kliq

Stupid penalties do not make a team better, it just puts you on the PK more often. A player being tough and gritty is completely different then a player slashing other players when he gets upset. When I think of that I think of a whiny Sydney Crosby in 2009. Our team is not "stale", we lack elite talent AND we have alot of injuries. You take a few of the top players away from a team already lacking top guys, and this is what you get.

So in other words, you took an opinion you had and like usual tried to sell it as fact. Also, there is a big difference between a player saying "I enjoy playing with player X" especially if the question asked was "do you like playing with player x". Your comment was that "Datsyuk asked to play with Mantha". I cant even see Datsyuk telling the media this.

You need balance. Some of these guys (why are you listing Pulkkinen he's on Minny) could be great fits on certain teams in certain situation, but together on a team without elite talent they aren't being utilized properly. Not to mention the constant changing of lines by Blashill. You take a player with Nyquist's talent and put him in Chicago on say Kane's line, I bet he would look amazing. You float him around from line to line in Detroit and he looks ok. Also, when a team is losing blame gets passed around to everyone. If we weren't what we were in the late 90's, early 2000's no chance guys like Draper, Maltby, McCarty would be praised as much as they were. On the flip side, take Abby and Helm and put them on our 1997 team instead of McCarty and Draper, not a bad thing would be said about them.

I agree. I think one of our biggest problems as well is that our D are not offensive at all. In a perfect world you have D that are very good at actually defending, but can also move the puck and create offense. I would love to see a stat on how many shots from the blue line are tipped in now compared to the Lidstrom/Homer era.

lol, what did I write Dick not Dave?

Really? Do you have a link?

I believe the quote was "Coreau isn't that good. A career backup at best."

100% agree. The fact that this didnt happen earlier is actually quite shocking when you think about it. 2008 shouldn't have happened based on your typical cyclical nature of a team. The fact that the Wings were able to keep up a high level of play after they lost the core of the 1997 team was truly impressive. The Wings, Spurs, Pats and Cardinals are all teams in their respective sports that have defied this cyclical nature for years. It will catch up with all of them eventually though, and unfortunately for us its now happening to the Wings.

Wouldn't your argument for why Scotty Bowman is the reason for 98 and 02 and not Holland hold true against Stan Bowman and how Dick Tallon is the reason for his 3 cups?

If this is directed to me, I didnt say they bought the cup but I to say money had nothing to do with it is just wrong. Had Ilitch told Holland he had to cut payroll, I dont think those cups happen. But that argument can be made against almost any team with a high payroll. IMO, the only team I have ever seen buy a championship were the 2009 Yankees.

100% agree, most teams backups are UFA signings or minor trades anyways. Just look at our division as a sample size. Only two teams have a homegrown backup. Toronto - *Enroth (UFA) (I put an * as they have gone back and forth with Bibeau these past couple weeks) Montreal - Montoya (UFA) Boston - Khudobin (current tenure UFA) Buffalo - Nilsson (trade) Detroit - Mrazek (drafted) Florida - Riemer (UFA) TB - Vasilevskiy (drafted) Ottawa - Condon (trade)

Was anyone else thinking The New Day lol?

So you are saying that if you take the top 10 picks overall from the last 10 years, there are only 2 or 3 busts?

There is no way to guarantee yourself the 1st overall pick, even if you are dead last you may not get it with the new draft rules.

Ya its weird. Mods can these threads be merged? It doesnt make sense to have 2 threads both at the top of the board with literally identical names.

I cant remember the date I did it, but it was at the time the top 20 D-men in the league based on points. 1/20 drafted in top 5 2/20 drafted between 6-10 3/20 drafted between 11-15 1/20 drafted between 16-30 13/20 drafted out of the first round/not drafted 1) Erik Karlsson -15th overall 2) Brent Burns – 20th overall 3) Kris Letang – 62nd overall 4) John Klingberg – 131st overall 5) Roman Josi – 38th overall 6) P.K. Subban 43rd overall 7) Oliver Ekman-Larsson – 6th overall 8) Mark Giordano – undrafted 9) Tyson Barrie – 64th overall 10) Ryan Suter – 7th overall 11) Shea Weber – 49th overall 12) Drew Doughty 2nd overall 13) Dustin Byfuglien - 245th overall 14) Brent Seabrook – 14th overall 15) Duncan Keith – 54th overall 16) T.J. Brodie – 114th overall 17) Andrei Markov – 162nd overall 18) Keith Yandle – 105th overall 19) Shayne Gostisbehere – 78th overall 20) Kevin Shattenkirk – 14th overall

I cant remember where I read it, but apparently this has been as issue as he is having a hard time keeping his stick to himself.

It was a hall of fame team, but lets be honest we are not talking all those players during their prime. Either way, I am not saying that money had nothing to do with it as that would be stupid on my part, having money to spend will always be a factor. But money does not equal success as it takes the right players being put in the right system. Just look at the NYR of the early 2000's, a payroll I believe close the Wings but with zero success. Anyone remember the famous Lindros-Fleury-Bure line lol. I just hate the blind hate of Holland. When people make excuses to give him zero credit, I find it sad. No one person is 100% responsible for any cup, but what some on here do is try to strip him of credit of all of them. If you really look at it, while not as a GM obviously, but as a head of scouting the guy played a big part in putting the 1997 team together, the 1998 team while he didnt put it together as the GM, he made some minor moves that did work. 2002 had more of his fingerprints, and 2008 from a GM standpoint was on him. I just find it hypocritical how people will give Holland zero credit for his '98 and '02 cup wins, but then give Stan Bowman 100% credit for his 3 even though Dick Tallon is the one who acquired Keith, Seabrook, Kane and Towes. Or they will give Yzerman 100% credit for Tampa's success even though he took over a team already having a strong core with Stamkos and Hedman. I would never sit here and say that Ken Holland is the #1 reason for the Wings success, he was a part of a great organization who dominated this league for almost 25 years. Though to say he had nothing to do with it, is just going to an extreme due to current frustration.

This is the perfect example to me of how fans will twist anything against Holland. Any other GM makes a UFA signing that contributes to a cup and they are given credit, Holland does it and you say "he used Illitch's cash". Holland is not perfect by any means, but its crazy how fans will stretch reality to put him down.

HAHA! You totally beat me to the punch! I was thinking about that at work today.

Overall this sucks. But compared to what I thought last night Ill take it as good news. When I watched the injury happen live and he couldn't put any weight on it, I was thinking torn ACL, MCL, LCL, PCL, or meniscus.

Meh, I wouldnt call my comments optimistic. I said I think this week means nothing either way. I didnt say that I thought they would make the playoffs.

I think the Wings firing Blashill really does depend on what they value more, the present or the future. If the Wings don't turn it around and fire him mid season they are clearly more concerned with the present and making the playoffs. If they keep him, that tells me they see a future in him and are looking down the road. I dont think Blashill is a great NHL coach right now, but like a young player, if there is a high ceiling with him, you keep him.

Well that was an interesting debut. Took out Bishop with a shot, took out Howard with what looks to be a very bad injury, then got an assist. Not many guys can say they did that.