kipwinger

I'm not really up in arms about it. It's a thing I've talked about for a long time around here, and I call it out when I see it. People will keep thinking the league/refs/Bettman hate the Wings (or favor some other team), and I'll keep saying its dumb. It's the ciiiiircle of liiiiife. As far as O'Halloran goes, sure, he called off some goals that should have counted. Mostly on Holmstrom. But Holmstrom interfered with goalies ALL THE TIME and never got called for it. We all talk about the ones taken from us by O'Halloran, but how many goals do you think got counted over the years that shouldn't have (if refs had been officiating as closely as everybody purportedly wants them to)? Or is the theory that Holmstrom was almost always in the right, and that occasionally refs just decided to screw him over?

Agreed. But that's what happens when you let Keven Lowe and Craig McTavish run your team.

Specific ones are sure. But how many people around here actually believe Dan O'Halloran has a vendetta against the Wings? A bunch. How many people actually believe Bettman "handed Pittsburgh the Cup" in '09? A bunch. How many people rail, game after game, about missed calls against our team, but seem wholly oblivious to all the missed calls which benefit our team? A bunch. Those aren't sarcastic jokes. That's an actual pattern of behavior, and based on my (nonscientific) interaction with other teams' fanbases, we're worse about it than most (in the same way that Chicago fans are worse about hopping on the bandwagon than most).

For sure. Tallon is an excellent GM when it comes to drafting. I mean, he gets high picks because his teams suck when he takes them over, but his high picks usually turn out to be pretty good. Lots of teams draft high and blow it.

Why demote Ericsson? Our defense is playing fine. We've given up 1.33 goals per game, good for 6th in the league.

I'm not skeptical of the fact that high profile players tend not to get disciplined. It happens. We've certainly been the beneficiary of it from time to time (Kronwall). I'm skeptical of this constant conspiratorial undercurrent among Red Wings fans. Not a season goes by in which there isn't some new league conspiracy to do some new nefarious thing...always to the exclusion of Detroit, of course. Look at last night's GDT. Peruse the comments and see how many are some variation of this general theme, "The refs are letting Tampa get away with something that they aren't letting Detroit get away with". It's bogus, and worse, intellectually lazy and boring. There are no conspiracies. The league lets some players get away with things, and not others, but it's the same for ALL teams' superstars. The refs make calls and miss calls all the time, but not in an effort to screw one team or another. I have no idea when, or why, Detroit fans became such babies. Our city is the most brutal, violent, roughneck, hardcore city in the country and ironically our fanbase seems to be the most whiny at times. It's gross. I vote we stop complaining about all the ref/league/Bettman conspiracies. But that's just me.

Well, I think it says something about how to build a solid team. Not necessarily a franchise, but a team. The Panthers, just like the Oilers, drafted high a million times in a row. And they pretty much universally brought their high draft picks straight to the NHL (which you should with high picks). But it seems to me there are a couple of big differences. 1. The Oilers don't surround their kids with quality veterans. Having Jagr, Campbell, Mitchell, and even Thornton helps. They set the tone in the weight room, the keep the team on an even keel over a long season, they shine during crunch time, etc. Basically, they're leaders. And they should be. You don't play in this league for 15-20 years if you're not good at something, it's just too hard. 2. They ensure accountability. Nobody in Florida seems to get a raise, get playing time, or even the benefit of the doubt just because they were drafted high. Compare that to Edmonton, where RNH gets a HUGE contract after doing not much of anything, Sam Gagne gets traded despite being consistent and hard working, and David Perron gets traded because he criticizes the young bucks. I guess that's what happens when you put a fox (or foxes) in charge of the hen house.

I'm so confused by all the conspiracy theories. It's hard to keep them straight. I thought the NHL was secretly conspiring to help the Penguins win, and Crosby to be the poster boy for the league. But then they stopped being good, and everybody told me that the NHL was conspiring to help the Blackhawks win, and for Toews to be the poster boy for the league. Now you're insinuating that the NHL is conspiring to help the Oilers win, and for McDavid to be the poster boy for the league? I guess the only thing that's consistent is that no matter who the NHL is secretly conspiring to help win, it's DEFINITELY not the team that's done all the winning for the last 25 years. It's hard being a Wings fan.

It certainly seems like it to me. At least so far. There are a couple of things that REALLY excite me about this team given how we're playing right now. First, we don't even have our best possible lineup on the ice. Add Dats, Dekeyser, and Helm and we're significantly better. That's unreal. Secondly, I actually think we HAVE been a bit sloppy. Not necessarily undisciplined, but sloppy. Like guys are still trying to figure out chemistry given their new linemates, tempo, etc. And thirdly, we're not really getting much out of second and third lines. Once we get three lines rolling (and we've clearly got the talent to do so), we're going to be REALLY hard to defend. I think this team is going to be VERY good over 82 games.

Aha. I botched that reference. Either way, I think their defense is pretty decent. Ekblad, Campbell, Gudbranson, Mitchell, Kulikov, are all pretty solid hockey players. I don't know much about their kid Petrovic, but otherwise I think their defense is solidly above average.

Their whole team is scary. Tallon knows how to draft, no doubt about it. But I actually think Hedman is overrated, so I'd be wary to calling Ekblad a "poor man's Victor Hedman". Hedman is a decent player, but he was never really recognized as some sort of superstar until the playoffs last year, when he had a strong first couple of rounds, and then got completely exposed in the finals. Ekblad reminds me of Pietrangelo, or Dougie Hamilton.

I think in general the team seems to be freer to make decisions for themselves, and play a more fluid game. Blash is a lot like Cooper in that regard. And both remind me of coaches like Vigneault and Laviolette. Their philosophies seem less prescriptive. Babs' system seemed much less so. Other than a handful of guys (Dats, Z, Lidstrom, Kronwall), guys didn't seem free to make a play if it weren't part of the overall strategy. Hard to argue with Babs' system, he won lots of games. But I'm not sure its the right one for a team full of skill players. Guys like Dats, Z, Nyquist, Tatar, Larkin, Richards, Pulkkinen, Jurco, Green, Smith, Kindl were drafted because of their offensive creativity, playmaking ability, speed, vision, etc. Not their ability to take a hit to make a simple play. There are a million guys that can do that. IMO, taking away their freedom to create cuts down on their effectiveness tremendously. I'm sure I'll get a thousand responses explaining how Babcock was a superstar at letting his players play, and that I'm biased, and blah blah blah. And obviously we've only got 3 games under Blash to compare, so we need to see how things pan out over a full season. But it sure SEEMS like our guys are getting up ice quicker, dumping the puck less, creating higher quality scoring chances, etc.

Speaking of powerhouse teams to got some high draft picks and turned them into competitive teams, how about those Florida Panthers. They're looking awfully dangerous to begin this season. Dale Tallon rules.

I disagree. I don't think they're making safer plays. The cornerstone of Babcock's defensive philosophy was "make the safe play". He explicitly said so a number of times. He wanted the forwards to play back, and get quick passes from the defense to the offense when Detroit gained possession. That was the "safe play". Get the puck out of Smith or Kindl's hands and onto some forward's stick who doesn't suck. Trouble is, they're both bad passers and are very susceptible to pressure (as are Ericsson and to a lesser extent Quincey). So teams forechecked us hard, pressured our defense, and caused turnovers in Detroit's zone. Obviously, that's not good. Blashill doesn't ask those guys to make the "safe play". He empowers them to make the dynamic play. The next time you see Smith or Kindl gain possession of the puck and immediately carry the it up ice before making a play, ask yourself if either of them would be allowed to do that under Babs. Seriously, when was the last time you saw any of our defensemen (other than Kronwall) lead the breakout by carrying the puck and making a play? Not for a long time anyway. Our defensemen are super mobile, and yet speed and mobility were never a part of their game under Babs. Even Ericsson and Quincey are mobile compared to most other teams' big stay at home guys.

Our transition game is the biggest difference between this year and last. We're basically fielding the same "crappy" defense that Mike Babcock didn't trust to lead the breakout, and yet we're extremely effective at getting the puck up the ice with momentum. I mean, having Green helps no doubt. But it's interesting that Kindl, Smith, Quincey, and Ericsson can all look so much more effective than a year ago. Take Smith, for example. Everybody knows that I'm not the guy's biggest fan. And he didn't disappoint last night. A couple of bungling turnovers, etc. etc. But the big difference is that when he did it last night, he wasn't deep in the Detroit zone. I honestly don't give a damn if he throws the puck away up ice. Sure it breaks up momentum, but it's really not harmful. Same with Kindl. Weird how that works.

Lol. Trolls. Not to be taken seriously.

Our team is insanely fast.

Lol. You really think that's why we couldn't score? Because we didn't have the firepower? We had four 20 goal scorers. Our young guys have gotten a year better. We've added a rookie sensation, an elite offensive defenseman, and a skilled second line center. Oh, and we're healthier. This isn't the same team that played Tampa a few months ago, and you know that as much as anybody.

Every team, every year, plays 3-4 guys who are ostensibly less good than their prospects. If its such a bad idea, why does everyone do it? Why will William Nylander play for the Marlies while Daniel Winnik starts for the Maple Leafs next game? Surely there's no value in playing an old, one dimensional grinder over a you skill player right? Except there is. They play a role, and they play it well. A team full of skill players and rookie prospects would ******* blow. That's why Miller, Ericsson, Quincey, Helm, etc have jobs despite being "worse" than younger guys.

Which team are you watching, the 2012 Red Wings? We've got as much, or more, offensive firepower as any team in the league. Any attempt to characterize this current team as unskilled, or offensively impotent is a load of malarkey. Our third line in tonights game is Sheahan, Nyquist, and Pulkkinen. The Babcock days are long gone, we are a skilled team again. Embrace it. Come on board for the big win.

You mean like the big, punishing, body checkers that Chicago and Tampa have on their 4th lines? Nah, those pantywaists can't hack it.. We need a 4th line like the Islanders. Clutterbuck and Martin. Hells Yeah! Those guys hit anything that moves, which is why their team is so successful.

And I'd reiterate that after two games there's no need for things to "get ugly" as Rick had mentioned. However, if you have no depth scoring after 2 games, you should do something about it, as Blash seems to be thinking. If the problem continues, we might see a change in which guys get scratched. I agree. I don't think he's a bad player. My whole point is that with our current depth, he's not going to break into the lineup in a scorers role. He'll get his opportunity on the 4th, and it's up to him to produce a little in that role (which isn't impossible). Then work his way up. I definitely think he can do it, but that's the way it's going to have to happen because we're too deep for him to take the position "I can't produce if I'm not in a scoring role". He better, otherwise it may be a LONG time before he gets an opportunity.

We've only played 2 games.

I got you. I don't think you're hating on the guy or anything, and there are definitely very few spots available. I really liked him in the preseason with Tatar and Richards. Clearly Blashill likes the idea of a big winger with Tatar and Richards because he just moved Franzen up there. If Franzen isn't ready for that kind of ice time and/or Jurco plays well in the fourth, he could very well find himself back up with those two. He needs to see this as a process...and for that matter so do the fans. Again, I don't love him on the bottom line, but I like it a lot more than seeing him on the bench.

Didn't Ovie do it in like 375 games? I think Crosby did it even faster than that. Just puts into perspective just how special those guys are given that Stamkos is an insanely good hockey player in his own right.