kipwinger

Kronwall is actually handy in the shootout. I remember watching a game against the Wild a couple years ago when the shootout went seven or eight rounds and Kronwall finished it for Detroit. It was pretty sweet.

Point taken, however if you look at most professional sports leagues (or maybe all of them) there is some sort of revenue sharing agreement. The fact that some teams lose money does not mean the league as a whole is unstable. One could easily say the same thing about the MLB where the league is doing just fine, but A LOT of teams lose money.

Arguments on the other thread aside, I honestly think Andersson will play more games for the Wings than Tatar will. I just don't know where Tatar fits in. He's too unfinished to beat out Nyquist or Brunner, and by the time he gets a shot guys like Jarnkrok, Jurco, Tvardon, and Frk might be ready to go ahead of him. I think he'll get traded sooner rather than later.

Nyquist or Brunner.

No, what got us going is that you said you'd sell the heart and soul of our club because better players would be available, which I called classless and trying to buy a cup. You focused on the second part because you thought you could make a better argument. However, the fact remains that even if I were willing to concede (which I'm not) that Ilitch didn't buy one in 2002 (and try in other years), it still wouldn't change the fact that you seem to favor buying teams and would gladly sell off all the players who worked hard and stayed loyal to the club for a bunch of free agents. Remember, only one of us said that the only two players he'd keep were Datsyuk and (maybe) Helm. And so I'll say again, it's classless and cheap and I hope I never hear you say another thing about class, loyalty, or tradition in hockey because it clearly doesn't mean a single thing to you.

You know which Cup winning team wasn't comprised of more that 1/3 free agents, contributing a sizeable portion of it's playoff points? The 2007-08 Wings. You've made your desire for "superteams" clear before. Again, that's good old fashioned hockey if I've ever seen it.

When more than a third of your playoff roster accounting for some 45 playoff points comes from free agency you sure as hell didn't draft/develop the team internally. What would you call it? Note: HAHA, I didn't even read the rest of your post above where you said the only players you would keep are Datsyuk and (maybe) Helm. You don't give a damn what I'm saying, you've already admitted you'd piss away every other player that we've developed and buy new ones. Why am I even talking to you about this, apparently you not only don't mind if an owner buys a team, you've admitted you'd do it yourself given the opportunity. Classy dude, good old fashioned hockey at its best.

And clearly if you have the choice you'll show no appreciation or loyalty to a good leader, teammate, and hockey player and instead err on the side of money and young legs. Classy dude. He bought the cup in 2002.

Boy it would be super exciting to see Detroit buy a cup again. WooHoo, just what I've been missing. Screw all of that drafting, developing, and working young players into your system, that's not fun or interesting. It's way more sweet when Mike Ilitch can just buy anyone he wants. That's what real hockey looks like. The guy who posted above me just said he wouldn't sign Zetterberg! Yeah f*** the guy who's played his whole career for you, is the heart and soul of your current lineup, and took a pay cut to stay with you during his prime. Get rid of him! Ilitch can buy better. I seriously hope that nobody who is in favor of this, and especially nobody that would kick Zetterberg to the curb, ever talks about class in hockey again. You clearly don't know it, don't have it, and wouldn't recognize it if it bit you in the ass.

Any company that turns a 3.3 billion dollar profit is "stable" and the NHL is no different. It looks less stable because it shares less money which, as the article you linked points out, is what keeps small market teams in the other leagues competitive. The only thing that restricts the NHL's growth potential compared to the NBA, NFL, or MLB is that it really can't be played by kids growing up down south. And without a lifelong commitment to a game, it's hard to build fans. Other than that, it's no less "stable" than any of the other major leagues.

Woe to whichever side loses this court battle. They're playing a game of chicken, and whoever comes out on top is going to absolutely neuter the other bunch. Especially for the players. If a judge should rule against them in all of this, then the deal they'll be forced to accept will be MUCH more lopsided then the one they turned down a couple weeks ago. Hope your lawyers are good ones boys. I'm sure both sides' legal teams are telling them it's in the bag, but only one is telling the true. The other side, no matter who it is, will wish they'd be a little more reasonable two weeks ago.

51/76, forgot a lot of easy ones. Lang, Markov, Lebda, Lilja, Modano. Damn.

I read this as Cam "Fowler" and was in total disbelief. I'm tracking you now.

1. Correct, you didn't say it explicitly. However when you say "Holland loves his soft fourth liners", call the 05-06 team "probably the softest of all time", sarcastically saying "lots of grit on that team", and then challenge me to name tough players who have played since the lockout, you strongly insinuate it. Now you can say all day long that such an insinuation wasn't your intent, but I'm going to have to call bulls***. 2. May and Downey did not play with the Wings for very long, but neither did Leino, Ritola, Hartigan, Langfield, Mowers, or Calder and you were more than happy to use them as evidence that "Holland loves his soft fourth liners". May and Downey, incidentally, played more games for the Wings than most of the guys you mentioned. 3. Perhaps the reason he doesn't keep guys like Downey, Drake, and May around is because they are a dime a dozen and so there's no need to sign them to long term contracts. Also, maybe because all three of them retired after playing in Detroit. Those tough players who aren't old or perpetual fourth liners do get signed long term, like Maltby, Shanan, Draper, Kronwall, Chelios, and Stuart who were all kept around for a while.

Ok, I'd love to oblige you. Brendan Shanahan, Jiri Fischer, Chris Chelios, Danny Markov, Todd Bertuzzi, Dallas Drake, Darren McCarty, Kirk Maltby, Kris Draper, Aaron Downey, Brad May, Niklas Kronwall, Brad Stuart and now Jordin Tootoo all played for the Wings post lockout (not that post lockout should matter since Holland was the GM before the lockout), and all of them are noted for their tough and/or gritty play. I think you are understating the number of tough guys the Wings have used simply because most of them aren't goons and don't take stupid penalties, which given your screen name is something you obviously enjoy. But to say the Wings have not used gritty/tough players under Holland is wrong. Dead f'ing wrong.

Mowers (52 games), Langfield (33 games), Emmerton (71 games), Hartigan (23 games), Ritola (7 games), Calder (19 games). Man Ken Holland loves softies fourth liners, which is why they are constantly playing more games than tough guys like Dallas Drake (65 games), Aaron Downey (60 games), Brad May (40 games), Kocur (136 games), McCarty (200+ games), Malty (200+ games), Draper (200+ games). Try all you want, but whenever anyone tries to make the argument that Ken Holland doesn't like tough payers they are demonstrably wrong. For every Ville Leino you can point at, I can point out a Dallas Drake who played for the team much more often and in more important roles...all on the fourth line. Holland uses tough guys just as much as anyone else in the league, get over it.

Ken Holland loves soft fourth liners huh? You mean like Dallas Drake, Aaron Downie, Brad May, Joey Kocur, Darren McCarty, Kirk Maltby, and Kris Draper? That soft, or softer?

Tom Renney was his coach in Edmonton. Tom Renney is now our assistant coach. Tom Renney hated Linus Omark and thought that he was lazy and entitled. No way the Red Wings slap their new coach in the face by doing that against what is certain to be his advice to the contrary.

I had a lengthy response typed in my post above, but after reading this post of yours I decided out of kindness to not continue this conversation any longer. It's brutal to see what a lack of hockey has done to you. I replaced that post with a joke. A not very good joke.

Did you hear about the new courduroy pillow? It's making head lines.

If the owners were sick of him then he'd be fired. If the owners didn't want the voting rules changed to give Bettman more power they wouldn't have voted for it. And most importantly of all, if the owners didn't want a lockout they wouldn't have voted for it...unanimously. Who gives a damn how much he gets paid, everything that Gary Bettman did, does, or does not do was sanctioned or is currently being sanctioned by the owners. Everything.

Are you trying to imply that Gary Bettman already is accountable to other people and that he didn't unilaterally force a lockout on the players, owners, and fans because he's a vicious little weasel who hates hockey and hates all of us? That's a novel perspective.

Look I already mentioned that there were a lot of guys more capable in the organization than Emmerton. My whole point was that just because there are guys who are better, doesn't mean that Emmerton sucks or that he won't turn into a decent NHL player. Now on to your post. None of Sheahan, Jurco, or Brunner have ever accomplished a single thing in professional North American hockey. Sheahan and Jurco aren't even good AHL players yet, let alone capable of being compared to Emmerton at the NHL level. One day they might be, but for now, you're reaching.

Why in the world would our roster look anything like that?

Who was it that said Emmerton had grit again? I'm still drawing a blank on that one.