kickazz

To be honest I think bad press like this is necessary sometimes. At the very least it makes ownership and management aware of what people think. Holland has 2 years left on his contract as a manager. I wonder what Mike and Chris Illitch will do if the next two years don't get any better and continue the downward trend.

Hahahah. That's true, the "we need to miss the playoffs for some changes" argument is definitely dumb. Failing isn't going to turn into success that easily. There's no way in hell do I as a fan want to see The Streak broken. I'd much rather keep making the playoffs and get better than not make the playoffs and think magically the 14th pick will be good enough to bring us a Stanley cup lol. And us missing the playoffs isn't going to change free agency. Nor is it going to convince another GM to take on Howards contract. Or Ericssons. Playoff success is completely irrelevant to contract dumps and pickups or winning the cup. Unless we tanked and got first round pick. But that's the most extreme and stupid way going about things with mostly uncertainty along the way.

Agreed with the bold but we've been progressively getting worse and locking much of the same roster. Which is why I'm not surprised at the rating. Even the most level headed fans are wondering why certain things are going on. You know it's true too. I think the team on paper is better next year compared to last but these new and old contracts are starting to become worrisome. The sum of the parts are adding up little by little. We like our team.

Not surprised at all. If you asked me last year, I would have disagreed with this. But after 3 years of being KO'd from 1st round and this year was the most embarassing of all when we BACKED INTO the playoffs. Yet if there's still no change in the management philosophy then for sure this is concerning. I think rank #21 is a fair assessment. Some of the contracts given this summer have been awful. (I know some of you guys like those said contract players, but leaving emotions out of this I'm looking at it purely through $$ and success expectancy). Still like the management overall for draft reasons and the hockey culture, but don't count me out from giving criticism when it's deserved. I certainly hope there's a trade to make up for some of these questionable contract extensions that have been given out. And no I'm not blaming Holland or anything, he's only a part of the equation. It's an entire team of decision makers including Blashill.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.wingingitinmotown.com/platform/amp/2016/7/20/12244044/red-wings-dylan-larkin-ran-a-hockey-camp-in-his-hometown-because-he-awesome?client=safari# Check out the link. Larkin should get the A. Hopefully he does. He's 19 and just ran his own hockey camp in Michigan. Incredible. This is more off-ice leadership than the 25-30 year olds in that locker room.

Personally I didn't think he was overall. But I didn't even pay attention to the guy until he came out of nowhere in Tampa and had a crazy good season or two when they won the cup. Then sort of fell off the radar. If he was top it was a short lived time imo, not as consistent as some of our past players.

I will clarify again that I think Fedorov's number needs retirement consideration but I'm just pointing out why blaming Illitch for anything in this matter isn't going to be a good supporting argument. When I read about the Aurie incident years ago, Illitch straight up came out and said his number isn't retired because he wasn't in the Hall of Fame. So that's where I get my step 1 from. Step two comes from an article that came out when Lidstrom's number was retired where he said that having your number retired is "all about being a Red Wing". And like GMR posted earlier - almost all the guys up there basically played only for the Red Wings give or take a few seasons for Lindsay and a bit more for Sawchuck. Ultimately I hope Illitch sort of brushes the whole contract issue and Feds not being lifelong Red Wing under the rug. And the only reason I say that is because half of Fedorov's Hall of Fame speech was dedicated to the Red Wings.

Illitch doesn't need to do that favor for Fedorov lol. Fedorov didn't do him any favors by staying. Ultimately Illitch has the upper hand in this made-up debate we're having. I mean even Steve Yzerman took a really s***ty pay cut just to stay with the Red Wings towards the end of his career. Yzerman was definitely the better Red Wing. And at the end of the day, retiring someone's number doesn't just come down to skills and accomplishments. That's only the FIRST step in having your number retired. The second step and probably the most important step comes down to being a Red Wing- which entails honor, dedication and loyalty to the franchise. It's upto Illitch if he wants to excuse Fedorov for his screwups for the step 2 that I just labeled in the previous paragraph. So arguing against Illitch isn't really in your favor to promote Fedorov's number retirement. Because when you do that, Illitch's argument would be Fedorov's TWO contract dramas. Which opens another can of worms.

Should've made your username SergeiViktorovichFedorov

Why not? I think he has a shot in a very weak class. 932 points, 2 stanley cups, Conn Smythe and Byng along with two 91 point seasons. Not a bad resume. Theres a few guys in the Hall with lesser accomplishments I'm not saying he should be in though.

We all have our biases. A lot of people here think Fedorov, Dats or Zetterberg were never generational talent but Lidstrom and Yzerman were. Years ago on hockeyfights.com you would see people saying Lidstrom was overrated and didn't start winning his Norris Trophies almost 10 years after his career and after guys like Ray Bourque and Paul Coffey retired and Chelios declined. Basically saying Lidstrom only won Norris trophies when all the good defenseman in the league started retiring. Outrageous argument right? Of course it is, because we all love Lidstrom. But nonetheless people make it an argument.

What should the standard be then? As Lefty pointed out in the post above yours, Fedorov is top 5 in almost every category. And no doubt he was also a generational player and a first ballot HOF last year. Is that not enough? I think #13, #40, #30 are debatable but #91 is above those three in my opinion.

It depends. A lot of people initially thought Lindsay and Abel weren' at the same level as Howe. When they were retiring Abel's number my father wasn't too receptive of it (he was a huge Production line fan as a little kid). Even now he thinks Howe should be the only one retired and everyone else should have another lesser honor. Depending on the generation, people's perception of "legends" are quite different.

That or you're feeding them.

One of them was not playing half the season due to injury lol.

Lmao I know your joking, but it might actually happen that way. (although not so extreme) All depends on the owner and the owner alone and what he feels like doing. Illitch could wake up tomorrow or in 10 years and say "maybe we should retire Fedorovs number" and we would all accept it. And then 30 years from now when asking if some future player should be retired, people will refer to Fedorov, Yzerman and Lidstrom as the "precedent that's been set" My point is, tying in Lindsay or Delveccio or Abel with Howe, Yzerman or Lidstrom is not the same at all. Some of these guys were retired much much later after the fact and in hindsight of their careers. Only 3 people were retired immediately.

Gordie Howe left the Wings in 1971 and his number was immediately retired in 1972. Ted Lindsay's number was retired at the Joe in 1991 almost 26 years after he retired from the game. Sawchuck's number was retired 1994 at the Joe. 24 years after his final season with the Rangers. Here's the best one. Sid Abel retired from the game in 1953 and his number wasn't retired at the Joe until 1995.

Well if that's the argument then neither Sawchuck, Lindsay, Delvecchio nor Abel would be on the rafters since neither of their numbers were retired till about 30-40 years after they stopped playing and until the organization discussed the matter. Only Gordie Howe, Steve Yzerman, and Niklas Lidstrom were immediately retired after their retirement no questions asked. If there's anyone that set the precedent on the rafters it's Howe, Lidstrom and Yzerman.

I agree with you. I've been vocal about having issues with his contract/term but Helm is an excellent PKer. By all eyeballs tests and math freaks data he's our best penalty killer. I'm hoping AA, Larkin can take a page out of his book for the PK. People with speed have an incredible advantage in these situations imo.

The PK under Babcock was fine up until 2011 or so. Things started changing to more passive/ "shot block to save a goal" bullcrap once we started transitioning from Datsyuk/Zetterberg to Miller, Eaves, then Glendening. It's fine, we didn't have anyone to fill in for D and Z's role. But now with Larkin, AA, and Helm signed for 5 years, there is absolutely no excuse not to use capable speedy, skilled players on the PK. One thing I liked about Draper more than Glendening/Miller was not only was Draper a good defensive 3rd/4th liner but the guy knew how to drive offense and often times converted his PK time into offensive opportunities. His 21 shorthanded goals and Selke trophy as a damn 4th liner (unheard of) speaks for itself.

Not the pairings necessarily that I agree with on WIIM, but the point they drive home is important. Our PK is nothing but garbage shot blocking. We need to change that and make it more of a threat to the opposing team like it once used to be. Doug Houda turned Patrice Bergeron and Marchand into excellent PKers (Marchand has 19 SH goals... jesus). I hope he brings that philosophy here.

Well would you look at that. WIIM writes a nice article about exactly what Krsmith and I have said ad nauseum. https://www.google.com/amp/www.wingingitinmotown.com/platform/amp/2016/7/19/12207888/setting-an-ideal-red-wings-penalty-kill-for-2016-17?client=safari#

This guy will probably help this small market team grow some more. Preds really were the winners in this trade. For both on-ice and off-ice reasons.

He's an option under "all of them". Unless you think D and Z shouldn't be up like some of the others here. I guess I made the options that way because of the lack of HOF for Osgood. Maybe if he was in or guaranteed to be in (like Datsyuk is guaranteed with the way NHL talks about him), I would have made Ozzy an individual option.

Not really because on the PP we had Lidstrom/Schneider and (Rafalski in 09) who were all better at quarterbacking the PP than 38 or 40 year old Fedorov was. I'm starting to wonder how much of him you actually watched after his stint with Anaheim. Stop living in the past with the guy. Our team and primary players were better than him in 2007 and especially in 2009. He would not have won us the cup, he would have simply been a support piece to a team that got outplayed by Anaheim and a team that lost to a hot goalie named Fleury. If Lidstrom isn't making that point blank shot with 10 seconds left, nobody is.