kipwinger

Just take in a lot of games with other knowledgeable fans. You'll pick it up as you watch more of it. And ask a lot of questions. If I can teach hockey to my girlfriend then I think anyone can learn.

I don't really have the inclination to hate other players, seems like a waste of the time I could be devoting to the Wings awesomeness. That said, I usually get irritated with guys who screw with our players. So... Perry, for fighting Datsyuk (to a draw haha). Clowe, for calling out Kronwall (and then getting what he asked for). Pronger, for fighting Cleary and illegally hitting Homer in the playoffs. Kesler and Selanne, for not taking their hits like men (e.g. the way Jakub Voracek did). I can't really think of more at the minute, but if you're not a Wings player or you haven't screwed with one, then you're pretty much not even on my radar.

Six years is not too long for a young guy, as you mentioned. Especially one that is aggressive, is awesome on the power play, has a laser for a shot, and has put up 50 pts. in the past. I'd have spend on Wiz, rather than give Ericsson the raise he didn't deserve at the time. As for Erhoff, I seriously doubt he plays into his 40's. When he retires, his contract comes off the books. No big deal. Even if he doesn't, he's a tradeable asset later on, teams put a premium on puck moving defensemen at the deadline when they're trying to make a playoff run and need help on the blue line. But yes, it was a long contract.

3 to 4 million would have gotten us Erhoff, 5 would have gotten Wisniewski. Both of those guys are better than anyone on our defense not named Kronwall. I get irritated when I see people suggest that it's no good to overpay. I'd personally rather see Holland overpay for talented players than overpay for average ones.

Look, as far as GM's go I think Holland is one of the best, so I think he does a good job. However, you can't lose 3 of your top 4 defensemen in the course of two years and not bring somebody in. Obviously you can't replace Lidstrom, but you can replace Stuart and a very old and beat up Rafalski. Players were available, they weren't signed for one reason for another. I think that was a mistake. So to answer your question, yes I think he does a good job, but he didn't that time.

Yeah, I guess I misunderstood you. I was definitely in favor of signing Allen as well.

I've read that the kid has a cannon of a shot. How accurate is it? I love players that shoot hard, but shooting hard AND accurate is the real key in the NHL.

Definitely a possibility the longer this thing goes. If either side feels like they were forced to accept a deal they didn't like, just to get back to work, then the threat is there for next time. All the more reason why each side needs to eventually make concessions without all these little caveats this time around. Real concessions are hard to swallow, but leave you in a better position to negotiate a little easier the next time around.

According to Lebrun's article on ESPN, the league wants 6 or 7 years on the deal. The NHLPA only wants five. So if your reasoning holds true, the players are apparently looking forward to another showdown with the owners more than the owners are. http://espn.go.com/b...r-what-it-means

1. They weren't traded, their rights were. 2. I'm not really too upset about a guy who is mildly dirty as long as he's physical. That Allen video didn't break my heart. 3. Salo and Gonchar had stats either better or favorable to Kronwall last season, despite their age. Hamrlik wasn't great last season, but his 13 points and plus 11 are still better than all but two of our returning d-men. 4. Also, I think you're stretching this "wanted to be back in..." such and such place argument. Carle played 12 games in Tampa about four years ago. Fairly sure his roots aren't sunk too deep. Jovo hadn't played in Florida in 13 years, and I can't find one source that suggests that the reason Pikanen signed with Carolina is because of Jussi Jokinen.

I think the point that he was trying to make is that over the last three off seasons at least 10-15 defensemen have been moved (or were available) that are significantly better than anyone we've got aside from Kronwall. Of course they weren't going to replace Lidstrom or be a number one d-man, but they were still better than what we're left with now. Edit: Here's just a cursory glance at some of the defensemen who have been moved in the last three offseasons, none of whom landed in Detroit but all of whom are an upgrade over almost every defenseman on our team. This list is limited to top four d-men, and doesn't include defensemen acquired in trades. Still, it does give you an idea that guys were out there to be had. 2012: Suter, Carle, Wideman, Allen, Garrison 2011: Bieksa, Hamerlik, Jovanovski, Wisniewski, Pitkanen, Salo, Erhoff, 2010: Gonchar, Hamhuis.

Yeah, this is bulls***. Not to say there there wasn't equally backhanded b.s. in the owners previous proposals, but for the union to say they've made significant concessions and then throw this out there should attest to the fact that each side is trying to take the money and run, all the while saying they're ok with a 50/50 split. If the players don't give a legit concession on the HRR, the owners don't concede on the "make whole" component of the contracts and we don't see any hockey. It's really that simple. But shame on anyone who says the players came down to 50/50. Absolutely not true.

I totally agree, that was all I was saying really, is that something which seems good superficially might end up not being acceptable to one side or the other because of an accumulation of all the little details. Let's hope that isn't the case this time. I REALLY need to see some hockey soon.

This sounds fairly legit, though in every instance so far the initial reports tend to make any proposal (by either side) seem a little bit more rosy than they were in actuality.

Both, though I do have to wonder about anyone who can suggest that Holland didn't have anything to do with our Cups in spite of the fact that he was either wholly or partially responsible for drafting Zetterberg, Hudler, Franzen, Datsyuk, Fischer, and Kronwall, and signing or trading for Shanahan, Chelios, Hasek, Hull, Robitaille, Drake, Stuart, Malty, Kocur (the second time around), Larionov (the second time around), Samuelsson, or Cleary. Because obviously none of those guys contributed to the cups (especially 2002 and 2008) in any serious way.

Do you say this stuff because you actually believe it, or because you think it's really clever to instigate people? Seriously, I have to know.

Yeah, that's a fairly significant oversight on my part. He voted for the lockout though, so my point is still the same. That wasn't the point I was making at all.

That's interesting because I know shop.nhl.com sells all kinds of merchandise with team logos on the front. I don't recall ever seeing a player that owned a team before. Good try though.

Well that's probably the most reasonable thing I've seen written on the issue. Well done.

I think the owners are entirely justified in wanting more than half of the HRR, given that they accrue ALL of the costs and take ALL of the financial risks. The players are entirely justified in wanting their ALREADY NEGOTIATED contracts honored, and not wanting unnecessary regulation of future contracts. Unfortunately, in negotations where millions of dollars are on the line, getting to a reasonable position takes time, and the final compromise has to be fought for (by both sides). I find it especially distrubing that anyone (not that you're doing this) would suggest that this is some sort of pissing contest between Fehr and Bettman. Neither of them do a single thing that they aren't mandated to do by their respective constituencies. All of the vehemence, hyperbole, etc. by the fans is the result of our third party view of all of this. It's easy to point a finger at one (or both) sides of this because in reality its not OUR millions of dollars on the line. It's always easy to tell someone else what they ought to do when the tough decisions aren't ours to make, and the consequences aren't ours to accept. Who cares who's right or wrong? I don't. I just want to watch Datsyuk turn Ryan Suter inside out.

I honestly can't believe how much stone throwing is going on here. Who knew LGW was so full of morally, ethically, and behaviorally PERFECT individuals? I know I screwed up a lot in my youth, then learned my lessons and got over it. How lucky for all of you that you've never done anything wrong or irresponsible before. Nothing to get over. Easy. Here's hoping Riley (and the rest of us degenerates) can one day live up to the high bar that you've set for us. Lord knows you'll all be there waiting to point a finger and give us a good old fashioned self-righteous sermon if we don't.

What a stand up guy. No longer content to jerk people around because he can, Ed Snider is beginning to finally see the light. What's the matter Ed? Did you expect toying around with your minions to be more fun (and less costly) than this?

Sanctimonious much? I'll go ahead and assume that you've never been drunk and drove, or been tipsy and drove, or been legally drunk and but felt fine and drove. The kid f***ed up, it's not an uncommon screw up, and he's not a s***ty person or a dangerous degenerate or anything else. He's just a stupid kid who made a mistake and got caught. Now he gets to pay for it.

My original comment had nothing to say about (or to do with) Gary Bettman. Would you prefer I go back and edit in something about him so that your standard broken record blame game seems a little more organic and a little less forced or what? I'd be glad to help you out.

Thanks for the heads up, I'm apparently behind in the "news that infuriates me" department, haha.