kipwinger

Saying you wouldn't trade Yzerman for Gretzky is a lot like saying you wouldn't trade Ray Bourque for Bobby Orr (yes, I know, you wouldn't need to. But you get my point). Sure he's a good player, but you're getting the best player in the history of the game (at his position) while he's still in his prime. Of course you make that trade.

I've always felt Gretzky was underrated defensively, but that's neither here nor there. Not that Gretzky had terrible linemates in NY in 97 or 98, but he'd have had better linemates here. Plus he'd have had a WAY better defense to get the puck up to him. And our powerplay was super good too. This is all purely speculation, but I think on those Detroit teams he puts up considerably more points than he did with NYR. Edit: I had previously said that our PP was better than NYR. I can't find stats for 1997, but in 1998 the Rangers had a better PP than us, so I stand corrected. I still stand behind my point though. We had more finishers all around and that would have increased his totals significantly given his passing.

I stand by my original statement. Gretzky retired in 1999 at the age of 38 with 62 points. In 2002 Yzerman was 37 and put up 48 pts. So the question is, do I believe a 41 year old Gretzky (the age he would have been in 2002) could put up more than 48 points on that team? Yes, yes I do. Despite his retirement, I'd still rather have had Gretzky in 2002 than Yzerman.

Don't get me wrong, I love Yzerman as much as the next guy. But I don't even think twice about that trade. You take the same teams as we had in 97, 98, and 2002 and swap Yzerman for Gretzky and we're WAY better.

This gets better. The Kings lost their first rounders in 89, 91, and 93. Detroit's first rounders in 89, 91, 93? Mike Sillinger, Martin Lapointe, Anders Eriksson. Notable Detroit draft picks in 89, 91, and 93 who came AFTER the first round? Lidstrom, Fedorov, Konstantinov, and Osgood. We could have made the trade and still drafted the core of our dynasty teams. Holy Hell.

I hope not considering we're in the EXACT same situation with Stephen Weiss.

I think he's trying to say that if you sent him down you'd clear 900k and only have to swallow about 400K. Conversely, if you sent down Quincey (for instance) you'd clear 900K and eat about 3.3 million. Hence, low risk and high reward for MDZ. Don't get me wrong, I'm not heartbroken we didn't sign MDZ. I don't really care. But I do think your debate will be more productive if you two are at least speaking the same language.

I wish I could "like" this 2,000 times. Definitely my favorite post in a good long time. Touche my man. Touche.

I'm not going to agree to disagree, because that's weak. But I am too tired to disagree, so I'm calling it a night. Good talk though buddy.

It wouldn't be like buying anything because they're your prospects, you didn't pay for them. Also, selling makes sense when you've got so many other (tvs?) that these ones will never get used. Also, quality guys get traded for unproven prospects and picks (in packages) all the time. Bobby Ryan did. So did Thomas Vanek. Just to name two in the last year. Package them with a top six forward and you could have Marian Gaborik or Jason Spezza or James Van Riemsdyk. Again, I'm not saying just throw guys away. But I'm sick of everybody acting like the future of the Red Wings is hanging precariously in the balance, and should we move Backman, or Pulkkinen, or Tatar, or Nyquist, or Quellet, we'll all of a sudden become the Florida Panthers. We won't. Just so long as we don't move ALL of them. Saying that drafting and developing is the key to success does not mean that you can never, EVER, move a homegrown talent lest the organization crash and burn. Just move them intelligently (e.g. not for David Legwand).

Their future IS secure. They've got so many NHL ready prospects they can't get them all into the lineup. What does waiting accomplish? Their untouchables are still untouchable and the other guys are so far down the ladder they can't get a shot at the NHL to increase their value. Guys like Pulkkinen and Backman are as valuable as they're ever going to be as AHL players. And they're not going to crack the NHL to increase their value as they're each behind at least two other (better) players. Why couldn't they be traded?

Go look at my posts. I've said 200 times that I don't mind him being traded. I was against trading him for Myers or Green. Trade him in a package for Yandle and I'll smile all the way to opening day.

Lots of team have won in the cap era by doing both of those things intelligently. You're saying you don't want to be black and white but then you're going ahead and being black and white. Philly vs. Edmonton. Philly or the Oilers are not the only models. They're just the two (negative) extremes. Competent management shouldn't be like either Philly or Edmonton.

I completely agree, but I'd extend this thought to trades as well. I get so tired of this lame old "the only way to win is draft and develop" bulls***. Elite teams all over the league have a good combination of homegrown talent and guys they brought in from elsewhere. And in almost all those cases they either overpayed via trade or free agency to get those pieces. Yet everyone at LGW acts like if we were to trade a couple of our young players or prospects we'd be mortgaging the future. We wouldn't. Nobody's suggesting we trade ALL our young players. The obvious goal should be to build from within AND make (intelligent) free agent signings and trades. Don't think it's possible? Take a look at the team who drafted and developed Quick, Brown, Doughty, Toffoli, Voynov, and Martinez AND ALSO traded for or signed Jeff Carter, Mike Richards, Justin Williams, Marian Gaborik, Robyn Regehr, Jarret Stoll, etc. I can almost hear it now... LGW: "You can't trade Jack Johnson for Jeff Carter. Johnson's the future. Carter's a locker room cancer and he's not committed to two way play. Babcock will eat him alive".

Well to be fair, it's not like the Detroit Red Wings are an injury free bunch. He'd probably fit right in, sitting there with the other half of the roster watching the Griffins steal their spots in the lineup lol.

Feel free to think what you want, I'm not here to convince you. I'm just here to say that fans expectations aren't "unrealistic" because the organization purportedly has the same expectations. I'm sick of this whole "Red Wings fans are spoiled with success" argument. You're supposed to want your team to compete for the championship every year. You're also supposed to be bent out of shape when you don't think your team IS competitive. That's what being a fan is all about. Not sitting around casually observing the team and then clapping at the end of the game. Ho hum.

Yeah, particularly sports hernia. Remember Brent Gilchrist? A lot of guys never fully recover from those.

Check out my edit above. He's been pretty seriously injured since 2011. Also, I wouldn't say he "lost value". He's probably still a pretty valuable player to any team. It's just that with injury history he comes with a pretty significant risk as well. Hence the decrease in his contract.

Maybe...but you're speculating. For all you know he didn't sign anywhere because he was working through an injury and wouldn't have been able to pass a physical. You're seeing what you want to see. I'm just saying that a guy who is young, has decent size, excellent skating, and who has shown himself capable of putting up big points and playing big minutes typically doesn't just lose value overnight. It's not like the guy forgot how to play hockey. Edit: Two sports hernia surgeries between 2011 and June, 2013 were probably a pretty big factor in his decreased production. Same has been true of Weiss and (in other sports) Verlander and Cabrera. I'd imagine this is a bigger factor in the reluctance to sign him than some notion that he's "jumped the shark". http://www.sportingnews.com/nhl/story/2013-06-13/michael-del-zotto-injury-update-rangers-coach-john-tortorella

In large part I agree with many of your points, but I do want to say two things. 1. Ken Holland himself, on many occasions, has stated that the Detroit Red Wings organization expects to compete for the Cup every year. If fans have "unrealistic" expectations, it's only because they've listened to (and believed) what management has been telling them. 2. Aside from that, even if it's "unrealistic" to WIN the Cup every year, it's not unrealistic to expect the organization to TRY. Which is really all that most fans want. Nobody really thinks we can win every single year forever. It's a little bit patronizing to talk about fans and their "unrealistic" expectations when all they really expect is that the organization try to compete for championships. That's the whole point of competition after all. To do so requires that management ice the best possible team each year. Many fans (rightly or wrongly) believe that isn't happening.

Which people feel that way?

You're welcome to feel that way if you want. But based on every single metric of success taken thus far in their respective careers, Del Zotto is a better player. Hell, this year was Del Zotto's big "down year" and he had exactly three fewer points than Smith. To date, Del Zotto had been WAY better than Smith offensively, and probably marginally better defensively (or at least he was in 2012 and 2013). But my point was simply to say that he's a guy who's a work in progress yet still has big upside.

Del Zotto will be fine. The Rangers just brought him up too early and f***ed his development up for a while. He's a better version of Smith, shows promise offensively and is still pretty bad defensively. He'll come around.

I'd rather have Lame Beer than Lamb Beer. Just sayin'.

Haha. Well I think it goes without saying that Lilja the greatest pound for pound fighter in the NHL's long history. But it just goes to show I was right all along. It says a lot about how pointless and idiotic fighting in hockey is when a guy who barely did it was the best there ever was. Oops...just went there.