kliq

Damn! 4x3 is good value to.

Saying that you were right about Hudler not leading our team, would be like me saying now that Nyquist will never win a Hart and DD will never win a Norris, not exactly a "bold prediction". Agreed @krsmith17 had Franzen never suffered all those concussions, I have no doubt that he would still be a great player.

For the record, I would like to see Osgood go in, but here are the points against him. - No major individual awards - Was not consistently a top goalie in the league year after year, very up and down - Had a powerhouse in front of him - Eyeball test showed that he was good, but never appeared to be elite. Nobody would watch Chris Osgood play and say "damn, this guy may be one of the best in the world". With all that being said, IMO hockey is about performance, and at the end of the day Osgood performed and because of this he should be in the HHOF and he should have his number retired.

lol......Sorry, when you said game 6 OT, I was thinking TB/Cgy. OK, they didnt kill us like the Ducks, but we got really outplayed.

Calgary did have an elite goalie that year in the playoffs, and the Wings/Canucks/Sharks (repecfully #1, #3, #2 seeds) couldn't overcome it. You literally cannot have a harder path to the finals then the Flames, then even in the finals they had to face the #1 seed on the other side. In the end the Lightning overcame a team that was playing great hockey and I give the Lightning props for it. They were a great team. I watched a lot of the Flames that run, and in the playoffs they were legit playing great hockey. Both the Lightning and Flames looked much better then the '03 Devils. I cant argue the bold, they were not great on paper but we all know that what's on paper means nothing. If it did then Washington would be one of the greatest teams of the last decade. Its what you do in the playoffs and TB and Cgy kicked ass in the playoffs. Did I call the game 6 victory a rout?

In 2004 it did.

At least the Hawks are out!

I think if the 2004 Lightning face the 2003 Devils, the TB D is able to hold of the mediocre offense of the Devils, and TB's far superior forwards are able to score just enough to win the series. It likely goes 6 or 7, but TB should pull it out. I give Brodeur the edge over Khabi, but Khabi faces a much weaker offense. Sure, agree to disagree.Though the 2000 Devils and 2003 Devils were a much different team. Like you said, #1 in scoring for the 2000, team #14 in scoring for the 2003 team. I wont debate the 2000 team, I agree they likely win.

Detroit Red Wings‏Verified account @DetroitRedWings FollowFollow @DetroitRedWings More The Detroit #RedWings today recalled defenseman Joe Hicketts from the AHL’s @griffinshockey. #LGRW

Again, I'm not talking about how good a team was throughout the decade, if that is the discussion then no question NJ > TB. You can keep making excuses in regards to the 2004 TB team, but at the end of the day you can only beat who is put in front of you and TB did that. They dominated the regular season, they had the best player in the league, the had young studs, they had a great goalie, and they had decent D. I believe the 04 Lighting beat the 03 Devlis in a best of 7. Your logic is flawed as well. You criticize TB for beating Calgary, a team with only a stud (Iginla) and amazing goalie (Kip) and great coaching (Sutter), but you praise the Devils in '03 who beat who in the finals? The 7th seeded Ducks who also beat us, had a stud (Kariya), an amazing goalie (Giggy) and a great coach (Babs). They had a very similar path. Where I really give credit to the Lightning was their semi finals win against the Flyers, that was a very good team. As far as the bold goes, that was my original point. The Devils were a team that had a great system, a great coach, and a great goalie, but for the most part were filled with mediocre players. Ill give them credit, they won the cup, but I dont they are as good as TB. I remember that Having your season end in OT is one of the worst feelings you can have as a fan. I remember it really pissed me off how some Wings fans turned on Joseph that year. The guy was my favourite goalie in the league for year and I was pumped to have him here, and then to have Holland treat him pretty poorly, followed by the fans doing the same, it really left a sour taste in my mouth.

I didnt realize that the 2001 team was so good offensively, I'll give you that one. 2003 on the other hand, my point stands as they ranked #14 in GF. TB in 2004 was ranked #3. They were a good team, you can only beat the competition that's in front of you, and like I have said, they beat the team that took us out, and we were supposedly the best with all the hall of famers we had.

Are you talking Calgary? They had Jerome Iginla who at the time was one of the best players in the NHL. Craig Conroy was nothing special, but he also had a career year that year. Add them to a very good D and amazing goalie, and they were a great team in that playoff run. Like I said, they kicked our asses in the 2nd round.

If you are talking who had the better team over a 10 year span, or overall franchise success, no question its the Devils. I am looking at each team in a bubble, and based on that I give the edge to TB. You can say that TB struggled to beat a team of scrubs in Calgary, but that team of scrubs kicked out asses in 6 games. That team of scrubs had the best goaltender in the league who was playing absolutely lights out.

Dammit, I did didnt I. Sometimes you just need someone to slap you in the face and wake you up, thank you for that @kickazz

This is literally the opposite of what it is, its 100% about opinions, specifically the opinion of the owner.

Don't agree on the Gelina's goal, to overturn that you needed 100% indisputable evidence that it did not go in, and that was not there. Based on the angle, had that puck been on the ground, its a goal. If it's in the air which it likely was, its not a goal. Either way, had that gone it, its not like the series is over. Calgary had a chance in OT to win and they failed, they also had a chance to win game 7, and they failed. Blaming it on that goal is an excuse, we're not talking Dallas/Buffalo/Hasek/Hull here where the series ended by a blatant BS call. If we are talking the last 40 years (so 1977-2017), of course they are low on the list. With teams like the Habs, Wings, Oilers, Penguins, Islanders etc. dominating like they did, any team with one Cup win will rank near the bottom. If we are talking 2000-2009 I think the Wings, Avs, and Pens are better. I think they are better then the Canes, possibly the Devils, and Ducks. I think the Devils are a bit overrated, they had a great goalie and played a good system, but the team was not that talented. You don't allow Scott Stevens to attack the head and they come down big time. Not the most skilled team out there. They were more so a product of the rules. I feel like teams now a days with today's rules would kill them. TB had good forwards, they ran with the big 3, as well as Stillman who had a great year that year scoring a point per game, Modin, Fedotenko (who was great in big games), and of course "The Chuck". On D they weren't super strong, but they weren't bad. You had Boyle and Kubina at their peaks who were very good, then the rest was OK. Either way, we are talking cup winners here. They are all good.

To be fair, we also saw "re-build on the fly" Holland succeed between '02 and '08.

I'm just asking you why you think that? Were you not a fan of the players? coaches? Carolina I get, but TB I dont see it. They had a great goaltender, 3 superstars in LeCavalier, Richards, and St. Louis (who did win the Hart that year), and they beat a team that kicked our ass despite how loaded we were. Not to mention, they werent just a team that went on a run, they #2 to only us in the overall standings. I think people marginalize TB because back then they had such a bad history, plus they just don't get the type of attention from the media that teams like us, Colorado, Pittsburgh, Chicago etc. get. I'm willing to listen to your reasons though.

It doesn't say century, it says decade. That means 2000-2009 meaning the choices are: 2000 - NJ 2001 - Colorado 2002- Detroit 2003 - NJ 2004 - TB 2005 - None 2006 - Carolina 2007 - Anahiem 2008 - Detroit 2009 - Pittsburgh So with the missed year they are really just saying these are the top 5 of 9 teams. Why do you feel Carolina and TB were such weak teams?

I want them to sign Rannta. He's playing very well for an awful Coyotes team. Have him start next year with Howard as backup, trade Howard at the TDL then bring Howard back the following season with a backups salary, he doesnt want it, move on and bring in any backup. What about the elite Dylan Larkin?

Sometimes fans don't get it and that is a perfect example. They don't like Bettman and don't understand how he has a job, well its because he's doing what he is told to do. People like to have simple scapegoats though. Blaming Holland for everything is easy.

Exactly. IMO the way it works, is your owner, president, GM, and the rest of the inner circle at some point have a meeting. At that point, a discussion is had where everyone gives their views, and a direction is laid out, by the owner. The direction can pretty much be 1 of 4 things. Go for a Cup, Make the Playoffs, Re-Build, Tank Job. Then its the GM's job to run with that vision. I just can't see any world where an owner says "meh, I dont care, do your thing". Its just not realistic. I'm sure the contracts themselves were Holland, but the direction had to have been given to him. This is why Illitch likely wants to keep Holland, because why would an owner fire a GM for doing what he is told. From what I read, Al Davis was the worst. There are stories that he used to call the coach during games and force him to call a Hail Mary because he loved the long bomb. That's the worst type of owner, well that or the cheap owner that ONLY cares about money.

I highly doubt he's traded for a 4th. Maybe a 3rd, definitely a 2nd. I think T.O would have traded for him had they no landed Plekanec. Babs loves him.

That's not evidence. First off, you have no idea what the relationship between Holland and Illitch is. If Holland is carrying out the plan given to him by Illitch, why would Illitch fire him for doing what he was told to do. I have a boss, and sometimes my boss has me do things I don't agree with. If I follow through on a plan that I knew would fail because my boss asked me to, should I be fired because it was a bad plan? Thank about it. I'm not going to sit here and say that this is the case because quite frankly, I dont know what is said behind closed doors, but I am also not the person making definitive statements. You are. Secondly, define accountability? In fandom, it seem accountability is solely defined by being a coach or GM being fired. Maybe Holland was doing his thing, Illitch had a talk with him and Holland changed his approach. There are many more layers to accountability then simply firing someone. My point, is there is nothing to suggest that Illitch doesn't care about the Wings and is solely focused on the Tigers. You want to throw it out there as a theory, cool. To say it as fact, you're wrong because you're guessing. It's not logical to me for an owner of a team to not care about the team he owns. My guts tells me that Illtich (Mike and Chris), Holland, JD etc. all had a game plan of keeping the streak alive. Once that ended, we have pretty much been in re-build mode. Other then Daley, every single move we have made has been a re-build style move.

The issue with Kane is his attitude. Right now the guy is playing for a contract, so you have to think he is on his best behavior, If I'm San Jose, it would make me nervous to sign him long term term as if the issues re-surface, that could hand cuff you for years. With that being said, I guess its up to the coach, captain, vets etc. to see if he has legit changed, or if the BS is still there.