kipwinger

Lol. I'd take Lesnar. He's a Paul Heyman guy.

You can't have it both ways. Injuries can't be the reason you're no good one season, and then health the reason you're no good the next. I mean, I'm all for deconstructing narratives in an attempt to get at the truth, but I think we've got to safely assume that in general its ALWAYS better to be more healthy than less healthy. There may be the occasional exception, but for the most part, the premise "healthy=good" is pretty much a starting point.

I think realistically we'll see this: Tatar-Pav-Helm Abby-Z-Cole Nyquist-Sheahan-Pulkkinen Miller-Glendening-Andersson/Jurco I'd add that this lineup is dumb, and won't do a whole lot of anything. But that's what we'll see, because Mike Babcock (for the time being) is the coach of the Red Wings.

Are you insinuating that our competition is so much better than last year, that despite a largely healthy lineup all year, and despite growth from key young players (Tatar, Nyquist, Sheahan, Dekeyser), we're no better or worse than we were a year ago with a team full of injured vets and rookies? I don't buy it. Montreal and Tampa are in roughly the same shape that they were last season (i.e. tops of the division). Boston is worse. Toronto is worse. Buffalo is worse. Florida is better (but beat us each time we played a year ago anyway). And Ottawa the same or slightly better. I don't see some sea change in the quality of competition within our division. Particularly when we're, across the board, a much better team (if only because of our health and the growth of young players, nevermind our new additions). And even if all those teams improved dramatically since last year, didn't we? Didn't we hear over and over and over how good our team really was, and how it was only the injuries that were holding us back? Didn't we hear how Babcock dragged us into the playoffs despite an AHL roster, and just wait until next year? Didn't we watch as everyone blamed our shortcomings on Bertuzzi (gone), Cleary (not playing), Sammy (gone), Kindl (rarely plays), Quincey (much bettter)? How aren't we better?

I seriously don't understand what the hell is going on with this team. I don't expect us to be the first in the division, or conference, and didn't expect that to start the season. So no big loss. But I also didn't expect a late season collapse either. We're a better team, across the board, than we were a year ago, or even two years ago. Five 20 goal scorers. Bigger. Faster. Healthier. Oh the defense is bad? How's it worse than it was? Dekeyser is better than a year ago. Quincey is better than a year ago. Kronwall's not worse. Smith's no worse. Zidlicky is a huge upgrade. Only Ericsson is playing worse than he did a year or two ago. Goaltending? Same deal. Jimmy's not been great since his injury. But he wasn't great a year ago either. And this year at least Mrazek has been good enough to win games. AND Jimmy was only bad for the second half of the year. He was excellent to begin the year. We're a better team. A healthier team. An improved team. In every regard. And we're getting the same result. I don't understand.

Didn't someone ask before the game why Smith gets criticized and Dekeyser doesn't? Lol.

That was a mirror image of the Hartnell goal against Columbus. Zidlicky needs to take that pass away and Smith needs to take the guy wide open in front of the net. That pair is a train wreck.

I'm expecting good things from James Tiberius Howard tonight. We're good.

Not me. We aren't getting either of them so what do I care if they're the next Crosby or the next Daigle? f*** Connor Mcdavid!

Yeah wouldn't want them too worn out to keep up their current level of play. That could be detrimental lol. But in all seriousness, good point. I hadn't even looked at the upcoming schedule and was talking as much about all the days off the last two weeks as I was about the current one.

"There's always concern, but when I look at our last little bit of games here I like how hard we played," coach Mike Babcock said...We came out, we were organized, we came after them, Babcock said. They scored. We didn't score as (much). I thought (Coyotes goalie Mike) Smith made some real good saves for them." Genius.

Dan Cleary will come in and be our best player in the playoffs. He'll do it on heart alone. Because that's what he does. And while we won't win the Cup, the long playoff run will be exactly what Mike Babcock needs to become the highest paid coach in the NHL. He'll enter next season at the top of the mountain, ready to bring his revolutionary new message to the team. The message? Try harder. Try like Dan.

Aaaaaaand the Wings got another day off today. They seriously take more days off than any team in the NHL it seems like. If I just lost an absolute stinker to a bottom dweller, I'm pretty sure I'd find something for the guys to do the next day. Collective therapy perhaps?

2 time all-star AND Olympian, if I'm not mistaken.

I'm completely perplexed by all of this right now. Sure our goalie isn't playing great. Sure our defense isn't spectacular. I completely get that. But is our defense any worse than Pittsburgh, or Ottawa, or Vancouver, or Minnesota? Is our goalie worse than Winnipeg or Calgary? I mean, what confuses me is why we're falling off a cliff right now. If we were just a mediocre team, I'd get it. But mediocre teams are playing more consistently than we are. We've got the same weaknesses as every other mediocre team, but they're staying the same or trending up, and we are in a tailspin at a time in the season when you want to be heating up. We added a 20 goal scorer, a 30+ point defenseman, and they're both playing great...yet somehow we're worse off for it. How does that happen?

Sooooo, what the hell is going on with the Red Wings anyway?

Sooooo on the plus side, Kindl looked good eh?

Rusev doesn't suck, he's just enigmatic.

Abby! Nice goal, nice stretch pass by Kindl. Who thought that would ever get typed on LGW?

Because the day was saved by a secret chemical compound when the heroes were being dominated and were exhausted.

Why o why wasn't space jam a baseball movie. Too apros pro?

Well lest we blame it entirely on the whipping boys, doesn't anybody even want to mention the fact that zetterberg lost the battle in f front to the actual goal scorer? Cuz...ya know...he did.

Jesus, think you could find the time to marry her after two kids Helm? I mean, no rush or anything.

Quenneville took over Chicago a year after they finished 10th in the West and 20th in the NHL. Babcock took over the Wings a year after they finished 1st in the West and 1st in the NHL. Quenneville's team wasn't quite as bad as Babcock's Anaheim team, but he's never stepped into a team as good as the one Babs did. So again, all of your criticisms of Sutter and Quenneville apply just as much to Babcock. If the guy with 700 wins, 2 cups, and 4 good post seasons did it all because of his stacked team, then the guy with 500+ wins, 1 cup, 4 good post seasons also did it on the back of his super skilled team. And why is it such a sin for Quenneville to win with good teams? You're supposed to. Babs had world class teams and won less often. His win percentage with the Wings is lower than Quenneville's with the Hawks (marganally, I'll admit). Is there some coach out there who did more than Quenneville with a less skilled team? Certainly not Babcock, as you've already admitted, since he only ever won with (your words) the most skilled team in the league (too). Like you, I don't object so much to your characterization of Babcock. He is a good coach. And he did an exceptionally good job that first year in Anaheim. But I don't understand why you're so quick to dismiss Quenneville. If Babcock (or any other active coach) had 2 Cups, 2 President's Trophies, made it to the conference championships 4 times, made the playoffs 15 times, had 1 Jack Adams Award, and was 3rd all time in wins, nobody would argue that he's the best coach in the league. But you think he's "average to above average" because he didn't win more Cups with his other teams, and because his players were too good? I don't know man.

Lol. What a hater.