kliq

2. I dont need factual evidence to tell me that "3 cups" is not a requirement to have your jersey retired. Like I said, if Stevie didnt win a cup in 2002, there isnt a chance in hell his jersey would not still be up there. 4. I dont base my opinion on if a player is "generational" or not based on fan votes. I base it on what the players bring to the ice day in day out. I believe that Datsyuk brings something that nobody of his generation brings, this is evident by the way he talked about amongst his peers. I also dont like to go by fan votes, because historically casual fans are more incline to vote for players who excel on the offensive end of the ice, and ignore the defensive end of things. Of course their are outliers, but this is typically the way casual fans vote. As to why Datsyuk hasn't made the all star game as much as the other guys, if I had to guess it would be due to injuries. He hasn't played a full season since 2010. You are not going to make an all star game or especially make first team all star when you play 56, 70, 47, 45, and 63 games a year. (his GP totals since 2010) Look, I'm not going to dismiss everything you are saying. You do bring up some valid points, I just don't think they are strong enough to justify him as not being a generational player. You make it sound like the other guys were great into their 30's and Datsyuk was a flash in the pan who was good for a couple years. You do realize that last year at 36 years old Datsyuk was 6th in the NHL in points per game. Delveccio did score more then 80 points in the 1968-69 season, and that season he ranked 7th in points (I would use points per game to keep in consistent, but I couldn't find it). Now I personally think total points really mean don't much to me as point totals change based on what generation you are in. To me it is more of an indication where you rank amongst your peers during your generation. If we compare 1968-69 for Delveccio (the year you referenced where he was a similar age to Datsyuk last year) he scored 83 points, it was his career year, and he was 7th in the league in points (43 points below the leader). Had Datsyuk played an entire season healthy last year, he would have likely scored in the 75-85 point range and been right around the leaders, pretty close to #1. Pretty comparable if you ask me. If your statement is "Anyone getting their jersey retired with less cups would set the "trophies category" bar to a lower point" then obviously I cannot disagree with you as that is basic math. If your statement is "Anyone getting their jersey retired with less cups would lower the bar" I still completely disagree and maintain that the argument is weak. Can we please end this debate now lol.

Maybe his multiple concussions have something to do with that.

Well that sucked. It was nice though to see Keith win the Conn Smythe, I'm sick of seeing Toews get all the credit for Chicago's success.

If they were going to do that, I think they would have done it a long time ago. His jersey isnt retired, but it is out of circulation.

To make it easier to read, I will just number my responses in accordance to the way you numbered yours. 1. Like I said, you and I are on the same page with Fedorov. 2. Cups do not matter. I agree its not what I "feel" or what you "feel", but the the guys up there having 3 cups is not why they are up there, it's just something they have in common, it's not the deciding factor. You think if Stevie didn't win in 2002 he would not be up there? Of course he would be there. I don't think the cup argument is fair because having your jersey retired is an individual accomplishment, winning a cup is a team accomplishment. You cant base someone having their jersey retired on how good their supporting cast is. With that logic, Barry Sanders doesn't deserve his jersey retired (not sure if they do that in the NFL, but making a point). Maltby, McCarty, Draper & Holmstrom all have 4 cups, but I don't think anyone including yourself would say these four deserve to go up there. I get your argument, you are saying cups "solidify" it, but what I am saying is that measuring a players accomplishments based on cups, is very short sided and putting who they are playing with as way to big a factor. Especially when they guys you are comparing them to played against 5 teams. Like I said, I believe that Datsyuk deserves to be up there as much or if not more then at least one of Lindsey, Abel, and Delvecchio, and when you talk cups with those guys, you are talking the original 6 era where you had a 16.6% chance of winning a cup every year, in today's era there is a 3.3% chance. So much easier back then its not even close. Plus, Datsyuk doesn't have Gordie Howe on his line. 3. Okay, fair enough. 4. Are you seriously saying that if a player is truly "generational" the fans will vote them in? Its a popularity contest, and popularity has nothing to do with skill. Zemgus Girgensons started in last years NHL All star game. In MLB all star voting this year, 7 KC Royals are starting. All star voting mean NOTHING, and if you did a poll I would guess most education fans feel the same way. Also, back when Lindsey, Abel etc. played, you had 6 teams, meaning 24 forwards would make the all star team out of a talent pool of roughly 72 players. Being top 24/72 doesn't exactly seem like the hardest thing to do, especially when half of the greatest players in the world are not playing in your league yet. Now a days you have 30 teams, and 24 forwards make it out of a talent pool of roughly 360 players who are the best of the best. Again, so much easier back then to make an all star team. The reason why I bring this up is because you are using all star appearances as a reason as to why Datsyuk is inferior to the others. For the record, I am guessing that the all star teams carried 12 forwards back then, and most teams carried 12 forwards. I am sure my math is not exact as there may have been extra bench spots, more/less lines etc. but I am sure my point got through. I only say this because I don't want to argue semantics. 5. I am not sure why you keep bringing up Howe & Yzerman. I have stated many many many many times times as we have gone back and forth that I do not put Datsyuk at the same level of either of these guys. Secondly, nostalgia exists like it or not. I'm 33 years old, and I know I will never have the passion about a player the way I did/do about Yzerman due to the fact that he was my idol as a kid. When I talk about Yzerman, I will talk about him like he was the greatest thing ever. When the kids of today turn 50 or 60, I guarantee they will be saying things to their grand-kids statements like "I remember back in my day Pavel Datsyuk, they called him the magic man. Greatest hands I have ever seen!" They will look at him the same way I look at Stevie, and the same way the generation before us looked at Howe, Lindsey, Abel etc. I am looking at this extremely objectively, I just don't agree with you. The fact that you keep bringing up the argument of cups, tells me that you are unwilling to evolve your thinking in the criteria of what it takes to go up there. The game is changing, the game is evolving, and something like a jersey being retired needs to evolve with it. At the end of the day, Datsyuk is an all time great and deserves to be up there. What separates him from from from Abel, Lindsey & Delvecchio is that he is playing in an era where winning is harder then ever to win, and he doesn't have a case filled with offensive trophies because he is the type of player who always puts the team first. Had Datsuyk played a one dimensional game, there is a very good chance he would have won a Art Ross, but that just isn't him. The guy is a team first kind of guy, and I will not look down on him for that. Look at 2009, the guy put up 97 points (4th in the NHL) AND he won the Selke. Ultimately it appears you and I will never agree as you put way to much stock into trophies, and do not see Datsyuk as a great at the level of the others. I do. We can go back and forth for days, but I think at this point its just starting to get repetitive.

I'm not sure why you are bringing up Fedorov, I'm not debating on behalf of him. I agree Fedorov shouldn't go up there due to his lack of loyalty. We agreed on that in the other thread. Datsyuk probably could have won an art ross if he wasn't so defensively responsible, I am not going to hold that against him. Ill give you the Hart trophy argument, but only for Abel. Basically it sounds like you are saying he should not have his jersey retired because he has 2 cups, not 3 which is absolutely ridiculous given its a team game. Plus, like I said when you have 6 teams and play almost 20 years, you should have more then 2 cups. I really don't give all-star appearances much merit now a days. First off, hasn't Datsyuk turned down the all-star game a bunch of times? Secondly, the starters are voted by the fans which can result in people making it that shouldn't, third the all stars are picked half way into the year meaning its not a representation of an entire season, and lastly every team has to be represented by one player meaning its not the best 36 players (or however many) in the NHL even making it. Datsyuk deserves to be up there. People look back on the past and view it in a higher light because it was so long ago, nostalgia. People also don't appreciate what is in front of them in the moment. I just hope that 10 years from now people look back at what Datsyuk has done here and appreciate him for the legend that he truly is. Its sad to see people so against him.

I think you misunderstood me, my apologies if I was unclear. I'll clarify. I was comparing D & Z to Delvecchio, Lindsey, and Abel (I didn't say Howe, I am not sure where you got that from) in terms of how good of players they are. People always talk about how the bar is high and how the Wings have incredibly high standards, which they do. But then they will say that D & Z should not be retired because they are not at the level of Yzerman, Lidstrom or Howe (which they are not). My point with Datsyuk is that he is at the level of Delvecchio, Lindsey, and Abel. My point being, to have your jersey retired you need to be as good as the guys at the bottom of that list, not the top. People are also saying that D & Z should not get their jersey's retired because they don't have as many cups as the others up there. Again, to me that argument is when comparing them to Delvecchio, Lindsey, and Abel (not Yzerman, Lidstrom & Howe) and IMO they only thing Delvecchio, Lindsey, and Abel have over Datsyuk is cups, which is why I think the cup argument is weak because there is no longer 6 teams. It was easy for players in that era to win a cup. I never said its impossible to win multiple cups in this era, what I said was its much harder. Saying Chicago won two is true of course, but irrelevant to this conversation. Even if they win tomorrow, it doesn't take away that its harder to do now. Back then you could literally have every team in the league win the cup in any given decade. Team could easily go on runs and win 3,4,5 in a row, just look at Montreal. Lets drop Zetterberg for this debate and the "both or neither aspect", because if I had to choose at this point I would lean towards Zetterberg not going up, all of the points I have made on this have really been about Datsyuk. What I want to know is this.....please explain to me how retiring Datsyuk's jersey is "lowering the bar". How is he less deserving then Delvecchio, Lindsey, and Abel? Datsyuk is a generational talent. He is loved within the community, he has won 2 cups in an era with 30 teams and 1 in an era with a salary cap, and he plays against the best players in the world unlike the other 3 that I named (which is not a shot at them, just the way hockey was back then). He has been voted the smartest player in hockey by his peers, and he has been voted the hardest to play against by his peers. Offensively the guy is capable of things that nobody else is, defensively he has won the second most Selke's (3) of all time. How is he "lowering the bar"? I would like to hear the argument of how Delvecchio, Lindsey, and Abel are at a higher level then him. Other then Abel winning a Hart which I admit is a strong case for him, I dont see it. I have a feeling you agree with what I wrote, below is what you posted in the Ozzie/Feds thread. I have a feeling that what makes this such a difficult topic is the fact that Zetterberg doesn't really have the resume yet, and people connect them together. Tell me this......if Zetterberg publicly came out and said he didnt think he was deserving of having his jersey retired, and the question then became only about Datsyuk, would you vote yes, or no?

I wasnt comparing them to Yzerman or Lidstrom, I was comparing them to Delvecchio, Lindsey, and Abel. Datsyuk deserves to have his jersey retired no questions asked as the guy is a generational player. It seems the biggest argument against him is "If you retire D, then you have to retire Z, and Z doesn't deserve it" I admit I am not 100% sold on retiring Zetterberg's jersey, but I would rather retire both then retire neither. Datsyuk deserves to be honored, and shouldn't be punished because Zetterberg is borderline. (which I cant see the Wings doing, its not their way) Yzerman is my favourite player of all time, my idol growing up, a great leader, and an unbelievable generational talent, but lets be realistic here, in 2002 he played on an all-star team literally surrounded my legends and future hall of famers. Not fair to say Zetterberg needs to do what he did. In 1997/98, the roster Yzerman had around him was also not like anything Zetterberg has played with. Yzerman played in an era where Ilitch could spend 20 million more then everyone else, Zetterberg doesn't. While Yzerman is without a question a greater player then Zetterberg and a true legend, BUT to put Yzerman's accomplishments on Zetterberg is unrealistic and unfair.

I think the cup argument is weak. Back when half the guys up there played there was 6 teams. Of course you are going to have more cups in a 6 team league then a 30 team league.

You could sign Cleary then send him to the minors.

Agreed. Like the players that are up there, as time goes by people will start to appreciate them like they deserve.

Agreed I wouldn't do that trade either, but wouldn't trading Weiss be more of an admission of the signing being bad then keeping him? Cant say I agree with you on the Cole/Zidlicky trades. Cole had an injury which happens in this sport, luckily he had an expiring contract and Zidlicky did was he was supposed to do. In the end we lost to a great team in 7 by 1 goal (not counting EN). Very low risk and not sacrificing the future for a chance to make a run.

In his trade scenario he says we are getting Phoenix's third pick.

There is a ton I can say to this, but it would just be a repeat of of things I have said 50 times already. Mostly in this thread: http://www.letsgowings.com/forums/topic/76672-holland-signs-4-year-extension-with-wings-mod-warning-post-130/page-13?hl=+fire%20+holland

I think you are right. But to be fair, that was following the 2012/13 playoff run where we lost to Chicago in the second round. Cleary actually played very well in that series. It wasnt until the 2013/14 season that things just fell apart.

If they have to eat any part of the contract, I say just keep him one more year and see if he does play better under Blashill.

I wasn't citing only an anonymous freep tweet, I was citing an anonymous NHL source that confirmed the freep tweet, hence two anonymous sources lol. Of couse I read your entire post, if I am going to respond back with a difference of opinion I am going to make sure I know what I am responding to. There is no lack of "sinking in" needed here. I 100% fully understand your opinion and understand why you have it, I simply dont agree with you. I feel like using the term common sense is a slight way of taking a shot at me for not agreeing with you, as there is no easier way to attack someone's stance/opinion then saying that the reason why they don't agree with you is due to a lack of intelligence or lack of comprehension. That's fine, but I am not going to go down that road. You want to understand my logic in believing the story, here it is: - Philadelphia is nototious for making stupid moves. Any other team I probably would not believe it, but this is a team that traded JVR for Schenn, Hartnell for Umberger and numerous other horrible moves that I don't feel like looking up. I think this point is shown. - I believe Ken Holland's biggest strength is his eye for talent. In the case of Cleary, I have to wonder why he would give him a (1.5 - 2.5mil) contract when it was obvious to everyone that the guy was done. I don't believe Holland is bad GM, and I don't believe that he was unaware of Cleary's diminishing skillset/health, I believe that he made the signing due to the loyalty Cleary showed him in turning down the Philly contract. If Holland signs him again to a one year deal, then I definitely believe it. I know Holland makes mistakes, I am not saying the guy is perfect, but there was not really any upside with Cleary last year and especially not this year. (He does bring leadership, and he does just take a press box spot, but 2.5mil is way to much for that) - I don't see why HSJ would just make this up, why an anonymous source would lie when confirming it, or why NBC sports would make up an anonymous source confirming it. It's such a small story, there is no reason to lie about this. Its not a story that is going to "get clicks". To me it makes more sense that Philly offered this contract, received backlash for another bonehead move, then denied it. Again, I AM NOT saying that the contract is 100% true, I am saying that I think it is true.

Completely agree. At what point is enough enough. Get that team out of there and give it to a city that actually cares. I do feel bad for the actual die-hards,

Do you not see the hypocrisy in what you are saying? You say that I have a bias, while you are the one constructing a narrative that one side is clearly wrong. (hence calling St. Jame's story BS & Fodder and taking Holmgrem's words as fact). For the record, I am NOT saying that the that the story is 100% true, I am saying that it could be true and that if I had to guess I do believe it is. I realize that I could be wrong as there is no proof. You make claim that only one source reported this. Here is a section from the article I posted. Did you read the whole thing? "It ended with the Flyers giving the Stanley Cup veteran left wing an actual contract -- three years for $8.25 million, according to an NHL source, who confirmed the signing as reported by the Detroit Free Press late Monday." This section clearly states that an NHL source confirmed the St. James report. They are referring to St. James as an NHL source as obviously someone cannot confirm their own story. Lets just end it by saying you don't believe the story, I do. There is really no need to debate something back and forth that nobody can prove.

I read those sources just fine. I am very aware of what you just posted. I wasn't saying that without a shadow of a doubt Cleary was offered a 3 year deal. I was saying that it was being reported he was given a 3 year deal as the poster was saying that ONLY Cleary & Holland were talking about a 3 year deal. Read what I said: Again, it could be BS. But just because a GM says it it (especially Philly) doesn't mean it was true. If I had to guess, I'm thinking a 3 year deal was on the table pending a physical, and Cleary didn't want to do the physical for obvious reasons......But that is just a guess.

I don't disagree, I also want him to retire. Though I put it more on him then Holland, if the handshake agreement did happen and Holland renags, it sends a bad message. Lets just hope Cleary retires, or Holland signs him to a minor league deal.

CBS Sports reported it: http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on-hockey/23574197/dan-cleary-to-sign-with-flyers-for-three-years-775-million NBC Philadelphia reported it: http://www.csnphilly.com/hockey-philadelphia-flyers/source-flyers-dan-cleary-agree-deal NHL.com reported it: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=681912 My point of showing all these links is that Cleary and Holland were not "the only ones" talking about it. It was reported from pretty much every media outlet out there is. Could it be wrong....sure. Only Holmgrem, Cleary, and Cleary's agent know for sure. I believe you are right and that a handshake agreement is not allowed under the CBA. But good luck proving a conversation that took place between a select few. Again, could it be BS....yes. But all signs point to it being true given that he keeps getting signed when he clearly is done. I am basing my opinion off off what I see.

I'm guessing this isn't directed to me as I am not one to put down Franzen, but here are my thoughts. From my understanding, doctors will give Franzen the okay if he is fully recovered from his concussion. It is also my understanding that with every concussion you get, you are more likely to get another one if you receive another blow to the head or even body. Based on the number of concussions he has had, and based on the fact that it appears every year he is missing more and more time, and from what I read his symptoms are getting worse and worse (this could be wrong) I hope he never plays again for his own health. If it was told to me that Franzen would never have another concussion again with 100% certainty, I would gladly have him back in our lineup. Him at 100% is exactly the kind of player we need.

I dont think It will be league minimum, it will likely be similar to last year.

Because prior to the 2013/14 season the Flyers offered Cleary a 3 year deal. Cleary turned it down for a 1 year deal with the Wings on a handshake agreement that he would get a deal in each of the next two off seasons (equaling the Flyers 3 year deal). Holland is simply keeping his word which he should. Signing Cleary now is not a mistake, if anything the handshake deal was the mistake.