kipwinger

My only issues is the public funding aspect. The MASSIVE public funding. If the illitches had paid for it themselves they could name it whatever they want and I wouldn't have much to say.

I absolutely DONT think now is the time to trade for a defenseman. Sure we need one, but no high end defenseman are available for trade. Shattenkirk? Vatanen? They're no better than Yandle and you wouldn't have to lose assets to get him. What we definitely don't need to do is throw away good assets, from a rebuilding team, on a second tier defenseman. Magically put PK Subban on our current team and we still aren't contenders. We need a good defenseman to be hitting his stride in 3-5 years, when Larkin, AA, Mantha, Tatar, Nyquist, etc. are all in their primes. Not next year.

What a benevolent act by our patrons the Illitch family. They used millions of dollars of public funds to erect the world's biggest advertisement to themselves. Thank god for our glorious leaders!

I know, how dumb we are for preferring the name reflect the culture, history, or people of our great city instead of acting as an advertisement for sub par pizza. Perhaps we should build an alter to Mike Illitch in Campus Martius Park and ritualistically bow each time we pass since idol worship is now something to be proud of. The arena is partially financed with public funds, so its not asking too much to have the name reflect the public, and not corporate, interest. But that's just me. I'm a dreamer...who also played attention in civics class. Now if you'll excuse me, Living Colour's "Cult of Personality" just came on the radio and I need to go practice being slavish.

It probably will, but to be honest those attempts to come up with phoney baloney nicknames are almost as bad as the corporate names themselves. Nicknames have to happen organically, they can't be the result of some marketing strategy.

To be fair, Larry Brooks is a total weasel.

I don't agree. The "eyeball test" doesn't really tell you anything over a whole season. First, because people see what they want in a player. Second, because the types of things you described tend to wash out over a full season. The defense, for instance is just as unlikely to clear the crease for Jimmy as it is for Mrazek. The eyeball test should be used (sparingly) in specific instances. For example if Abby has two goals in a game it might look really good, but not if you watched the game and one was an empty netter and the other bounced in off his foot.

Lol, Helm's not happy with his "situation"? Apparently playing with Pavel for a good portion of the season displeases him. Screw that guy. Tell you what buddy, make good on any of the 10,000 breakaways you get and we'll talk turkey.

Dombrowski finished last in the division with one of the leagues highest payrolls. Hardly comparable to a guy who made the playoffs while transitioning his team to a new generation for the second time.

Imagine all the booze he and Tatar could drink. Maybe even more than Patrick Kane. No thanks for me. Obviously.

Dang, apparently being bigger, and punchier, and hittier isn't all its cracked up to be. I wiffed on this one. Expected more from the Kings skill guys.

You're right though, I do like Bean and Fabbro at our current spot or even back some. Guess I need to do a deeper dig.

I'll take your word for it in terms of the quality of these guys. I havent seen most of them play. I just noticed that 5 of the top 15 north american skaters are defensemen, and 3 of the top 15 euros are as well. But zero defensemen are top end in either the NA or Euro rankings. So theres a fair chance that the top defense prospects don't get looked at until 10-15. But again, whether these guys are worth the effort I don't know. I don't really begin tracking minor league guys until after the season.

That comparison you quoted was to Hakstol, not Babcock.

Agreed (with some caveats). And he STILL made the playoffs, so what's the problem? Unless you're suggesting that he will never improve upon his mistakes this year? I believe he probably will as he gains more understanding and confidence at the NHL level. I don't expect a rookie coach with a mediocre team to have all the answers right away. I DO expect him to learn and improve as he gains experience. He made the playoffs as a rookie, as his power play and player usage improve (which they should after a full off season to analyze the team, and some new assistants), so will the teams success.

Kris Draper is assistant to the GM, but not Assistant GM. That's Ryan Martin, who is also the GM for the Griffins. If anybody is being groomed its him. Or maybe Fischer. Drapers position was created for him to take care of him after his retirement, but he has almost no responsibilities regarding scouting, drafting, or roster management.

That has more to do with how tight the standing are. 4 points could be the difference between 5th and 8th. Hence the drop. Our win/loss rate wasn't noticeably different between January and April. So despite "spiralling" down the standings we werent losing any more than we had been. And we DEFINITELY didn't loss at a greater rate than a year ago, so its obviously not the coach. Blash ain't perfect, but the effort some are making to paint him as some kind of unsuccessful hack rings false to me. He's a rookie coach who turned in a decent season with a mediocre, transitioning, team.

You're splitting hairs. He's won one more playoff game and had what 2 more regular season wins? If he's "better" the difference is negligible. Efforts to paint Blashill as some kind of failure are almost entirely attributable to a frustrated fan base which is unaccustomed to transitioning teams.

Not really. Holland was a key part of selecting Lindstrom, Ferdorov, Konstantinov, Kozlov, McCarty, Lapointe, and Osgood as director of scouting before he was GM. Then he was instrumental in drafting Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and Kronwall. Stevie gets credit for Johnson, Kucherov, Palat, and Sustr, but he had NOTHING to do with Stamkos and Hedman. As far as player acquisition goes, Holland gets credit for Hasek, Hull, Robitaille, Rafalski, and Chelios. Stevie gets credit for Bishop, Garrison, Stralman, Filppula, and Callahan. No matter how you cut it, Holland was instrumental in building a dynasty. Stevie, while not entirely bad, hasn't drafted or acquired nearly the talent Holland has. Trying to divorce Holland from the Wings success, past and present, requires such a stretch of imagination as to make such an argument absurd.

Regardless of his familiarity, its harder to coach at the NHL level than the AHL level and a coach, just like a player needs time to adjust their game to the increased competition. Its the reason why almost no coaches (or none) have won a Cup as a rookie. Its really hard to do right away. Blashill inherited a borderline playoff team and did just as well as his predessessor. Anybody expecting an immediate transformation was being unrealistic. Coaching a borderline team into the playoffs as a rookie coach is quite an accomplishment. He wasn't perfect, no doubt, but he did a good job considering the team is in the middle of a transition. I'd be far more disappointed with the result if he took over an established team full of prime stars and underperformed in the playoffs. He had almost the exact same season, with a very similarly transitioning team, as Dave Haskoll in Philadelphia and nobody is saying that rookie coach should be fired.

I think the one thing, aside from replacing Ferschweiler, that we need to do is try to move up in the draft as far as is reasonably possible. Not into the top 5 or anything, but as high as we can. There are a ton of high end defensemen in this years draft and most have good size. None will go in the top 5. We currently draft 16th. Move up as far as possible and take the best offensive dman of the bunch. That's our biggest organizational need.we already have our future top centers and goalie, plus a ton of good wingers. We just need that future offensive guy to pair with dekeyser and we look good going forward.

Yzerman would be the sentimental, yet wrong, choice should Holland be replaced (which would also be dumb). Tampa Bays success has more to do with drafting Stamkos and Hedman as anything else and Yzerman had nothing to do with either. He's had some successful acquisitions (Bishop, Stralman), some decent ones (Garrison, Boyle), and some bad ones (Carle, Filppula). But most importantly he hasn't won jack s***. In general I think its a bad idea to give front office duties to former franchise stars. It almost never works. Because they're so beloved they tend to be above scrutiny and their stature within the organization discourages any critical evaluation of the job they're doing.

I hate Jeff Blashill because he's a rookie coach who finished the regular season with just as many points and only 2 few playoff games than his predessessor did the year before. What a loser! He should be more like Babcock, who took over a presidents trophy winner and coached them to a first round mauling by the 8th seeded Oilers in his first season with the Wings. Or we could just give it a minute and not be so absurdly reactionary.

I once saw Tyler Johnson described as a maidmer. Which, apparently, is the opposite of a mermaid. Being a fish top half with a human lower half. I can see it.

By your own admission Abby was under coaches orders not to drop the gloves at all. So I don't see what difference the timing makes. But I'm not trying to talk you into anything, so have your kicks. Kickazz, no double standard at all. My disdain for fighting in hockey is so well documented I didn't think it needed repeating. I disapprove of both fighting AND fans acting like idiots.