kickazz

I voted Lidstrom btw. Can't really justify why other than fandom

Comparing Howe to someone like Mario Lemieux Wings fans would likely pick Howe. Compring Orr to Lidstrom, Wings would pick Lidstrom. That's my main point. We as fans have our biases, and will come up with ways to justify our choice. I know I do it. GUILTY! Wasn't shocky2002 the poster that made the claim this summer that Yzerman, Fedorov, Datsyuk, Zetterberg were all better than Howe or something and we all went crazy? The justification used was how the era was different and it was easier in Howe's era and the latter players played with tougher competition. Yet many of us didn't like that reasoning.

I'll keep going with devil advocate side. Orr was an MVP on his team for the cups they won. Lidstrom was an MVP once out of 4 cup wins. Some may argue that Lidstrom had the better team than Orr. Besides, in the 90s none of the Norris winners were European anyway, it was still Canadian/American talent that Lidstrom couldn't win the Norris against. If we use the argument that Orr played against lesser competition, then I wonder what you guys would think when comparing Gordie Howe to Mario Lemieux, then Alexander Ovechkin or Sidney Crosby? How would you rank Howe to the more recent scoring leaders and MVPs?

9/10 times this question is asked anywhere other than Letsgowings.com people will say Bobby Orr. Of course here, we're all homers for Lidstrom so we'll blindly say it's him. But you guys know me and I'm going to be real about it as much as I loved Lidstrom.... Nick Lidstrom didn't win his first Norris trophy till he was 30 years old and many of the amazing defenseman in the NHL (such as Coffey, Chelios, Borque, Leetch) were either retiring or well past their prime. Because of this, many Non-Red Wing fans have considered Lidstrom a tad bit overrated when it comes to using the "well he won 7 norris trophies" argument. Now before anyone gets offended, I'm not saying I agree with this. But it's just something I've read/heard over the years. Specifically I've heard the argument that "well Lidstrom couldn't win the Norris till the best defenseman retired and he was 30 when he was first able to do it". On the other hand, Bobby Orr won the Norris in his 2nd year and then like 8 years in a row after that. Bobby Orr revolutionized the game and had an impact that NO ONE has done or ever will do. Not even Lidstrom. Who is better? We can't really answer that. Bobby Orr was probably more skilled. Lidstrom was just a really smart player. His hockey IQ was second to none in his prime. But that doesn't mean Orr's wasn't either.

Pisses me off that we're bad in a "weak draft class" Of all the godam years this had to be it. Here's the source on Nolan Patrick's sports hernia: Among the top players for the 2017 draft is center Nolan Patrick of Brandon of the Western Hockey League. Patrick is expected to be ready for training camp after having sports hernia surgery in July. https://www.nhl.com/news/2017-nhl-draft-futures-list-highlighted-by-nolan-patrick/c-281220668

That's still Tatar's fault. I believe the doctors with the franchise told him he needs to take the summer off or he will end up having surgery and Tatar still decided to go play in the international games over the summer for Slovakia/Team Europe. The Red Wings are his employer, we pay him, and he decided to put us low on his priority list. He's at fault here. No way to make excuses for him.

Google translate is surprisingly very accurate. The question is more about whether the tone implied is what we percieve it as. Maybe Slovaks just have a blunt way of speaking and it's not mean to be offensive

That's the other issue. A lot of our "young players" are not so young and are heading towards expensive contracts (like DK did and now Tatar is). And they're not even good enough to be a good cup winning squad. So yeah you're right, maybe stockpiling draft picks and getting some nice cheap talent that are really good would do our cap space well for a few years. As it stands we're in for a 4th pick in the draft. Whoever we get in that 4th pick would likely be very very good and cheap for years to come.

Although if we don't make playoffs, I wonder if that changes. According to the interview Tatar thinks some big changes would happen.

No sale then. GMs know the players true potential.

Anyways, as far as Tatar, a package of him and Nyquist would get us some good picks IMO. They're underproducing but so is the entire team overall. And people would associate that with Blashill, not the players.

Nyquist is faster than all the players you just mentioned up and down the ice. His short strides when he starts give him good acceleration. Take a look at his backcheck and forecheck on this play. Says it all.

Nyquist is one of the fastest skater after AA, Larkin and Helm.

Interviews like these just show you the locker room attitude. Some of these players don't give a s***. Especially when they say something along the lines of "looking forward to trade deadline" Assuming the translation is correct. Regardless when people have the attitude of not wanting to be in a place, they tend to not apply themselves fully. It's just human nature.

What?? Why should Tatar not be traded and Nyquist should? Both played 40 games and have 18 points each. They're both equally having terrible seasons in their total point productions. It's more embarassing for Tatar because he's on the top line with Zetterberg and Mantha who are the two best right now and they're both outshining him, even carrying him on some plays. Nyquist plays on a third line... if anything I say Tatar should be the one traded. Clearly from this interview he doesn't want to be in Detroit. Well if that's the case then fans don't want him either. Get out if you don't like it here Tatar. But putting all that aside, I'd probably trade both.

We would get the 4th pick as it stands. Kind of exciting in a way. Call me optimistic.

Well if AA is bring a bad boy then bench his ass 100% I'm sure we'll find out soon enough. Seems like Blashill and Holland are letting the media and fans know little by little what's going on behind the scenes much like the players did in locker clean out last season.

Agreed.

AA being a bad boy in practice?

Hasn't broken through in almost a year now. February 14 of this year marks one year anniversary of the fall of Petr the Great. Can you believe it? One year since his break out performance ended.

I didn't say HE was cancerous. I'm saying cancerous people in team setting are a detriment. All we know of is this one incident. There could be more or none. Either way I thought he handeled the situation poorly. You have to be pretty far off to be cancerous. He's young, has time to learn and improve his attitude. But it's a concern and should be dealt with. Anyways, it looks to me like they did in fact deal with it by benching him in favor of Coreau that second time. Lots of speculation but the article is hinting on this narrative. I trust Ansar, Savage and Helen when it comes to these things.

Additionally, at least this might shed some light on why Mrazek has been benched. Obviously there could something going on that we don't necessarily know about and perhaps Blashill and the coaching crew knows. So while some of us might not see it as a "big deal" Blashill might be because there may be more issues than the one incident. Alternatively he could have just been benched for sucking.

Who said we should trade Mrazek over those actions anyways? And if he can't handle adversity and is reacting on immature defense mechanisms, then yeah, he is being an egotistical immature brat. As far as Mantha, It doesn't matter if you think what Devallano or Holland said is true. Calling someone a "spare part" but historically making excuses for other players who have similar or worse performances seems pretty biased. Regardless the point is, we didn't see Mantha ***** out. Whereas Mrazek gets benched and decides to be a boy wonder rebel over the smallest thing in practice. It's pretty petty. So yeah, I'm calling Mrazek out. What's the problem with that? You don't have an issue with Holland calling Mantha out (unprofessionally), so what's your issue with fans calling Mrazek out? If what Ansar Khan is writing about true and if he was being stubborn then I stand by my opinion. In the real world if I had a worker that failed to show up to his shift because he didn't get a pay raise or didn't get picked to lead a project, that worker is going to have a damn tough time under me until his work ethic got better. I'd make sure of that. Cancerous people are just a detriment to team settings. Maybe it was a one time thing (I highly doubt it if they let it reach the media), Nonetheless, Mrazek is still young, he can still learn. But what he did was definitely not a quality I'd want in someone who was on my team (whether it's a sport or work place). He needs to mature up and deal with it better. Practice or games, you're part of a team, you're counted upon, you get paid, you are expected to be there. End of story.

Red Wings win with Steve Ott's hatrick goals all on the PP. Somehow now that he's on the PP instead of Sheahan, our PP becomes alive again and jumps from last in the league or whatever to 15th or something.

Right, it's up to the Red Wings to let this information out. Thinking outside the box goes a long way when it comes to media manipulation and reported news. They obviously want the fans and general public to know the information. Could have easily covered up for Mrazek. And don't be naive to think they haven't covered for other players they want to.