kipwinger

Totally agree. I'd just add Dats, Z, and Helm to the lineup we've already got and not mess up the chemistry the other lines formed. I'd actually rather have that happen and leave the kid line intact than have Alfie come back, forcing Helm into the bottom six and Jurco out of the lineup. But that's just me.

Yeah, but so did Mule and Nyquist. Franzen-Legwand-Nyquist was the best line we had all year. So I don't see any reason to not try and replicate it with Weiss. The second best line was the kids, and barring a return by Alfie we'll have Tatar-Sheahan-Jurco back together too. We'll essentially be adding a Zetterberg-Datsyuk-? line to the two best lines from a year ago.

That's not even remotely true. He did not play Left Wing for Grand Rapids. At all. Again, he was drafted as a center, and has always played center. I have no idea where you're getting this. I'm really not trying to be contrary here, but you're just not right on this one. The most recent example I can give you is that a year ago, when the Wings were eliminated, Sheahan centered Jurco and Callahan for GR. Go to the player page for every team he's ever played for and he's listed as a center. Go to press releases for when he was drafted and they'll say "Detroit selectes center Riley Sheahan". Aside from one random sports website that nobody has ever heard of or used, nobody has ever listed Sheahan as a left wing. I have no idea why you're making this your Alamo. Get over it. Sheahan is a center. Here's an article referencing his position at St. Catherine's...http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/2010/04/30/riley-sheahan-arrested Here's an article discussing him being a center at Notre Dame...http://blog.mlive.com/snapshots/2010/06/red_wings_pick_riley_sheahan_2.html Here's one referencing his center position in GR...http://www.cbsnews.com/news/red-wings-prospect-riley-sheahan-found-clad-in-teletubby-costume-faces-dui-charges/

Scrolling back through this thread makes me chuckle. How funny would it be if Dekeyser was the one who played hardball and not Tatar. Ya know, after a lot of folks made Tatar out to be some ego maniac who was just biding his time before holding the team over the coals.

I think it's a pretty big stretch to say that he's a "natural wing" when he's played the vast majority of his career since juniors at center, included every single game he played in the AHL and NHL. He may have played the odd game at wing here or there, but he was drafted as a center and has never deviated from that in any meaningful way. Again, you had a point with Glendening, but you're stretching with Sheahan. I mean, Spotrac? Really?

When?

I know, that's why I said that. Filppula was good for a year and bad for a year. But considering he's maintained that level of play after moving back to center suggests that it was more about him taking a big step forward in his development, and less about some positional advantage.

Agreed. He had the big year on Z's wing, but then he remained there the following year and it was a disappointment (albeit he was injured throughout the season). But he just posted 58 pts. as a center in Tampa, leading me to believe that his production increase that year with Z had less to do with his position and more to do with his linemates/ice time.

This whole thing makes me think of that time Babs put Filppula on the wing. I can't imagine this turning out any better. Which isn't to say Fil was bad on the wing. He was ok on the wing. But I'd rather have a winger. Plain and simple.

Sheahan is not a natural winger. He's played center since his days in St. Catherine. I can't speak for Glendening though.

I know this will seem like a totally crazy concept but here goes. If we've got so many centers that we can't find spots for them all...and one as good as Helm has to be moved to the wing...couldn't we have traded one of them in a package for a natural winger? Isn't that how other teams do it? Trade the thing you have in abundance for the thing you don't have much of?

Why don't we just have an entire team full of two way centers of varying degrees of effectiveness and then we can play them at every position? "And starting in goal, number 8, Justiiiiiiiin Abdelkadeeeeeeeer!"

Doesn't Datsyuk have one of the league's highest shootout percentages? Seems like a no brainer to me.

I want nothing to do with a Zetterberg, Datsyuk, and Alfie (or Nyquist) top line. It should be wildly clear over the last five or six post seasons that we don't have anyone scoring down low. Giving another perimeter guy top line minutes is a recipe for failure. I'd rather lose a little bit of offense but change the dynamic of our attack than keep throwing the same one dimensional attack at teams over and over and over. Jurco showed a willingness to use his body to protect the puck, was strong in the corners, and had no problem creating offense in traffic. Plus, despite rookie linemates, limited minutes, and no powerplay time, his offensive number projected very favorably to Alfie's over a full season (and should only increase with D and Z). As such... Z-Dats-Jurco Nyquist-Weiss-Franzen Tatar-Sheahan-Abby Miller-Helm-Glendening/Callahan/Cleary

Jesus, can you imagine? "I tried to reach [Detroit Red Wings owner] Mike Ilitch, because I knew Wayne would have loved to go to Detroit," Pocklington said. "But it was basically done so quickly, and that was it. There was never a bidding war. There probably should have been, looking back." Interesting read to say the least. http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=679887

Firstly, I've heard you rail about how bad a stat +/- is about a thousand times. So it seems like you're nitpicking stats that you'd otherwise argue aren't worth a damn. But I'll play along... In, the last decade of his career Gretzky had a negative +/- seven times. Five of those times his team didn't make the playoffs (e.g. they were bad teams). The fact that he drives possession doesn't mean he's going to make bad teams into defensive stalwarts, and I never claimed such. But it does mean that on good defensive teams (like the 97 and 98 Wings) his "lack of defense" will likely be made up for by his contributions to possession. I think the reason why that seems less clear based on +/- stats is because increased possession leads to more powerplays (e.g. those Wings teams were on the PP all the time, hence "our PP is our enforcer), and the additional offensive zone time (and points) gained on the PP does not affect the +/-. For example, if Gretzky was doing his thing in the offensive zone, creating offense on the cycle, and generally pressuring the opposition (like he did his whole career), the opposing team A) can't generate offense (so you're not playing defense) and B) has a greater likelihood of taking a penalty (so you're not playing defense). When they do take penalties, and Gretzky's team scores, it won't affect his +/- but nevertheless his possession lead to A) scoring, and B) long periods of time in which his team didn't have to play defense. He did this ALL THE TIME during his career. But don't just take my word for it. Here's two time Stanley Cup winning coach Daryll Sutter making the EXACT same argument while explaining how Marian Gaborik's defensive shortcomings wouldn't matter to LA. "The game’s changed. They think there’s defending in today’s game. Nah, it’s how much you have the puck. Teams that play around in their own zone (say) they’re defending but they’re generally getting scored on or taking face-offs and they need a goalie to stand on his head if that’s the way they play,” said Sutter. http://www.sportingnews.com/nhl/story/2014-03-10/la-kings-news-darryl-sutter-quotes-corsi-for-definition-sidney-crosby

Nobody said he wasn't a star. Many people, however, have suggested (rightly) that he wasn't considered the untouchable, legendary, captain of a dynasty franchise until much later. He was obviously a star. He was scoring 100+ points a season at that point.

I love Jurco on the top line. Also, when old man Alf inevitably gets hurt Mantha gets that third line spot. I also Iike the idea of giving one reserve spot to Callahan. But what about the defense? That's much tougher.

I'd add that in getting Gretzky you wouldn't sacrifice team defense, only individual defense. Individually he's worse than Yzerman, no doubt. But he's so much better of a possession player that your team defense would improve simply by virtue of having to play in the defensive zone so much less. But other than that, I agree with most of what you've said above.

Well it's all hypothetical anyway isn't it, because they were already much better than anyone else either way? Hence the two Cups. The whole point of the thread though (hence the title "What Might Have Been"), is what would have happened if Gretzky had come here in a trade in 1988. I contend that we'd have still won the Cups in 1997 and 1998...and perhaps more along the way. Gretzky was that good of a possession player. Yzerman had only one clear advantage over Gretzky and that was defense, and Yzerman's defense (puck possession team) wasn't really a game changer in those series. Gretzky's additional offensive acumen, I argue, might have been. Tell me the additional offense wouldn't have been useful in the 7 games series' in 91 , 93, 94, or the 6 game series in 96 as well? Gretzky was SO much better than everyone offensively, that the team would be better overall than with Yzerman's. Why? Because Gretzky massively drove possession to such a degree that on a puck possession team like Detroit, it would lead to huge overall net gains. Both for the offense (where his ability to control the puck would lead to more zone time and increased production for everyone), along with the defense (which would be better by virtue of never having to actually play in their own zone). In short, Gretzky is the ultimate possession player, and the Detroit Red Wings of the late 90's where one of the ultimate possession teams. Of course they'd be better.

No, I get your point (and Hoon's). My position is that you'd be nuts not to make the trade in 1988. And when you did, you'd still have had a better team in 1997 and 1998 to win the Cup...if not some sooner. Those teams didn't win back to back years because of Steve Yzerman's defense. They won because they were the best team assembled since the 1991 and 1992 Pens. Gretzky's defensive shortcomings (which are overblown) would have been more than made up for by the fact that he was (even as an old man) a MUCH better offensive player than Yzerman, and would have only been more so if put on a dynasty team with the likes of Shanny, Fedorov, Larionov, Lidstrom, Konstantinov, etc. etc. etc. I guess my main point is that when you look at their respective stats, it looks like Stevie wasn't all that far behind Gretzky in 97 and 98. But that's because everybody on those Detroit teams had MASSIVELY inflated numbers because of just how good the team was. Put Gretzky on those teams and instead of 97 and 90 pts. he probably has 125-130 both years. Sure Stevie played better defense, but who cares? We had some of the best defensive teams in the history of the game with or without Yzerman's defense.

Because Gretzky was putting up more points on significantly worse teams. At every single stage of their respective careers Wayne Gretzky was a superior player. I know that it's become fashionable over the years to downplay just how good this guy was, but the truth is, he's not universally considered the greatest hockey player in the history of the game because he was actually worse than Steve Yzerman. Again, this is just a case of hometown nostalgia. As I've already said, it's like saying you wouldn't trade Ray Bourque for Bobby Orr (I know, same team) just because Bourque was really good too. Given their respective careers up to that point, you'd be a complete and total fool to not trade Yzerman for Gretzky in 1988.

Of course it's a "what if", but that's the point I'm trying to illustrate. Whenever anybody blames injures for the woes that have befallen us over the last five years, they're doing the same thing. They're assuming that having Dats, Z, Helm, and Franzen healthy will make up for all the team's shortcomings. But that's not really true. In 2011, and 2012 we were 19th and 13th in the league in injuries (e.g. not badly injured), and yet we had exactly the same results as we did a last year and the year before. Why? Because aside from Dats, Z, Franzen (and back then Lidstrom), our team was full of plugs. The very same plugs who would have been in the roster MORE had they been healthy last year. We already know what a healthy season of Dats, Z, Franzen, Cleary, Bert, Helm, Abby, etc. looks like. It looks like 2011 and 2012...when we didn't do anything at all in the playoffs. And back then they were all younger and had Lidstrom too. What makes you think it would have been different last year? Everybody acts like without injuries we'd have had some super team full of good kids and productive veterans. That's not true. We started the season with too many forwards and not enough cap space. And even if we did have the roster and cap room, no way do Sheahan or Jurco make that team out of training camp. Without extended injuries they don't ever get a call up. Maybe Nyquist would have, but add him to the roster below and it's still bad. So, in reality, we'd have had this... Z-Dats-Abby Franzen-Weiss-Alfie Cleary-Helm-Bert/Tatar Miller-Andersson-Eaves/Tootoo/Sammy Kronwall-Ericsson Quincey-Dekeyser Smith-Kindl Lashoff That team would get MURDERED by any Cup competitive team in either conference. Finally, an aside: Give me a break on the Chicago series. You're talking about having our full roster minus a rookie defenseman and a third line center. No team is fully healthy in the playoffs. If your margin of victory is so narrow that a third line center and a rookie defenseman can tip the balance, then you probably weren't meant to win anyway.

He's not speaking literally, he's speaking figuratively. When people nostalgically look back at Yzerman, they remember him how he was in the Bowman years and rarely remember the early part of his career. He wasn't a selfless, gutsy, two way, leader back then. He was a showy, one dimensional, goal scorer. At the time of the Gretzky trade, Yzerman wasn't the Stevie Y that we all remember as "The Captain", though he was in fact the captain of the team. That's what he's saying.

We were talking about over the last five years. All of those guys (Bert, Cleary, Sammy, etc.) had significantly bigger roles in the last five years than they did last year, were not regular scratches, but were not in the lineup nightly because of injuries. Net positive. And even if that weren't true, you're still making my point for me, which is that just because injuries severely diminished our success last season...they didn't noticeably impact us (for the worse) the four post-seasons before that. Edit: Actually, I take that back. Even last year. Without injuries there were not enough roster spots or cap space to call up ANY of Nyquist, Sheahan, Jurco. No injuries means Dats, Z, Franzen, and Alfie would have been surrounded by garbage all season. Look at our opening day roster. You think that team's winning anything? Nope.