kliq

Not really, because its not like 2008 is when D, Z, Kronwall, Lidstrom started to regress/retire. IMO our rebuild on the fly started in 2013 after Lidstrom left and D and Z started to regress. The re-build may fail, I am not saying it is being done well as I dont know how it will turn out. But you cant count 2009, 2010, and 2011 as "re-build years".

Us. Between 2002 and 2008 when we lost the likes of Yzerman, Shanahan, Fedorov, Larionov, Hasek, Luc, Hull etc. This is why Holland is doing it, he has done it before and done it successfully. Granted last time we still had Lidstrom, but this is why.

A lot of people imply it is, not you I admit, but others do.

Agreed, there is definitely a double standard between the two. Some fans are so fueled on emotion that anything that happens when Howard is in net becomes his fault because they feel they have been burned by him in the past, while with Mrazek he is the one that makes them feel optimism. They dont want to believe that he can do anything bad so they find excuses for him. I have always been a fan of Howard and felt he was given a raw deal in Detroit, and Mrazek I do believe has the makings of an elite goalie. But right now, Howard is playing like the better goaltender.

I'll do my best to respond: 1) Hindsight is 20/20, its very rare for teams to just start rebuilding/tanking when they are still considered a top team in the league. 2) I believe that Larkin and Mrazek have superstar potential, I feel that AA has potential to be our 2C (you said he lacks......lacks what?) and Mantha I believe has potential to be a top line winger. I am not sure why you are so hard on Mrazek, I dont believe he is elite right now, but I think he definitely has the potential to be a top goaltender in this league, he shows flashes and has something special. You said it best, our D is junk, yet he still has come off as good as he has, he just needs consistency and better D in front of him. Its very early to tell, but Svechnikov seems like he also has alot of potential, possibly a top 6 guy (too early to tell though). Why does it upset you when people have optimism with our prospects? I get some overrate them, but you seem to always put down our prospects any time you get a chance, is it because you feel a top guy must be drafted in the top 5? On D we are hurting, I think DD can be a very good #2, but we lack a number #1 This is why I really want Trouba. I believe Sproul has top 4 upside, top 6 downside, XO/Marchenko are likely third pairing guys, Russo, Saarijarvi, Cholowski, I dont know too much about them as I have never seen them play, but we will have to wait and see, hence the re-build. D are very hard to draft, most top D are not even drafted high, it usually takes them a lot longer to develop. 3) I get you are not a fan of the rebuild on the fly, but again, the entire concept of it is to keep the team competitive while you re-build. The Wings may fail at the "keeping competitive" part of it, but the re-build part will take a couple years to assess if it was a success or a failure most based on how the guys in #2 end up panning out. If they flop, its a fail. If they succeed, its a success. I really dont understand the debate here. This isnt even me defending it, this is me just saying it like it is. If it was up to me I would be doing things slightly differently and I would be playing more of the kids. 5) I dont like tank jobs, I have seen this fail so many times in my life and for every 1 that succeeds (ie. a Pittsburgh, LA, or Chicago) there seems to be 5 that flop (ie. Arizona, Columbus, Atlanta, Buffalo, Edmonton (pre McDavid), Carolina, Colorado etc.). I wonder how many top 5 picks these teams have had combined since 2006 with NOTHING to show for it, and I dont mean just no cups, but missing the playoffs year after year after year. 6) 100% agree, I'll give the Preds their props. They were my cup pick at the start of the year. I just want to add, you mentioned Babcock earlier. I have never put down Babs as a coach. I have said he is overrated but not because I think he is bad or even not great. I think he is a top coach along with others, but sometimes the narrative on here is that he is an entire level above all (which is overrating him). Babs leaving hurt us, and I wish he was still here as with Babs I think we could be much better and that it would increase the probability of becoming contenders sooner then later.

This isn't all directed at you Dickie, but I'm sick of people making it sound like drafting top 5 is a lock to get an "elite" guy. It really only gives you a 50/50 shot. Ill take a 4 year sample size to make my point: 2008: Stamkos, Doughty, Bogosian, Pietrangelo , Schenn - I think most would agree that 3 have become "elite" talents. 2009: Tavares, Hedman, Duchene?, Kane, Schenn - I think most would agree that 2 maybe 3 have become "elite" talents. 2010: Hall, Seguin, Gudbranson, Johanson, Niederreiter - I think monst would agree 2 have become "elite" talents. 2011: RNH, Landeskog, Huberdeau, Larsson, Strome - I am not sure any would be considered "elite" So out of 20 guys, 7 or 8 have become "elite". I admit that some of these guys I dont know well so I could be wrong, but the narrative created by many is "tank, draft top 5, draft a "McDavid" type player, its simple", but in reality its not that easy and most teams that draft top 5 or top 10 are getting guys that amount out to the same level as guys like Tatar, Nyquist etc.

I was just using the Leafs as an example, I agree we are taking a much different path and look much different. You're not wrong about the D. I would have to say it is likely due to a combination of bad drafting, bad development, and bad luck. The only other thing I would throw in there is that the Wings have always been very reluctant to play some young defenseman on the main roster. This year is a perfect example as I dont know if a single fan wants to see a guy like Sproul sitting in the press box. You are never going to develop unless you actually play.

I dont see how you can say anything has failed. The entire concept of "rebuilding on the fly" is icing a competitive team (which we have sitting tied for the wild card) while re-building for the future. IF the rebuild fails, we will know if a few years if our young guns (Larkin, Mrazek, DD, AA, Mantha, Svechnikov, Sproul etc.) are not able to lead this team back into contention. If you want to argue that this team is not that good in the moment, sure you have a strong argument. But to say anything has failed is way way way to premature. The Leafs also sit with 13 points, does this mean their re-build failed? Of course not. Re-builds take time. As far as the "on the fly" part, well if we finish the season at the bottom of the standings, I will fully admit that aspect failed. If we squeak into the playoffs again, it worked. I have said it a million times and I will say it again, we are not as good as our 6 game winning streak led some to believe, but we are not as bad as our 5 game losing streak is leading some to believe. The reality, RIGHT NOW we are an average team that will likely just get into the playoffs, or barely not make it. I have gone on record in saying I like the rebuilding on the fly philosophy as I do not want to tank and I stand behind that, but I wish the ratio of kids to vets was a little more in the favor of of the kids.

When you score 1 goal, you can't blame your goalie. Sorry guys, but you are trying to create a false narrative that validates things you have said in the past. To quote the 3 faces of Bill......debunked brah! Lol.

I am not saying that the 4th line is our main problem, what I am saying is it is one of a few problems that can be fixed very easily. When you have a ton of little problems, what you need to do is attempt to fix them all. If you have an attitude of, "meh, what's the point, wont do anything" you have zero chance of getting better. Glendening-Sheahan-Jurco isnt going to light it up, but I think they can play better then the OMG line, and having Mantha in the top 9 instead of Sheahan will also make us a bit better.

I dont think anyone on here was expecting him to come in here and replicate what Datsyuk did in his prime. Most people were expecting him to replace the 2016 version of Datsyuk who scored 49 points. I think he can do that.

Here is my stance on the Wings, as of today we do not have a better top line then most teams as we definitely do lack "superstars". As guys like Larkin mature that could change, but as of November 6th, 2016 it is what it is. So IMO for us to be better then most other teams, what we need to do is utilize our depth. As much as the cynics like to call our team garbage (which its not) we do have a lot of players in that next tier. Guys like Nyquist, Tatar, AA, Larkin, Nielson Zetterberg, Abby, Helm etc. could easily fit into most teams lineups in a top 6 or top 9 role. When you role out the OMG line, you are essentially giving up on getting a goal every time that line is out there. Lets get that line out, turn it into a scoring threat and try to beat teams with our balance. Having a 4th line of Glendenning/Sheanhan/Jurco, and then putting Mantha on the 2nd or 3rd line IMO gives us a much better chance of scoring. While Jurco is hurt, bring up someone like a Tyler Bertuzzi who can give that line a bit of a spark. With Nielson and Helm anchoring the PK now from the forward position, I dont think we need Miller as much as we used to.

Were they ever not "re-building" lol.

When did Holland say that he wanted Nielson over Stamkos? All I have heard him say is that Nielson was his first choice in free agency. Stamkos never hit free agency, so I don't see how that is a "lie". Or did he say flat out that he wanted Nieson over Stamkos? If he did, my bad and that is a stupid statement.

Look at Jim Carey, went from winning the Vezina to pretty much disappearing.

It would be very frustrating to see this team not make it with Mantha in the AHL the entire year.

I think re-building on the fly can work if it's done the right way. The best example I can give is the Wings in 2008. Of course they still had Lidstrom which was a HUGE help, but that team was completely transformed from the teams of the late 90's and in between they never had to crash to the bottom of the standings. It can work if you give your kids a chance to play with the vets, the issue I have right now with the Wings is the fact that guys like AA, Sproul, XO, Mantha etc. are not getting the ice time they should be getting. I have no issue with having some vets (ie. guys like Helm and Abby), my issue is with guys like Miller, Ott, and E that dont deserve to be on the roster and are not as good as the kids. Make those swaps, pull off a trade for a top D-man (ie. Trouba) and I think this team is in good shape.

Do I think Mantha can be the difference in winning 10 more games or winning the Cup? No. But in a league where last year the 9th seed Boston had 93 points, and second in our division TB had 97 points, do I think having a guy like him could be the difference in not making the playoffs versus not making the playoffs? Yes I do. If any mistake was made, it was not by Nyquist and Tatar not becoming D and Z. The mistake was fans thinking they were the next D & Z. Both are good players, not elite. Top 6, not top 3.

You're probably right here, but when you have a mandate to make the playoffs, this is what happens. Not an easy task to re-build while making sure you make the playoffs every year. I like the addition of Nielson, but I also dont like the contract.

The TSN guys led by Bob Mckenzie are good, I wouldn't question their credibility. Remember, if you go back to that time they didn't know that Stamkos was done taking meetings, in their minds at the time he just hadn't met with the Wings yet. If I remember correctly, he met with the Leafs and TB then realized he wanted to stay in TB. My guess is that after one meeting outside of TB, Stamkos felt like anywhere but TB wasn't right and didn't want to waste anyone else s time. I dont think this was a result of poor approach on the part of Holland or any other GM's, if anything give the credit to Yzerman as he obviously did one hell of a job in his meeting selling Stamkos on TB.

There is a lot wrong with this. Many hockey insiders thought he was coming here. TSN listed the Wings as the favourites to land him the day before he signed in TB. The only people that thought the Wings had zero change are cynical Wings fans who like to create the false narrative that we cant lure free agents. This post is the definition of hindsight being 20/20, kickazz is 100% right. Had Stamkos not signed in TB and then been a UFA who Holland could not have afforded him, Wings fans would have gone absolutely nuts! You had to do what you could for a chance at Stamkos. Holland has made mistakes, but this one was the right move at the time and anyone to tell you other wise is basing it on what happened after the fact.

I 100% agree with you. Being a GM/coach, all you can do is give your team the highest probability possible to win. If taking out Miller and putting in Mantha changes your probability of winning a game from 49% to 53%....you do it. Over the long term, statistics always play out the way they should, and doing things that lower your odds will play out accordingly. You make a few moves like this (ie. Putting in Mantha for Miller, Jurco when healthy for Ott, adding a guy like Trouba etc.) the next thing you know, you go from being a team hovering around 6th-10th seed and could end up hovering around 3rd-6th.

This is a very deceiving point. This isn't MLB where you have teams at the top spending $100 million more then the teams spending 20th. In the NHL the top 20 teams payroll wise are essentially separated by 5 million. We drop 1 player and all of a sudden we rank like 20th. Not to mention, because we are using LTIR for relief, most lists still count Franzen which makes us look worse. I really don't think our payroll is causing confusion to the coaches, players, and fans.

Nice Shot Abby!!!

I dont think people are actually looking at the posts above lol. That pic looks pretty clear to me. Don't know why Fox SN Detroit didnt get that shot.