gcom007

That sounds a hell of a lot more likely than the $50-60 million dollar offers being suggested by some.

We really need to improve on D so our offense can get back to playing offense and the team can become a bit more balanced. So long as we continue to have the D that we do, if we're going to be a good defensive team, our offense is going to be compromised. That's just not going to work if this team is really going to make a push. There's a lot of good pieces on this team, but the defense needs a serious boost.

I'm slightly more optimistic about our chances personally, but with some of the ideas floating around about how much Buffalo is arguing, it'd be hard to blame him for turning it down. And as rough as Buffalo's been, they're a team that's going to be better before too long. I don't think it's the pipe dream some make it out to be.

I was thinking about the money angle though, and Holland has said several times that the money won't be an issue. Given that there's no cap for coaches and what's said, should we really be discounting that? If the Wings really want Babcock, why wouldn't they match whatever Buffalo's offering? Again, I'm operating around the idea of Holland saying money won't be an issue and again, that there's no cap implication here and we have a rich owner. I'm not saying I think Babcock or any coach should necessarily jump to making $5 million+ a season seemingly out of nowhere. I'm just wondering how Holland is approaching this given what he's said and what Buffalo may be offering.

Oh please... Aside from the fact that you're putting words in my mouth, are you really going to try and suggest that anything I've written about this matter is in any way profoundly worse than what countless regulars here post about any given other side of an argument? As if it isn't a regular occurrence for people here to lament the way other people think and post. There was no vitriol to what I said. If you have such a problem with it, report it to a mod and if they have a problem with it, they can ban me. They've done it before, but it wasn't for anything as utterly commonplace as what I've posted today, so I'm really not too worried.

If true, wow. But I really doubt that it is. I just don't see how you get to that number without a lot of years, and I don't see either side agreeing to anything north of six years, and even that sounds like a long contract right now.

What's amusing is that I didn't address anyone directly, didn't quote anyone, and spoke in generalities entirely. What names did I call you specifically again? You're clearly one of the most vocal, but you're hardly the only one in my estimation going off the deep end on this matter.

I don't mind the discussion at all. What I think is ridiculous is people acting like Babcock himself has somehow directed the little (and I mean "little" literally, this is hockey news/media we're talking about here...) circus in the press surrounding the decision. The guy did one sit-down interview with one of the top hockey media guys and said all the right things no matter what his decision ends up being, in my mind doing so to try to be open and honest about the process, because so many are fascinated by it, for whatever the reason. I don't see that as a big deal at all, and I think he did it to try to quell some of the more ridiculous reporting going on. And as said in the other thread, I don't think he's dragged out the situation at all. Quite the opposite in fact, and he's fully entitled to drag it out a lot longer, but he isn't. This is a good thing for all parties involved, and demonstrative of the fact that again, he's not really dragging this out. I can totally respect and understand why you believe him to be overrated, honestly. What I think is absurd is that you and so many others are trampling him for the way this whole situation has gone down. He's kept to a relatively tight timetable, been as open as reasonably possible in the right setting, and has said nothing that one should reasonably take as inflammatory. You want a new coach? Fine. I get why you might, even while I think it'd be great to keep him. But most everything else being bandied about by you and many others I view as nothing short of silliness.

Can someone fix the broken record?

I can't wait for this to end so all of this ridiculous whining can stop. What's more absurd: Babcock taking a few weeks to make a huge decision or fans on a message board pissing and moaning about it incessantly for literally days on end? You don't like all the media coverage?!? Boo ******* hoo. Get over it. Babcock really hasn't done as much to encourage it as many seem so desperate to believe. Really, he hasn't. And he really isn't taking that much time to deal with it. It's not unreasonable that he wants to assess his options at the ten year mark, and it's more than reasonable to take a couple weeks to spend time actually talking to other teams in order to make an informed decision. Nothing that is happening is outrageous except for how much some people around here want to whine about it. It's out of your control. The media is out of your control. And to what degree the media may be out of control, that is out of Babcock's control. All things considered, this whole situation is being handled quickly and efficiently. Remember, Holland gave Babcock until the 25th to talk to teams, and Babcock came out and said he'd make a decision by tomorrow, the 20th. Babcock absolutely isn't dragging this out.

Is the Blashill obsession like the backup goalie and the backup quarterback thing in Detroit?

He makes $400,000 now, double what most AHL coaches make.

A whole lot of people knew we had something very, very special in Datsyuk in 2002. True, he didn't become the fully realized player he now is until a bit later, but the evidence that he was going to be great was very much on display very early on.

Affirms what I thought of his post-game comments. He wasn't really s***ting on anybody. He was sending a message to his younger players; their time is now.

What kills me is that E broke his toe in pre-game soccer. OF COURSE he did...

Sorry, but totally disagree about Datsyuk. Z took some time to look like a full-blown superstar, but Datsyuk was pretty incredible from the get go. You knew he was going to be incredible even in his rookie year. He did have to get stronger though, which I think is Nyqvist's biggest need right now as well. He's just too weak. Datsyuk spent one of his early summers putting on 20 pounds of muscle and he became another kind of force when the next season started. And bear in mind, I'm not one of the people slamming Tatar and Nyquist. I'm definitely willing to give them time to continue to develop. But I don't think either of them have it in them to be as good of players as Datsyuk is and was, let alone how complete of a player Datsyuk is.

I will say that Datsyuk was dealing with some pretty serious injuries in the playoffs early in his career that didn't help him one bit.

Sorry, missed that about "too early." And I definitely agree, I'd rather overpay in free-agency as well. I just wish we'd target more accessible guys and overpay them. I mean, hell, what's the worst that could happen? Another Uwe Krupp or Stephen Weiss? It's not like it'd be the first time... I'm just really sick of having to pick up scraps in the weeks following the start of free agency because we missed out on the big name or two we were chasing.

I'd say more like 2-3 years away. And if Z doesn't show a serious uptick in his late-season game moving forward, you might as well consider what Z stands for in terms of points gone sooner. I hope we get 4-5 years of leadership at least out of Z though. At worst, I think he still stands to bring a lot of value to this team.

Jurco, yeah, I get that. Smith too. But Pulk hasn't had much of a chance here yet. And you could say the same even for Jurco on some level. Don't get me wrong, I think we overvalue a lot of guys too, but I think there's a chance some of these guys stand to come out looking better than they do right now over the next couple years. That said, I do think there's something to be said for moving prospects for NHL-ready talent if you can. I'm not one of those whining about all the guys we gave up, and if it meant adding significant pieces to round out this team, I could stand to lose some of our better talent coming up. It's part of the game. You hang onto everybody, you're bound to get burnt, and vice versa. Holland could stand to find more of a middle ground than he has and we might have a more well-rounded defensive group.

That other "ever-popular" Holland-mouthpiece spun a slightly different tune about Howard's fate with the Wings. "The Wings will listen if teams want to talk trade (however shaky he looked in spring, Howard has a solid history, including the playoffs), but economically, there's no urgency to make a move. Mrazek is under contract for one more year at $737,5500, which generally is less than what it costs to hire a veteran backup goaltender. So if no team offers anything good for Howard during the off-season, the Wings could enter next season with both on board. It never hurts to have two guys pushing each other." http://www.freep.com/story/sports/nhl/red-wings/2015/05/01/detroit-red-wings-petr-mrazek/26687233/ Smartest move if you ask me. Move Howard if the return is good. Otherwise, you likely have the best 1-2 punch in the game right now in terms of goaltending next year. Maybe move Howard at the deadline if Mrazek seems solid and a deal is there.

I also think Babcock was sending a message to his young players that they have to be better and they have to work harder to keep growing into solid NHL players who can compete when it matters most. Guys like Tatar and Nyqvist have a lot of skill and potential, but they're going to have to work harder and get stronger if they want to have a prayer of carrying this team when Dats and Z move on. As of now, they're simply not good enough. Not even close.

Nit picking my ass! We don't have anyone remotely close to Datsyuk's level coming up, and that's absolutely a problem. Babcock was being entirely realistic and addressing a very real problem that this team is going to be facing in the coming years. We do have a lot of good young players coming up, but do we have anyone even close to Datsyuk's level? I think people really, really, really undervalue how important Datsyuk is to this team. As I said before, we're going to learn a lot more about Holland in the coming years, because it's one thing to lose Lidstrom when you still have true superstars in Dats and Z to build your team around. But as of now, it's highly unlikely that we're going to have that luxury when Dats and Z retire, and with Z likely slowing down faster, it's going to be all the more pressing of an issue. Nothing Babcock said was unrealistic and unwarranted. We have some serious issues to deal with, and I don't think Babcock wants to wait until Dats and Z retire to hunt for a solution. And yes, I think Babcock is staying.

I don't really want to see Howard go. I'd love to have him stay, but I don't think he's going to want to at this point, and I'm trying to be realistic about maximizing the return you might get for him. If Howard ends up having decent trade value and we can bring in a decent veteran backup, I think it'd be smart to explore the possibilities. But it might not even be that complicated; I really wouldn't be surprised if Howard simply asked to be dealt.

He has actually suggested that it may be over. There's going to be some serious risk involved from here on out apparently and he's not sure what he's going to do. Given his age, I wouldn't be shocked if he calls it a career if the situation is as bad as he was suggesting, but who knows?