kipwinger

How is he going to help the kids any more than the vets we already have? We're not Edmonton, we've got tons of highly successful veterans on our team. And also, anything you gain in that regard is offset by the fact that he's old, slow, small, and even in his best years was only ok at actually playing defense.

God bless you!

Neither was Jurco...or Sheahan. Yet they both made us more difficult to play against than all the mediocre old hacks in the world.

Agreed. So rather that do something just to do it, why not give the spot to the most deserving kids and let them gain valuable experience which WILL help us in the future. Lord knows what 82 games under Babcock's tutelage would do for Ryan Sproul's development.

If I'm understanding the arguments correctly, we should sign Dan Boyle because he'll give us a right handed puck mover (but not one good enough to help us advance in the playoffs), and he'll provide leadership (but not any more than you already had in Kronwall, Ericsson, and Quincey). I'm sold. Your eyeball test says Smith is awesome in the same way that your eyeball test says Miguel Cabrera is awesome. Gotcha. I'm not going to argue with you about what your eyeball test tells you. You win.

You wrote a lot, and some of it I agree with. So I just kept what I wanted to address, and numbered them to make my responses easier to follow. 1. I'd like to know whether our organizational philosophy is going to be "tread water until the kids are ready to win" or "try to win now while keeping as many kids as possible for the future". Either way we've got more kids than we can fit, now or in the future. There's no way that Sproul, Ouellet, Marchenko, Backman, Jensen, Smith, Dekeyser, Kronwall, Ericsson, can all be on the same team at the same time. Figure out who factors into our future plans and who doesn't. Then trade whoever is left over in packages for future picks (if we're going the tread water route), or impact players (if we're going the win now route). Then, depending on which philosophy you pick, get your kids (or your newly acquired impact players) into the lineup. 2. These guys have plenty of people to "show them the ropes". Kronwall and Ericsson specifically. They've also got Dats, Z, and (probably Alfie) too. How much more leadership does this team need? All the guys I just mentioned have had more successful careers than any possible stop gap acquisition we'd make. 3. I don't think anyone here would suggest that KH should make any moves "just to make them". I think the reason SOME people were upset about the Legwand trade is because we massively overpayed for a guy that the coach used on the fourth line. It's a false dichotomy to think that the only choice is either "be happy with ANY player acquisition" or "be happy with NO player acquisition". What everyone obviously wants is RESPONSIBLE and/or impactful player acquisition. The jury is still out on whether Weiss will be that for us going forward. 4. Nobody is spoiled. We're all fans and we all want to win. Those who want change feel that not enough has been done to ensure that this team is competitive in recent years. And the results seem to support that (early playoffs exits). Others are equally disturbed by the results, but probably feel differently about the solutions. Saying people are spoiled because they're sick of early playoff exits is dismissive, and largely inaccurate. But even if it weren't, if wanting to win a Cup rather than get stomped by the Bruins makes us spoiled; it's a moniker I'll gladly carry for a while.

I get what you're saying buddy, and we spoke about this last night. I definitely don't want to fall into doomsday land, but at the same time I legitimately feel like many of us are dangerously close to crossing the line between wanting to acquire players that help us win, and wanting to acquire players just so we don't feel like management has lost it. I'm all about the former, but believe doing nothing at all is better than than the latter. If stop gaps are all that's likely to happen, I'd prefer to see these young guys begin their careers right now. At least that will help us in the long run. Signing mediocre hacks like Stralman or Gilbert accomplishes nothing (aside from being able to say "look we signed a puckmover!"). It would be Ian White 2.0. "No need to acquire real talent like Wisniewski or Erhoff, we got Ian White and Mike Commodore and at bargain prices too!" Do you think the Jets would take Tatar and a 3rd round pick for Wheeler? Because you've used your 1st on Perlini and we don't have a second on account of that totally sweet trade for Legwand. If that's the case maybe we can trade Smith and our 4th or 5th for Byfuglien as well lol.

If your entire strategy for winning a Cup someday is "the kids will fix it", doesn't it behoove you to actually...ya know...get the kids in the lineup? Since it's pretty clear there's no will to go trade or get a free agent who would actually improve this team, why bother signing anyone at all? Personally, I'd much rather see Sproul and Marchenko/Ouellet as a third pair, and Jurco, Mantha, or Pulkkinen than see us go out and acquire somebody like Stralman, Gilbert, Boyle, Alfredsson, Cleary, etc. etc. etc. At this point, the most optimistic outcome is that all available spots go to the kids who most deserve them. But even that is starting to look like a pipedream. What the f***?

Powers you say?

It's nice of you to care lol. I was already having a bad morning and the thoughts of bringing back Cleary, Alfie, and Gustavsson (who I'm actually fine with) temporarily overwhelmed the better angels of my nature. I'm still (cautiously) hoping for something substantial. We'll find out in a couple of weeks.

If we burn Dan Cleary in effigy outside Joe Louis Arena do you think everyone involved will get the point?

Good points, I should have just said this and you'd have totally been cool with it (or at least been mum on the issue).

Why would the Wings management feel obligated to commit multiple years to him if there weren't something more substantial from Philly? If there wasn't the structure of a deal present they'd have no reason to commit to him for longer. There must have been some reason to believe that he was leaving something on the table to become a Red Wing or else there would have been no need to make any commitments. Secondly, when reporters use words like "Babcock pushed" and "Babcock urged", it implies some reluctance on the part of Holland. Why would Babcock need to urge Holland, or push Holland to do something that he was already trying to do? Especially when you add in that it was done "at the 11th hour", which suggests that Babs was pushing and urging Holland to do something he wasn't already doing at the last possible second. Surely you don't need me, or these reporters to go to huge lengths to explain the use of context clues in their articles. Again, you're welcome to disagree. But to say my position is "baseless" is false. I've given you links, and now I've explained the logic. I'm also not sure why I have to go to such lengths to make this point to you. I definitely didn't see you requiring equal amounts of proof when people were blaming the Clearly signing on Holland. If nothing else, I think you'd agree that the blame is 50/50. So why not jump to Holland's aid while he's getting blamed for the Cleary debacle? It's almost like you're relentlessly combative when you disagree with someone and kinda ok with unsubstantiated comments when you feel the same way. Edit: You'll have a much easier time downplaying Babs' role in this the second you can show me an article saying "Holland pushed..." or "Holland urged..." Babcock to let Cleary back on the team.

I'm as eager to pretend things are "all Babs' fault" as you are to absolve him of any possible culpability. Which is to say that both are gross over generalizations. I don't hate Babcock, I just don't think he's beyond his share of the culpability when things go awry. Now, on to the way you addressed me. You don't have to agree with anything I say. I'm sure you're aware of that. But in the future I'd appreciate you not insinuating I've made things up, or make condescending references to my "elaborate claims". I'm not stupid, or a liar, and I resent being represented as such. As far as evidence for my "elaborate claims", I guess I'd start with all these... "In Daniel Cleary's case, when he was brought back at the 11th hour last fall, at the urging of coach Mike Babcock, it was with the understanding the Wings would ameliorate Cleary having left a three-year deal on the table in Philadelphia." http://www.freep.com/article/20140605/SPORTS05/306050048/detroit-red-wings-ken-holland "Cleary was a surprise, because he had bad knees and better offers elsewhere. But coach Mike Babcock wanted him back. The team leaders wanted him back – from Howard to Zetterberg to Datsyuk. And he came back on a one-year deal worth $1.75 million" https://sports.yahoo.com/news/nhl-s-hottest-scorer-gustav-nyquist-shooting-for-goals--glory---playoffs-after-starting-the-season-in-ahl-161232581.html "At the 11th hour, coach Mike Babcock pushed for Cleary to return, resulting in a one-year contract with promise of future employment." http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nhl/2014/04/27/red-wings-free-agent-list/8294157/ "Babcock had been pushing hard for Holland to re-sign Cleary, a versatile, hard-working heart-and-soul type of player who can play on any line and in any situation." http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2013/09/daniel_cleary_followed_his_hea.html "Detroit Red Wings coach Mike Babcock has been a big supporter of Daniel Cleary since the forward earned a contract with the club following a training camp tryout in 2005. Babcock pushed hard for the team to re-sign Cleary in the off-season." http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2013/11/red_wings_mike_babcock_hopes_s_1.html It's not too hard to see why I'd think Babcock was the primary motivator in bringing back Cleary when two of the Wings most prominent beat writers, as well as two reasonably well respected national outlets reported as much.

I'll agree about Niskanen, but not about Boyle. Boyle put up 36 pts. on a team which was second in the league in goals per game. San Jose is WAY more offensively capable than we are. There's no way he duplicates those numbers. The guy's washed up and his highly skilled offense pulled him along. He'd put up terrible numbers for Detroit, and our defense would remain small and slow, and after getting manhandled in the playoffs next season we'd all be wondering "what happened?". What happened was we were cheap and took a flier on a guy who anybody could see was done.

Why for listening to "the bestest coach eva", and his team leadership, when they said that re-signing Cleary was an absolute must? If he hadn't done that and Cleary put up moderately good numbers in Philly everyone would blame him for NOT listening to Babs. Without the coach's intervention, Cleary is a Flyer right now. It's as simple as that. This I agree with. He likely won't make the team and will retire rather than play in GR. It's just silly that it's even an issue right now. But I'll be amazed if he takes even a single shift as a Red Wing next season.

Not really, those guys didn't play for huge chunks of the season last year. The only way they hurt us was by taking up roster and cap space that could be used better elsewhere. But it's clear that the roster and cap space aren't going to be used better elsewhere so what difference does it make. You can blame Sammy, Bert, and Cleary until you're blue in the face, but they weren't the ones getting dominated by the Bruins. It was our defense who is either too dumb, unskilled, or weak to advance the puck, and a forward corps which both A) too small and one dimensional and B) either not mature enough, or too old, to play against guys in their prime. I don't see how bringing Alfie back and picking up some mediocre puck mover is going to help that. Christ, we've had two mediocre puckmovers in the last 3 years. Why not just hang on to White or Colaiacovo if you want a 2.5 million dollar, smallish, puckmover?

Whoa Whoa Whoa, don't everybody go blaming Holland here. Babs was the one who wanted him back. Babs was the reason he left money on the table in Philly. And Babs was the reason he got a commitment beyond last year from the Wings. If Holland had his say Dan Cleary would be entering the second year of his three year contract with the Flyers right now.

Is it starting to become clear to anyone else that with the exception of some lame ass acquisition like Dan Boyle or Tom Gilbert we're going to have the EXACT same team as last year? All the resources in the world won't make a difference if there's no will to use them. Puke. Expect D and Z to be hurt again, expect the kids to have good but not great seasons, expect Alfie to be re-signed and then be hurt/run out of gas, and expect our defense to be poor again. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Didn't they offer Maltby a two way contract in his final year as well? It was basically, make the team or retire? I could be wrong.

Well this both a blessing and a curse. No longer will Bruins fans have the opportunity to cheer on a local hero. On the other hand, at least Shawn Thornton will finally be able to pursue his true calling in life...dragging pretty blond women to the top of the Empire State building.

If Winnipeg is willing to trade anyone, I'd rather have Wheeler. He's a MUCH better player than Kane, though I've got nothing against Kane either. Also, I'd be reluctant to put too many eggs in Pulkkinen's basket. He's got a monster shot but he seems to be a one trick pony. I know you've got to give talent to get talent so I'm not going to shut down people's suggestions, but if it were humanly possible I'd MUCH rather trade Pulks than Tatar.

I'll take your word for it because I play the nothing lol.

I don't think anyone would argue that a good team should have a mix of grit and skill, North Americans or Euros. But beyond that kind of a platitude I don't think there's much to say. Anybody who thinks they know the exact ratio to land a Stanley Cup should feel free to post it. If not, then I'd imagine it depends on the coach, organizational philosophy, and existing roster.

That's the most reasonable set of defense pairings you've posted in a while. I'm proud of ya kid!