kipwinger

I don't disagree about Larkin having his own line, or playing around with Richards on the wing. We obviously need to have three lines going offensively. It's only going to make us that much more offensively potent. But I'm not sure that I agree our goals haven't come on high quality scoring chances. Both of Zetterberg's goals have been finesse plays. Larkin's was a pure snipe. Abby's one timer was off an awfully creative play from Zetterberg. It's definitely too early to tell how things will end up, but if we're scoring at a high percentage now, I can't imagine how it will change much when Tatar, Richards, Green, Nyquist, Franzen, etc. start contributing regularly. We're only going to get MORE offensive and we're currently top ten in goals per game (not that it matters much given how few games we've played).

Athanasiou...rather. ******* autocorrect.

I can't speak for anybody else, but here's the problem I have with your thought. Of course Athansiou is better than Miller. But he's not better for the role. By which I mean that to be a good fourth liner you need to play defense, kill penalties, block shots, agitate, hit, etc. Athansiou is our future second line center. I don't want him blocking shots in the NHL. I want him learning how to take over a game offensively in the AHL. I don't care if he ever blocks a shot, or kills a penalty. In fact I hope he doesn't. I don't want him to get hurt. His potential is too good, and his future too bright, to have him toiling away on the fourth line just to say "well he is in the NHL at least... Nobody would argue that he isn't better than Miller. He is. But you don't need a thoroughbred to do donkey's work. You need a donkey. And Miller is a cheap, effective, donkey

The guy's a good coach. I'm not taking that away from him. I'm just baffled that anyone would argue that his system isn't primarily defensive in nature. That's what makes him good. Why argue against it? If Detroit had been built around rough and tumble, two way Canadian trained players he'd likely have won more during his tenure. Unfortunately for him, all our best players are skilled, European trained, offensively creative players, so we didn't. With Columbus' current lineup, Babs would probably have won two or three Cups. With the Rangers, he'd probably have not won any.

I didn't say anything about shooting more. As a matter of fact I specifically mentioned getting better quality scoring chances. Which is probably why we've got one of the league's highest scoring offenses despite having fewer shots. I'm also not "remembering the worst" about Babcock. All of his teams have transitioned slowly. Even the good ones. Team Canada wasn't exactly lighting the world on fire offensively, despite having obviously superior offensive talent. His game strategy is build around shot suppression. He's said so. Every team he's ever coached has clearly been so. Yet when I say he's not offensive, and plays back in the d-zone you come a runnin' to defend him. Edit: Also, doesn't it make sense that a primarily defensive team would need to have a high volume of shots to score? Shooting a bunch doesn't necessarily make a team more "offensive". I'd imagine that Blahill's team will have a better goals per game, and a higher shooting percentage, and a much lower number of total shots. Just a guess.

My thoughts: Smith had a couple of boneheaded turnovers in the first period, and then settled down for the remainder of the game and was fine. He wasn't noticeable offensively, but that's to be expected. He was pretty strong on the boards and had a few pretty hard hits while pinching off wingers breaking into the zone. Kindl didn't have the early gaffs, and seemed to distribute the puck a little better in the O-zone, but neither where all that bad (or good). If the plan is to move Quincey to the third pair, then I think it depends on what Blashill wants that pair to be. A little more defensive, physical, and competitive? Smith. A little more offensive? Kindl.

I agree. No use in rushing him. He's way ahead of schedule on his return, why not play it safe and extend it out. Especial given how well we're playing in his absence.

I remember Johnson eating Datsyuk alive in the POs too. He does that for time to time lol.

I completely agree. And it would be the least successful conspiracy ever, considering how often we win. So why worry about it? But it's crazy, I live in the DC. I watch nearly as many Caps' games as I do Wings' games. I talk to their fans, I go to their bars, I read their sports pages. And yet, I never ever run across people who are so wholly convinced that A) their team is being screwed, or B) that another team is being unfairly helped. For example, they all hate the Pens, and Crosby, for being whiny, arrogant, and entitled. But they don't think the league is secretly guiding them toward success, and they have a more well established rivalry with the Pens than we do. Does anybody else who lives in another teams' city have the same experience? Unlike your average American, I'm able to multitask. It's what got me this bitchin' govt. job in the first place. YOLO.

I'm not really derailing the thread. The title of the thread has two components A) McDavid had a dirty hit, and B) the refs didn't punish him for it. Elsewhere you noted that the league will "make sure you hear about McDavid :-)". Which ham handedly insinuated league intervention on behalf of McDavid. I was just responding to that. If you didn't want it to be a part of the discussion, you should have left it out. I'd suggest titling the thread "Connor McDavid's Dirty Hit", and left it at that.

We have three great pairs anyway. Even more so when Dekeyser is back and Quincey is on the 3rd. I'm still not sure why you'd break up a pair that works well together in order to create three that have never played together before. Or why you think that would make us better? Than again, don't pay attention to me. I actually like Ericsson on the top pair so maybe I'm just justifying my own preferences lol.

Good point. That's why player development is so important. Most top five picks can step right into the NHL. Most 2nd and 3rd rounders can't. They need time.

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.