kipwinger

I understand that, and I agree. I'm saying that just because a guy's been a legit top sixer on another team, and he's available, doesn't mean we should pursue him. Thornton is awesome, but he's most effective playing a half-ice, power game. A game we don't play. So why give up the assets to get a guy who isn't a fit for our system and whose production will likely suffer for it? As far as my comments about an identity crisis...I agree with you, we don't have the skill to play European style puck possession hockey anymore. But even if we went out a got it, I'm not sure it will work. Even the best "skill teams" in the league (Chicago, NYR) are considerably more gritty than we are. I think it would be foolish to try and change our organization into Boston's. But I think it would be equally foolish to try and be a throwback 2008 pure skill team too. Because no matter who we sign or draft we don't have a Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Fedorov, Yzerman, (or Toew, Kane, Hossa, Sharp) type guy coming. So we'd better not hang our hat on a style of play that requires that level of skill because at long last we don't two or three of the best players on earth anymore. Better to shift to a style of play and roster that reflects that reality and can win with a little more grit and a little less skill. And to do so we need guys like Kesler, O'Reilly, Umberger and not Perron, Richards, or Thornton. That's what I'm saying.

Wouldn't the failure to have the roster necessary to carry out your gameplan constitute an identity crisis? Necessitating a change in roster or a change in gameplan in order to rectify it? Certainly a team full of guys who can't play the style the coach, GM, and scouts are promoting would fall into that category for me. I agree we don't have high end talent right now, but if we go out and get it, and it doesn't compliment what we've already got/is suited for a style of game we don't play, then I don't think it'll help much. Loading up on talent without having an identity isn't always the best thing in the world. Which is probably the reason why Columbus is a better team WITHOUT Carter, Nash, Gaborik, and Horton than they've ever been with them. They've got an identity now. Every name that gets bandied about is met with an "oooooh aaaaah" from myself and every other Wings fan. But it might be worth thinking about whether these guys will actually fit with what we've got now, and fit with what we want to be in a few years. Because sadly, aside from some fancy individual stats, adding a guy like Joe Thornton isn't going to help us. We don't have the team, system, coach, or philosophy to maximize his incredible talent.

We finally get a big scoring winger, I'm not moving that kid until I know what I've got in him. I'd rather lose Nyquist or Tatar than Jurco. He'll end up better than both in a few years when he's their age. Nyquist, on the other hand, has the highest value he'll ever have. Riding an unsustainable shooting percentage into "the next big thing" territory. He'd be the guy I'd move, but not for Yandle (who is awesome but too expensive). Anyway long story short, moving Jurco is a bad idea. Big, fast, skilled, physical, scoring forwards don't come along often. Small, skilled, euros with puck skills are a dime a dozen.

That's not the first time that Bob McKenzie has made me look like an ******* lol.

Both Spezza and Richards have done this. As have Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin, Thornton, Getzlaf, H. Sedin, D. Sedin, St. Louis, Marleau, Backstom, Kane, Kopitar, Hossa, Staal, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and soon Toews, Stamkos, Tavares, and Giroux, Sharp as well. Plus I'm probably forgetting some. If this is truly your threshold for "throwing money at them" then you'd have to agree that both Spezza and Richards were worth their contracts just like the rest of these guys are. That's some pretty illustrious company don't you think?

I guess my whole point is that I don't believe when thinking of our team we should get into a false dichotomy of skill vs. power. There are other ways to become harder to play against than to try emulating Boston and/or Chicago. We don't have the core to be either of those teams. But we can be harder to play against if we've got size, we work hard, we skate fast, and our engines never stop running. And it so happens that there are guys out there who are available and who play that type of game. To me those guys would do a lot more to give this team an identity (and get it back to contention) than all the big named stars (Thornton, Vanek, Moulson, Richards, etc.) can because they compliment what we've already got on the roster rather than being redundant or opposite of our current lineup. Plus, guys like Kesler, Umberger, O'Reilly are the exact type of guys that Babs loves. They skate hard every shift, are HIGHLY competitive, play solid two way games, and are versatile. That's how I'd make my personnel decisions this season. 1) Can the guy skate, 2) Does he work hard, 3) Is he a pain the in ass to play against. Any two of the guys I mentioned above plus Niskanen would go a LONG way right now. Of course that's just my opinion and I doubt it ever happens, but I'd love to see it. Z-Dats-Kesler Franzen-Weiss-O'Reilly Tatar-Sheahan-Jurco Miller-Glendening-Abby Babcock would drool over that lineup.

My guess would be Andy Murray from Western Michigan. He's got the pedigree and has had some success coaching at all levels.

That's exactly what I meant by difficult to play against actually lol. Not penalties, or fighting, or whatever. I mean guys who are hard to play against because they go balls to the walls, aren't timid, and can't be intimidated. An example of that I'm talking about was in this years Montreal v. Boston series. Look at a guy like Dale Weise. He skated his ass off, worked hard, finished checks, and was generally hard for Boston to deal with. All this despite his not being a fighter or penalty taker. Another example is Dubinsky for Columbus. Or Helm for us. Remember Helm against Phoenix a couple years back? Jovanovski had no way of dealing with Helm's forecheck. It completely ruined his series. O'Reilly is hard to play against like that. So is Kesler. So is Umberger. These are the types of guys I'd be targeting. Not the Thorntons (Joe or Shawn), Perrons, Vaneks, Moulsons, etc. We've got the skill already. And we don't have the makeup to switch over to full on power (e.g. Boston, Anaheim, LA, San Jose). But we could be a better Montreal or Columbus (as I've already said).

And the thing is, we might be moving back toward that style (high skill) but I don't know if the league is the same anymore. I mean, I don't think we're much (if any) less skilled than the 2008 team up front. We lost Sammy, Filppula, and Hudler, but have gained Tatar, Nyquist, Jurco, Sheahan. It's pretty clear that our current defense is not nearly as skilled, and I think that's the point of KH wanting to address it this offseason. But even if he does, even if you could build the 2008 Wings all over again, would that team win now? I don't know the answer to that question. But it does seem like even the skill teams (NYR and Chicago) are a more even mix of skill and grit than our last Cup team. So it makes me wonder if the making over the back end (while totally necessary) will be enough if we don't get a little harder to play against, and a little bit physically tougher up front? What got me started thinking about this was Ryan O'Reilly. I was wondering to myself whether I'd rather have O'Reilly or Nyquist. Same ages (roughly), both defensively responsible, both offensively capable (Nyquist perhaps even more so). But I view O'Reilly as being so much more difficult to play against because he's a physically tougher guy. I'm not saying that I think we should trade Nyquist for O'Reilly. Realistically it will never happen so why bother wishing. But I am saying that I don't think we'll find success again until we gain a little bit more physical toughness (in the O'Reilly, not Shawn Thornton) sense. And that may, at some point, have to come as the expense of Nyquist-like skill.

Another question I've been asking myself when it comes to what we need/want this offseason is this: What kind of team are we, and what kind of team do we want to be? It's clear that there's a lot of talent available this offseason. A whole lot of teams aren't happy with the outcomes of their seasons and are looking to shake up their rosters. But just because a guy is talented, or has played the right role in the past, doesn't mean he's a fit. For a few years now I've felt we were a team without an identity. Not skilled enough to be a skill team, not gritty enough to be a gritty team, and not big enough to be a power team. Now we've got some young talent coming along which displays some skill, and was drafted as such. Do we keep going in that direction and try to overwhelm teams with pure skill? Do we augment it with power? Do we augment it with grittiness? Personally, I think we can't expect playoff success on pure skill. Teams keep us to the outside and block shots. And we don't have the core go completely over to power like a Boston or Anahiem (whose best players are huge). I think the smartest move is to go gritty. Replace just a little bit of high end skill for fast, tough, rough guys. Be like a better version of Montreal or Columbus. Which would preclude acquiring guys like Thornton or Perron. But that's just me.

Just listened to the entire interview with Ken Daniels posted in the news feed above. Sounds like they'd like a d-man, but he says nothing's likely to happen up front if Alfie comes back.

His manhood? Literally or figuratively?

Changed what dynamic against Vancouver?

I actually think Thornton would be good with Franzen. He's made worse wingers look WAY better. But I still don't like the idea of acquiring him.

I appreciate your certainty lol.

Special how? I get that you like enforcers, and I'm certainly not going to try and talk you out of it, but you're starting to inflate Thornton's qualities into something mythic. Even as far as enforcers go he's not all that great.

If life has taught me anything its this...A) an increase in the quantity supplied always drives down price, and B) snakes make horrible birthday presents.

Haha what do they know? They just sell beer. Did Michael Jackson make "Thriller" by waiting around? Did Steve overtake Johannes as the greatest Gutenberg while taking it easy? Did Hulk Hogan pick up and slam a GIANT by resting on his laurels? Didn't think so.

Another high-end(ish) center on the market along with Spezza, Kesler, Stastny, and (maybe) Thornton. Keep driving those prices down boys, and hopefully they'll get low enough for Kenny to consider.

I don't think this is unreasonable. If you're not competing and you're not trying to become competitive I'm not sure exactly what you ARE doing. Waiting around? If life has taught me anything it's this...A) Sun-dried tomatoes are better than regular tomatoes, and B) fate is not kind to those who wait around for things to happen to them. You make your own breaks.

I like a good redemption story.

I wish. Seriously, I'd really love for Bert to get a Cup. I've got nothing but sympathy for the guy. I'd rather he win one than Alfie.

Jesus what a nightmare. I really hate dwelling on that trade because I realize we were over a barrel (sort of). But every time I see it written down on this site I want to puke. That package would go a long way toward landing Ryan Kesler right now, AND he'd be under contract. Kudos to Poile on the MASSIVE trade rape.

And thus ends my long time dream of cheering wildly as Todd Bertuzzi is handed the Stanley Cup first after it is presented to Zetterberg (and cheering all the more wildly knowing that the rest of the hockey world is HATING what they're seeing).

You're on a roll tonight buddy! Keep everyone on an even keel. Lord knows we need it. And here's hoping you're rewarded for your faith.