the chance, it's not really that big of a deal if you don't. It's almost more fun to think about who you'd take other than the obvious top guys IMO. Other than Pittsburgh, who had essentially 3 first overall (I'm counting Malkin because he clearly goes first in any draft that doesn't also have Ovechkin), the core groups of all the recent Cup winners have only sparse representation from the top spot. Ovechkin, Kuznetsov, Backstrom, Carlsson. Toew, Kane, Keith, Hossa. Doughty, Kopitar, Carter, Quick. Bergeron, Kreci, Chara, Thomas/Lucic(?). I'd much rather we get down to the business of finding those other guys and hope that Larkin turns out to be as good as Toews or Bergeron or Kopitar than waste too much time thinking about Jack Hughes given how unlikely it is that we'll ever draft him.

What a goof I am for assuming you "thought" his talent was being wasted when in reality you "think it feels" like his talent is being wasted. It was a real stretch on my part.