WingedWheel91

I wish Franzen well, and hope he can come back to play with Sheahan on our 3rd line. But if he comes back, its only a matter of time before people revert back to saying the outlandish things they said about the guy, and I'm probably one of them. This is because polarizing players have a way of garnering such a reaction... If Franzen wasn't such a skilled player, and history didn't provide a multitude of statistically great stretches of play (especially in the playoffs), we wouldn't react the way we do if/when he didn't show up for 2 weeks. If he was a role player - there wouldn't be a "Johan Franzen is lazy and he sucks" thread on this website. Phil Kessel is one of the most criticized forwards in all of hockey - and take a look at his numbers, a lot better than Franzen's? This is because he has demonstrated the ability to play at a high level, and usually effort is the only reason he doesn't. This is what makes people mad. Johan Franzen is no different - head injuries or not.

Mike Babcock is a better NHL coach today than Jeff Blashill. But today, Jeff Blashill might be a better coach for the Detroit Red Wings. The following players listed in Bold are players Jeff Blashill developed in Grand Rapids or at Western Michigan before they played in the NHL. TATAR - DATSYUK - HELM NYQUIST - ZETTERBERG - ABDELKADER JURCO - SHEAHAN - PULKINNEN MILLER- GLENDENNING - FERRARO KRONWALL - ERICSSON DEKEYSER - QUINCEY SMITH - MARCHENKO MRAZEK Here's the important part: Every single name on that list (besides Pulkinnen) came to the NHL and made an impact immediately. This isn't a fluke, or a system that condones itself to certain players - this is the result of a head coach who had the ability to make players better, and develop them into NHL caliber players. If you have the time, take a look at what Gustav Nyquist, Tomas Jurco, and Riley Sheahan did last year immediately following their promotions from the Grand Rapids Griffins. All of them averaged a significantly higher point per game average then, as opposed to this year playing only for Mike Babcock. I don't know if its utilization or motivation, but these players seemed to be at there best when they most recently played for Blashill - and when that wore off, Babcock didn't get the same results.

I hope he comes back, but he's also 36 and (at the very most) one more head injury away from retiring. Unfortunately, every concussion you suffer makes you more susceptible to the next one - so if he does come back it seems like its just a matter of time before its over. That being said, I wouldn't hate a: Franzen - Sheahan - Pulkinnen third line.

The problem with Mantha (and likely the reason he slipped to #20 in a draft he was considered the best goal scorer in) is and always has been his attitude/work ethic/compete level. I obviously don't train or practice with the him every day, but I think its a pretty reasonable assessment to say his lack of results at the AHL level are directly related to habits rather than skillset. He's 6'5, 200+ LBS, and possesses a lethal shot which allowed him to score 81 goals in 81 games last year for Val d'Or, size isn't an issue and he didn't just forget how to score goals. I'm not saying anyone should have expected a seamless transition or comparable statistical output, but it looks and sounds to me like he became comfortable relying mostly on skill at the QMJHL level, and may have underestimated how much work goes into being a professional. I think Devellano understands this - and uses public criticism as a way to motivate a player capable of so much more. This may sound crazy, but he's probably one of the few 20 year olds who might actually be a better Red Wing than Griffin. This way he can see first hand what it takes to be a Pavel Datsyuk, Henrik Zetterberg or Nick Kronwall.

Don't forget, Glendenning was also developed by Jeff Blashill...

If you are a Detroit Red Wings fan, you should be very proud of Ken Holland for doing what he just did. "Money will not be an issue" - yet we were always the lowest bidder in an attempt to resign Mike Babcock (while knowing him better than anyone). To me, I don't see this is as blind arrogance, but as a brilliant play by Holland to say and do what he had to - knowing the process would end with Jeff Blashill coaching this team for the next decade. I honestly am more excited with this information than I would have been had we re-signed Babcock, and lost Blashill. Babcock is a good coach, and should be praised for his Stanley Cup here - but his resume only shines with accomplishments that were legitimate expectations as well. He inherited Nick Lidstrom, Pavel Datsyuk and Henrik Zetterberg in their prime - yet only took us past the 2nd round of the playoffs in 3 out of 10 years he was in Detroit... (2007,2008,2009). In 2007 we had the most regular season points in the league, and one of the best teams on paper - and we certainly had the best team on paper in both 08/09. Blashill has coached professionally for less than 6 seasons - and if he wins the Calder Cup this year (which isn't a stretch) he will have 3 championships to show for it. He has also developed more than half of the current Detroit Red Wings roster (who won the Calder Cup 2 years ago), and has since developed players like Pulkinnen, Anthanasiou, and Marchenko the same way he developed the likes of Nyquist, Tatar, and Sheahan. This guy just continues to do it, and seems like he gets more out of these players than Babcock has - albeit at the AHL level. I don't think we lost the Mike Babcock sweepstakes, but won the Jeff Blashill award.

Trade Howard + 2016 1st Round Pick to Edmonton for this years 16th Pick Trade the 16th and 19th Pick to San Jose for the 9th Pick Draft Werenski

HIFI Canadian: I live in Toronto, and can assure you that Pat Quinn's (modest) success in his time here was primarily due to the fact that he also had roster control (without a salary cap) and MLSE money to spend. He was certainly the best coach the team has had in a long time, but also wasn't challenged to buy players at whatever price it would take. Following the implementation of the hard cap in 2005, he was fired because the Leafs didn't make the playoffs - and this started the magnification of what truly plagues the Toronto Maple Leafs: Bad management and even worse scouting. I can confidently say that Pat Quinn's departure as coach of the team, had very little to do with how bad they have been since. At the very least, we aren't going to find ourselves in a situation like Toronto because we have the arguably the deepest pool of prospects in the league - complimented by outstanding management/scouting. The other examples in Dallas and Colorado are intriguing, but both are still young teams who have had some success and probably need time to grow before we can truly judge who the better coaching option was. In terms of Mike Babcock, I used to completely agree with your assessment - but I no longer do. At the end of the day, this is a results driven and oriented business and in 10 years as coach of the Detroit Red Wings - Babcock has been unable to advance past the 2nd Round of the NHL Playoffs 7/10 times or 70% of the time he's had the chance. In 2008, we won the Stanley Cup and probably rostered the best team in the NHL, in 2009 we added Marian Hossa and certainly rostered the best team in the NHL, but lost in the finals. The only other year he was able to bring the Detroit Red Wings out of the 2nd round, was in 2007 where we lost to Anaheim in the 3rd round... That team finished the regular season with the most points in the NHL. Yes, he made the playoffs every year, but he also inherited a fantastic core of players in their prime... And when those players no longer were, the results have been 3/4 years out in the 1st round. My point is, if the next 10 years were guaranteed to yield the exact same results (including 4 first round exits) would you sign up for it? Keep in mind, the players who made him successful those 3 years I mentioned wont be a part of it. I am in no way/shape/form saying that Babcock is a bad coach - but is he atleast overrated? Maybe. It seems that his resume really shines because of the back to back gold medals (no pun intended) he recently won with team Canada, but again this is a case of accomplishing what was expected. Without bias, Canada should win every Olympic Gold they play for - they have the deepest forward group, the best defenseman, and the best goalie in the world. Of course its still an accomplishment to do it, but he isn't the only coach who would have - given the opportunity. My real point of contention with Babcock's return is what we might have with Jeff Blashill. - this guy continues to just do it. He's only Head Coached professionally for 5 years, but already has 2 championships and 4 semi final appearances to show for it. If he wins the Calder Cup again this year (after losing the likes of Tatar, Nyquist, Jurco, Sheahan, Glendenning, Dekeyser, and Mrazek,) he will have won championships 3/6 times or 50% of the time he's had the chance - I hope the Detroit Red Wings realize this, and that they are actually the ones in the drivers seat.

Here's a thought: No-one. I want no part in signing anyone the same summer that Cody Franson gets a multi year contract worth $5-6 Million per. The free agent class is an absolute joke.

I think your attitude has a lot to do with how management treats you.

Congratulations - you are one (of a very small group of people, and maybe the only one who doesn't live in Boston) who would rather have Ray Bourque on your team for a 20 year span than Nick Lidstrom. If your argument is that Nick Lidstrom doesn't have quite the offensive numbers as Bourque (although close) its obviously because of how much the game has evolved. He was putting up point totals that even the best NHL forwards don't put up today because of how many less goals are scored. The comparison between Lidstrom's and Bourque's defensive abilities aren't even worth the time. To even attempt to suggest that Ray Bourque's competition from 1979-1999 was greater/tougher than Nick Lidstrom's competition from 1992-2012 is really where I lose focus - There were only 16 teams in the National Hockey League when Bourque started his career, or 84 less Defenseman competing for the Norris Trophy. A full decade later, there were still only 20. You also realize that the Detroit Red Wings were an awful hockey team until about 1992 (Lidstrom's Rookie season), no coincidence there either I guess. And after all of that, in a league with 10-14 less teams (or 60-84 less Defensemen) than Bourque had to compete with, Nick Lidstrom still has the superior accomplishments. Is a Norris Trophy a "silly team stat"? Is a Conn Smythe trophy (on possibly the greatest hockey team of all time) a "silly team stat"? No. When you win the Conn Smythe trophy, you were the best player on the team that won a Stanley Cup...I can say confidently that without him in 2002, they wouldn't have won the cup. This is something Ray Bourque was never able to do, and at the end of the day there isn't 1 player who wouldn't trade individual accomplishments for cup rings. This is why the game is played.

In terms of your definition: "a #1 is a guy that is in the upper echelon of defenseman in the league" - Are you suggesting like the top 2, 3, 5 NHL Defensmen? Because unfortunately they are 25/30 teams in the NHL without a top 5 Defenseman, and they aren't very easy to acquire. It also doesn't mean your team cant be good without one, as Shea Weber, Drew Doughty and Erik Karlson are all players who didn't see the 2nd round of the playoffs this year. PK Subban hasn't contributed much and isn't likely to make it out of the 2nd round.

Ray Bourque did not do as much for the Boston Bruins as Nick Lidstrom did for the Detroit Red Wings. 5 Norris Trophies, 0 Stanley Cups. 7 Norris Trophies, 4 Stanley Cups, 1 Conn Smythe.

Can someone help me out here... What is the true meaning of a "#1 Defenseman"? By definition, there should be 30 "#1" Defensemen in the NHL, correct? The answer: It doesn't really matter. This is because Defensemen play in pairs, they are tandems built based on chemistry and synergy that hopefully play greater than the sum of their parts. Based on definition, I think it would be foolish to say Nick Kronwall is not a top 30 Defenseman in the NHL, so yes, he's #1... But not an elite #1. The other question is, how can anyone honestly rank Defensemen? Points are only a small indication of Defensman's true value to a team... I watched all and (attended 2) of the Red Wings playoffs games this year and can tell you that Kronwall did as good a job at shutting down Steven Stamkos as anyone else, which is his primary responsibility. The comparison to Nick Lidstrom is completely foolish, yet so often made. Lidstrom is arguably the best defenseman to ever play the game - Bobby Orr was revolutionary and of course had more offensive talent - but there isn't a Defensman in the history of the game to consistently do more for a team than Nick did, don't forget Bobby only played 9 real seasons in the league. To support that point even further, Lidstrom also played with Brian Rafalski for a good chunk of his career - where Kronwall has played mostly with Brad Stuart and Jonathon Ericsson, so its easy to see where a big disparity in point totals would come from. I would define a true #1 Defenseman as a player who plays on the top pairing, against the other teams best, playing in all situations - contributing offensively (with a good first pass) while being responsible defensively (limiting turnovers) and demonstrates leadership to support the growth of others.

To be honest, I don't see the point in arguing about whether Pulks utilizes the same go to move to score goals or not, because that's what all elite goal scorers do. Look at the 2 best pure goal scorers in the league: 1. Stamkos (patented half boards one timer) 2. Ovechkin (comes down his off wing, uses defender as a screen and fires through his legs OR his PP point/half boards one timer) I am not suggesting Teemu Pulkinnen is the next Steve Stamkos or Alex Ovechkin, but we should be able to agree that (1) he has an elite shot and (2) he has absolutely solidified himself as the best pure goal scorer in the AHL at 23 years of age. Those 2 facts lead me to believe that he should be able to one day be a very good offensive player in the NHL... (even if most of his goals come on the PP the same way)

Love these threads: Trade Nyquist, Mantha, Ericsson, Oulette, + 1st For Malkin. Trade Weiss, Smith and Anthanasiou for Phanuef (-2,000,000). Sign Mike Green. TATAR - MALKIN - HELM ZETTERBERG - DATSYUK - ABDELKADER JURCO - SHEAHAN - PULKKINEN MILLER - GLENDENNING - FERARRO KRONWALL - PHANUEF DEKEYSER - GREEN QUINCEY - MARCHENKO MRAZEK HOWARD

Who cares? It's either Babcock or Blashill - both outstanding coaches... I would personally rather have Blashill because he knows these players as well as Babcock does, and knows the next generation (Mantha, Oulette, Anthanasiou, Pulkinnen) a hell of a lot better. The current Detroit Red Wings, anyway you look at it, are the bi-product of a great job that Blashill has done in terms of development of our young nucleus, and they evidently respect him as a coach, which is massive. It just feels right, let him finish the job he has started and see if he can get more out of a Teemu Pulkinnen or a Tomas Jurco than our current coach has. I also didn't like Babcock's attitude last night, it was a selfish press conference he used as a marketing ploy to put the spotlight on himself - and the great job "he" has done. Without finding the direct quote, he basically said that the Red Wings have won "too much", and been "too good" in recent years to be in the position to draft a replacement for Pavel Datsyuk or a "Great Player on the Back End", and that "the team isn't as good as it was". My issue here is that the Red Wings were still an extremely good hockey team when Pavel Datsyuk was drafted (in the 6th Round) - actually they won the cup that year (1998), and the year before that (1997), and then again in his rookie year (2002) - so maybe a good future doesn't cost you a miserable few years. I understand that the Salary Cap made it easier back then, but who currently has better future than this? (Besides Edmonton) TATAR - LARKIN - MANTHA NYQUIST - SHEAHAN - ABDELKADER JURCO - ANTHANASIOU - PULKINNEN BERTUZZI - GLENDENNING - FERARRO DEKEYSER - MARCHENKO OULETTE - SPROUL JENSEN - (THIS YEARS 1ST ROUNDER?) MRAZEK I am not exaggerating when I ask this, but which forward on that list doesn't have star potential? Yes - we need help on the back end, but defenseman also mature at a much older age than forwards do, and our scouting staff is still the best in the business.

#TankIt #FireKenHolland #DoRedWingsFansDeserveBetter #IsHankTooSlowAndIneffectiveToPlayCenter #AreWeContenders? .......Welcome to the Club...........!!!!!!! #AtWhatPointDoesHollandDeserveBlame I always think of posts like these when they show that in game graphic, you know - when it shows the current leader (in all of the 4 major sports) regarding longest active playoff streaks... The one where we have like 24, the best NBA organization (arguably ever) has like 17, the best 2 football organizations (arguably ever) have like 6, and the baseball teams have like 3 each. Oh, in that time we've transitioned from being an old team to a young and inexperienced team... through 2 lockouts and the implementation of a hard salary cap. I can't wait to win tomorrow night and go through my "why so negative thread" to remember why we were going to lose in 5 to TB.

As inconsistent as the NHL Department of Player Safety seems to be at times, I think they still primarily focus on 2 aspect's of each reviewable play (much more than any other's): Injury + History. Because a hearing doesn't guarantee a suspension, I think the 2 main factors in the decision to only FINE Kronwall are as follows: (1) Kucherov was NOT injured on the play + (2) Kronwall does NOT have any suspension history with the NHLDPS - Actually, he doesn't even have a review history because the Havlat hit was a game misconduct for interference... And interference (at the time) wasn't even grounds for an infraction leading to a game misconduct (which pissed me off). If I'm wrong and he is suspended, I'd like to channel the 2007 Anaheim Ducks when we beat them 5-0 in Game 3, Pronger got suspended the next game for a hit on Holmstrom (where he also wasn't even penalized on the play) and the Ducks came back and beat us 5-3 in Game 4.

I know it still says TBD... But does anyone have a better idea as to what time Game 5 will be on Saturday? I need to plan my golf game around it lol

Guys, I still don't understand the "it will take a miracle to win this series" attitude. Game 1 - we got heavily outplayed and won on the road against the best home team (by far) in the NHL without our best power forward. Game 2 - we got slightly outplayed and lost on the road against the best home team (by far) in the NHL without our best power forward. Game 3 - we play at home against the worst road team (by far) in the NHL playoffs with our best power forward Game 4- we play at home against the worst road team (by far) in the NHL playoffs with our best power forward Series is 1-1... 3 games remaining in DET, 2 games remaining in TB. I know 1 player (unless Crosby, Ovechkin, Weber) doesn't usually make or break a team - but we can actually roll 3 respectable lines tonight with Abdelkader's return. Furthermore, Sheahan is much more effective as 3rd line Center, and Nyquist and Tatar are back playing with world class Centers who have historically made them more productive. I posted earlier that I would love to see a JURCO - SHEAHAN - GLENDENNING line, but Babcock actually knows these players a lot better than we do. Storylines are so fragile... If we take this game its 2-1 and were all the sudden 1 game away from putting these guys on the ropes! Lets go.

Hey Babcock, Why don't we give our 2nd best offensive player this series a look you a** clown!!!!! This is what the bottom 6 should look like: JURCO - SHEAHAN - GLENDENNING MILLER - ANDERSSON - FERRARO

The only way we can unload Weiss is to take back an equally bad contract... To get someone like Dion Phanuef who is a much better player, in a contradictory cap situation (long term cap hit, team in complete rebuild) we would probably have to throw in a prospect and/or draft pick to make it happen. At the deadline we were apparently close with Weiss, Smith, and a pick or prospect for Phanuef. Weiss has 3/4 years less on his deal so he becomes more attractive because by the time the leafs "3-5" year rebuild is competitive, his contract is off the books - and in the meantime his 3 contract years are irrelevant because the team wont be spending to the cap.

Just a few observations: -We don't have to play Connor Mcdavid 4 times a year for the next 8 years. -This improves our chances of trading for Dion Phanuef as Toronto was rumoured to have been using him as a way to move up to the #3 pick had Edmonton landed where predicted. He becomes even more expendable if they draft Hannifin. -This does not improve our chances of keeping Mike Babcock.

Although logic suggests Abdelkader is not going to play tomorrow, I still have some hope... Our lines should be: TATAR - DATSYUK - HELM ABDELKADER - ZETTERBERG - NYQUIST JURCO - SHEAHAN - GLENDENNING MILLER - ANDERSON/WEISS - FERRARO PROS: TATAR PLAYS BETTER WITH DATSUK (RATHER THAN SHEAHAN) NYQUIST PLAYS BETTER WITH ZETTERBERG (RATHER THAN SHEAHAN) ABDELKADER PLAYS BETTER WITH ZETTERBERG (RATHER THAN SOMEONE ELSE) SHEAHAN PLAYS BETTER AS A 3RD LINER (THAN A 2ND) CONS ZETTERBERG PLAYS BETTER WITH DATSYUK