kipwinger

This really bums me out. He's one of our better PK guys, and one of only a few forwards on the team that Babs doesn't have to beg to shoot the puck on net. Hopefully Patty gets it together before the playoffs roll around.

and put up 80 pts. a year ago, and averaging a point a game right now after his slow start.

Franzen and Kindl would get Nash out of Columbus, everything else being equal. It will never happen, but they'd take it and so would I.

Question: How open would you be to trading Hank? Answer: None at all.

Well said. Question: do you ever get tired of being reasonable and considerate when you respond to this stuff? Seems like having to sift through ten tons of reactionary bulls*** everyday would begin to take it's toll. Either way, keep up the good work.

Never really understood the whole point of hating another team. I am happy when the Wings win, I'm irritated when they lose. Their winning implies that whoever we play has to lose, so in that regard I'd like to see other teams lose, but if they aren't playing the Wings then who gives a s***? Seems kind of pathetic to be overcome with sheer delight when a team wins or loses and it's not even the team you'r a fan of. The Chicago Blackhawks, or the Blues, or Rangers or whoever, are not Al Qaeda for Christ's sake. In my opinion this is some obnoxious thing "macho" sports fans do to make a bigger deal out of a game then it really is. Celebrate when we win, be bummed for about two minutes when we lose, and then go read to your kids or something.

It was a good hit, and a bad call. Nuff said. Seems like every time a call gets blown there's always a bunch of people screaming referee conspiracy or the end of the game as we know it. The game's still physical and always will be, I don't think anyone actually believes that they didn't blow calls in years past.

Good on Big Bert. Can't wait to see Lidstrom hand him the cup first.

It seems pretty obvious that the article was written tongue in cheek. I take it as more of a compliment than anything.

He's a new member and probably wanted to get involved and start his own post. Why be a dick about it?

Also, the argument that you should trade a guy just because better players are on the trading block is dumb. Unless you have the best player in the world at every position, there is always a better player out there, which according to this rationale means you should always be trading...constantly...until somehow you create a dream team consisting of hybrids made from the DNA of Datsyuk, Weber, Rick Nash, and Lidstrom. But then you'd have to trade for a goalie. Saying that you should trade a guy for someone better means that the only two untouchable Wings are Lidstrom and Datsyuk and everybody else should be traded or considered trade bait. I'm sure they'd play real well with that hanging over their heads.

I'm really sort of flabbergasted. I never, in a million years, thought I'd ever be in a position where I'd have to defend Cleary against charges like these. I guess if you really, honestly, feel this way about Cleary then you win. There is probably no reasoning with you, as your viewpoint is obviously extreme to the point of absurdity. So you just win. Cleary is a worthless, pathetic, non-player who has only made the team through sheer happenstance, and should be regarded as an aberration who fluked his way onto an NHL team when a washing machine is worth more to that same team. He is most definitely not a solid third line Winger with average offensive ability and situational value. Most definitely not that. You win. And your argument is perfectly reasonable too.

I'm sorry, I'm must be having trouble seeing, because it looks to me like the big tough Blues have pissy pants when the Wings hit too hard.

Well reports from Khan at Mlive.com suggest the Wings are interested in trading for a top 6 winger and a bottom 6 grit guy. Doesn't specify if the bottom 6 guy will be a center or not, but considering Emmerton's limitations it's not unrealistic to think that's where the addition would come in to play. Also, I agree with pretty much everyone's frustration about Abby's lack of production, but as he plays good defense, finishes his checks, and has good size, I think he's a valuable asset for any playoff bound team. When the games become tighter, guys like Abby increase in utility.

ESPN is reporting today that the going rate for Bobby Ryan is two top prospects and a top pick. A few weeks ago they wanted roster players for roster players. I'm still not sure EXACTLY what it's going to take to land him but considering he's young, proven, and under contract, I don't know why the Wings wouldn't take a long hard look at him and try to make something happen if the new ESPN report is accurate.

Why would they move Bertuzzi down?

Danny Briere just got a concussion, wonder if we'll see any stories in print about his doctor's appointment? Like a few others have said, who gives a s*** about this guy's doctor visits?

I love how Eddie O claims that the Semin hit was both late and "up high" when in reality it was neither. Even when the Blackhawks aren't playing he's a fanboy.

That's a pretty weak slew foot. Have a look at this one, which is coincidentally the same moment I realized Dan Boyle is a gutless piece of trash. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y_L2iR7VZA

I think he'd need some teeth in order to accomplish that.

Well done, as usual.

So here's the conclusion of the article which supposedly "does against" those people who disagree with you: CONCLUSION: Overall these results suggest that fighting by itself does not significantly help a team score more goals or win more games, but it can often increase short-term momentum (i.e. the RATE at which they are getting shots) for one or both teams. Statistically speaking, if fights happen randomly it will take about 60 fights to equal one win, but if their timing is managed by the coach it could take as few as 30 fights to equal one win. PowerScout has uncovered many other factors that can provide a much greater contribution to winning than fighting, such as having a good penalty killing unit. So, who's the one disregarding contradictory evidence again? I'm confused.

I agree, but you're talking about some of the biggest and hardest hitters in the league...I'm not comparing Eaves to Clutterbuck and Clowe, I'm comparing him to Malty, who was an effective fourth line grinder without being the biggest or baddest dude in the league. My whole argument was that our bottom six is no less physical than it was in our hey day. Yes, Clowe and Clutterbuck are big, tough dudes...and yes, San Jose and Minnesota are both more physical teams than Detroit, but it doesn't seem to have brought them any more success than we've had...in fact, less so. This whole debate began with the assertion that Detroit is too soft to be successful in the playoffs, and that when they've had success in the playoffs it was because we were tougher, or grittier, or something...which I think is a baseless argument made by people who just happen to prefer a more physical game, regardless of its efficiency.

I've already shown you video evidence of the types of hits Eaves throws (obviously not every hit is big, but nobody can boast that), however it's inaccurate to say that he never throws big hits. Secondly, isn't throwing a whole bunch of little hits, but doing it all the time, sort of a cornerstone of the "grinding" concept we're all so fond of?

Find a stat board, look at Maltby's hits per season and compare it to Eaves'.