gcom007

Tough call. I think either would help, and both have some element of risk involved. Erhoff is a bit older and Niskanen hasn't proven as much and played on a better team. I'll be happy if we acquire either one of them though. Sure, it'd be great to get a big name, but our D isn't as bad as you'd think and having another solid guy to round out the top 4 makes the D a whole lot more serviceable than it's been the last couple of years.

Just because he's not a superstar doesn't mean that he couldn't improve the overall quality of our defense quite a bit. Erhoff in and of himself is not a guy worth going crazy over on an individual level like you would a superstar, but what he'd bring to the TEAM in filling out the D would be no small thing. We're not in a position to bring in an elite player either via trade or free agency at this point. We need to make the best of the situation and bring in guys that can help get this team going in the right direction towards being a contender again. Then maybe somewhere down the line we might be able to more reasonably get our hopes up about bringing in top talent. Right now, we just need solid guys to round out a defense that still has some glaring holes in it.

I get terrified when I see news like this. There's so many reasons why it just absolutely shouldn't happen, and even more given that we've gone after Jovanovski before and it didn't end so well. But I just get terrified that I'll read a headline on July 3rd, "Jovanovski signs 2 year deal with Detroit." It's sad that it feels like it wouldn't be so shocking at this point.

I'd be surprised if it happened, but that'd go a long ways towards shutting me up about Holland. One solid veteran that can easily take a top 4 spot would be big though. We don't have to have a star if we could just have a solid three line punch and stop having to rely so much on guys like Kindl and Lashoff.

Ha. I still sometimes question my decision. I was doubling in history and economics with a minor in PR and doing 18 credit loads year round essentially, given the 9 credit loads I took in the spring and summer terms. I think I ultimately made the right choice for me when it comes to skipping law school, but I went from one extreme to another academically, largely out of frustration and exhaustion, not to mention a dismal economic outlook. Enter idealism and the whole "do what you love" thing. Now I have...a music degree...that I don't use in the I.T. jobs that pay most of my bills. Life.

He would've gotten his praise if he'd just add another Stuart into the mix. You're not going to pull Lidstroms and Rafalski's out of your hat very often at all, but if you can't do that, you need more average core guys. I don't think you're really giving Rafalski his full due, even considering his fading performance in the last couple years, but DD is definitely a solid edition either way, and Ericsson has become better than many including myself expected. I think you might not be giving Stuart his full due either though when you say you'd take Ericsson over him any day, but my point isn't to compare. Like I said, I can easily reconcile the fact that we didn't land an elite defenseman to fill the hole left by Lidstrom. What I don't understand is why after failing to land some of the bigger names we were after, in three years since Rafalski retired and two years since Lidstrom and Stuart retired/left, why haven't we found a way to bring in another defenseman who at least solidifies our top four? Again, to be abundantly clear because I don't think people get this at all, I'm not talking about bring in an elite defenseman, I'm talking about bringing in a dependable mid-level defenseman that should cost around $4 million but you end up overpaying at closer to $5 million, or you have to trade a prospect you like. Our defense isn't great by any means, but given that we lost Lidstrom, Rafalski and Stuart in the span of a year, it's utterly and completely shocking that we're not way worse, especially considering how many minutes some of those jokers ended up playing down the stretch. Seriously, imagine how much better our defense would be with another top-four defenseman... It might not seem like much, but take a second to really stop and think about the fact that we had to rely so much on Kindl, Lashoff and Quincey, and the fact that Smith and DD are still developing, and Kronwall ultimately is a reluctant number one, and Ericsson, while improved, is still a little bit of the classic Ericsson from time to time. Having a solid veteran in the mix that easily cracks the top four doesn't automatically make us a contender or make the defense great, but it would make the whole situation a whole lot more solid to the point that if and when Howard gets back to playing like we know he can, we're really not going to be hurting as much from losing Lidstrom as we thought we might be. But it doesn't matter, because Holland has been too busy signing old, broken, knee-skaters to play forward instead of finding a way to make a deal for a solid defenseman that would instantly make this team a lot better. That is the sort of thing that just kills me about Holland. And I liked Bert more than most at his price, and as said, part of me even was fine with signing Cleary last year. I don't dislike these guys completely. But would I rather roll with a few more kids and spend a little bit more to bring in veterans that I know will be able to crack the lineup when healthy? Absolutely. We still end up overpaying for the veteran scrubs we keep scraping from the bottom of a long dry well, so why not role with a few more cheaper kids and pay a bit more money to sign better mid-level vets/role players? Holland talks like he doesn't want to overpay guys, but his actions say he just doesn't want to overpay guys he's never employed before. He's proven that he's perfectly willing to overpay former Wings that want to come back to pad their retirement savings after being abandoned by the teams they left us for.

Being a history major in college for four years was just a terrible thing for me. We ended up writing 3-4 papers a week, all in the 10-20 page range. When you have to churn out that much writing constantly, you learn to just spew; it's a survival tactic. I finally quit being a history major when I realized I really didn't want to go to law school, but the damage was done. I no longer have a concise bone in my body when it comes to writing, and I have no ******* clue how to get over it!

Absolutely. Again, as said, I think it's getting to the point where we need a fresh perspective from a GM. But if we can do so while keeping Holland in the organization, it's a win-win. Again, I don't know how intimately involved he is in all of the processes that go into drafting, but I can't take anything away from the success we've had drafting, and I'm more than willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on that front. To be utterly and completely clear, I don't think the guy is an idiot at all. And to be honest, if he became the GM of another team, I wouldn't be shocked at all if he built a great program from the ground up. I don't doubt the guys hockey sense and I don't doubt the quality of his "craft" I suppose you could say. What I doubt is his ability to still effectively apply his craft at the GM position in Detroit. He's a loyal guy, and perhaps a sentimental guy, which in so many ways are great traits to have when you're talking about being a good human being. But I think it's become abundantly clear that these traits haven't served him so well in the cap era. I'm generally a loyal guy and somewhat sentimental as well, and there's a part of me that hates the idea of letting guys like Cleary go, or not giving Bert one more "one more last chance" at a Cup, but you've got to be realistic about what's best for the team and make some tough decisions. You've also got to get more comfortable with the idea of bringing in guys you're less familiar with, because again, clearly, the old guys have been mediocre at best and oftentimes total disasters. That Holland is even entertaining the idea of bringing Cleary back after last year is colossally worrying to me, and I wasn't even one of the one's that worked up about it last year. Look it up; I was pretty neutral about it while the majority of people lost their s***. But the writing is no longer just on the wall, it's evolved into a Cloverfield monster that can speak, and it's hissing and screaming: "HANG THEM UP, DANNY BOY!" Again, I respect the guy for his loyalty and I can relate to being sentimental, but his judgement just seems too clouded by these traits anymore when it comes to personnel decisions, and I can say that not even accounting for my frustration with his resistance to moving guys we developed like Flip to make room for say, ******* Marian Hossa (!!!), when you have the chance to sign him to a lifetime deal at a great cap hit. But no, we'll stand by our guys, lose some of them to free agency immediately because they're not as loyal to us, then continue to keep hoping for that elusive breakout year from others, and then we won't even move them at the deadline a few years later when it's obvious we're going to lose them to free agency...I'm sorry, that one just still burns so much. Bottom line, again, I think Holland is an important part of this organization, and I'd like to see him stay a part of it on some level, but I think it's time for someone new to take over the GM role. Holland had a great run, and he probably would've been wise to stick to his "joke" and pass the torch when Lidstrom retired.

Again, to be clear, bear in mind that I haven't once said that Holland failed because he didn't sign an elite defenseman. Sure, I think he should've tried to bring another higher level guy before Lidstrom left, and I say that knowing full well that it'd cost us a lot and it'd likely have compromised some of our offensive depth. I think if Holland had played the situation better, he would've been shopping for the high-end defenseman he wanted before Lidstrom retired, not after when our backs are against the wall and we have to deal with the loss of Stuart too. But whatever; it didn't happen and realistically that is a tougher thing to pull off. If it was just that, I wouldn't be upset, but as I said, what blows my mind is that he hasn't even brought in a guy that could fill a Stuart-sized hole. Elite defenseman don't grow on trees, I get that, and it's ideal to not overpay for higher end guys if you can. But there are a lot more quality d-men out there that could fill in the hole Stuart left, and when you really think about just that hole being filled in the context of our current defense, it's not hard to see how much a guy like that would help, perhaps even dramatically. Even if we had to overpay a bit for an above-average mid-level defenseman, I think it would be well worth it, and again, it's something that Holland absolutely should've been able to have done at some point over the last three years. But you know, even that wouldn't bother me quite so much if not for the fact that he seems to have forgotten that we lost three top four defensemen, and instead has spent more time signing old, typically washed up, mid-level scrubs that oftentimes have done nothing to help this team and have only burnt through cap space. And most would agree that they would've been overpaid had they even played, but when you consider that many didn't even play, my mind just goes numb when I turn to look at what he's done for the defense in the same span of time. Bottom line, I'm really a lot less concerned with bringing in big names than most. It's always nice when you can find a high end guy who makes your team better, but it's foolish to think you're going to pull those deals off too often in the cap era. But if you can't find a way to plug holes with solid, dependable mid-level guys at least, you wind up in the sort of mess we've been in for awhile now. You mention that he's the reason that we can roll teams that can be competitive with the Grand Rapids kids, but that clearly wasn't part of his plans in either of the last two years. We've stumbled into the playoffs the last couple of years largely based off the steam from GR call ups, but the team that Holland put together that was supposed to do the job either couldn't stay healthy or the players were so bad that they couldn't even beat a minor leaguer out for an NHL job on an injury-plagued team. Meanwhile, again, we're wasting valuable cap space on these guys Ken Holland signed to fill out the team, but we still don't want to overpay anyone who could actually contribute and fill a hole. I don't know how involved Ken Holland is in our scouting program, but even so, it seems like the point your making illustrates that Holland doesn't have a good handle on the players he has. If these kids are good enough to beat out the guys he's signing and help the team make the playoffs, why are we wasting time and money signing guys that won't play when we could get these kids up and growing in the NHL, and at much cheaper prices than the mid-level scrubs they're winning spots from? I'll give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to our scouting and drafting program, and it's why I've said that it'd be ideal to keep him in the organization if possible if we go in another direction at GM. But as said, I still think you have to stop and question our strategy with the kids and thus also with how we pursue outside talent via trade or free agency when you look at how the last couple of years have gone specifically. Maybe it's time to start thinking about building teams with AHLers that are ripe as opposed to waiting for them to be overripe, and use the extra cap space saved from using younger guys to be more aggressive in signing the mid-level talent that you know can make your team better and maintain a spot in the lineup. But lastly, about the kids, I'm very optimistic, but I'm trying to be realistic too. Yes, we have half a room of kids with potential to build dams, but realistically speaking, if we're lucky, half of them will pan out to be solid NHLers, and only half of them will go full blown Ville Leino. It might sound negative or pessimistic, but realistically, it's pretty much inevitable. And as much as I'd like to be optimistic enough to believe Nyquist and Tatar could eventually fill the shoes of Z and Dats...and to be utterly and completely clear, I really like these guys, a lot, seriously, a lot...but if I'm being brutally honest with myself, I'd be shocked if they reached the levels of Z and Dats. They're real good players with a lot of potential and I hope they have long careers as Red Wings, but it's still way too early to expect them to become elite guys. It's possible, but I don't think either has the innate, almost supernatural talent of Dats, which truly was blatantly evident immediately, and Z is just an all around warrior of a player that few compare to. I'm not going to hold either player to the standards of Dats and Z at this point because it's simply not fair to them at all, and it's bound to lead to being unnecessarily disappointed in them. Furthermore, both Nyquist and Tatar completely disappeared in the playoffs, so clearly, they still have some learning to do and some important things to prove before we really get an idea of the level of players they'll be over the course of their careers. I'm not saying we should be worried, I'm just saying we should stay grounded and reasonable. Long story short though, I like our kids, I really do, but we don't have any that you can be sure that you'll be able to build a team around, and we generally don't draft high enough to get the kind of players that are really worth taking those bigger bets on. If Holland wants to float in-between rebuilding mode and a tweaking mode, we need to do a better job of bringing in proven NHL talent that is at least good enough to crack the lineup on the regular and contribute to this team. Again, I'm not saying we need to sign or trade for superstars. Not at all. Obviously it's great to get those guys when you can, but at this point, we haven't even been able to successfully bring in outside mid-level talent! That's ultimately what does kill me about some of the Holland bashers, because they piss and moan about missing out on the big names when the real story and concern lies more in Holland's inability to recruit role players that can crack the lineup. And that's the worst part of this. We still have a great core in Dats and Z. Kronwall is better suited to be a number two guys and loses some of his effectiveness in certain areas of his game having to be the number one guy, but even so, he's still a hell of defenseman. Jimmy at his worst is still capable of getting the job done if he gets a little bit better defense in front of him, and at his best, he's brilliant. If we'd do a better job of integrating our kids in a little sooner, trimming some of the washed-up veteran fat, and sucking it up and overpay if you have to a bit to bring in another solid top four defenseman, we'd be a lot closer to contender status. I've been saying it for years because I believe it fully: any team with Dats and Z in the lineup is a team capable of making the playoffs. I don't think we're nearly as far from being a contender as some think, but between the numerous bonehead moves Holland's made for forwards and his utter and complete lack of ability to bring in a proven NHL defenseman that solidifies our top four, the team just continues to slip deeper into a funk, and all the while the core guys are getting older and less-effective. It's just a real shame to me.

I specifically said that I don't give a rats ass about Kesler and that you can't blame Holland for not getting Kesler when we clearly had no chance based on Kesler's list. I'm honestly glad we didn't get him because I don't think he'd make the kind of difference we really need and hopefully at this point people will stop obsessing over the possibility of trading for him. I only got into the matter in this thread because rick zombo, one who speaks up on Holland's behalf almost as much as many others criticize him, touched on the very thing that I think ultimately summarizes the problem with Ken Holland's management of this team over the last five years. It just continues to boggle my mind how people can see the problem that we now have and not look at the big picture and question how it came to this. Believe me, I am the last person who thinks it's realistic to be able to sign all the stars for cheap, draft high, take advantage of killer lopsided trades in our favor, and so on. I get that you don't win every year. I get that you're not a contender every year. But five years ago, and for many years beforehand, we were easily one of the top 3-4 destination teams year in and year out. We'd be on most players lists who had NTCs. We'd have a fair shot at signing free agents who want to be part of a franchise that goes for it every year. Sure, it was still absurd to expect to sign everybody and trade for everybody, and I never suggested otherwise at the time, but like I said, we were in a much better position to do so relative to the position we're in now. It'd be one thing if you could say that we're still up there near the top, because no matter what, it was going to be harder to have the kind of teams we had at the start of the cap era when we were able to pay elite players like Dats and Z far less than they would ultimately be worth when they would eventually sign deals as UFAs. I get that and respect that and I'm totally fine with that because in all honesty, I think the parity that the cap has brought really has made hockey more exciting in general. But we're no where near the top anymore; we're lucky to be floating around the middle, and it's becoming ever more debatable how much we deserve to even be there. When you really stop to think of where this team was at five years ago, it's truly shocking that we have fallen as far as we have. We were a fresh Cup winner, and came within one goal of winning back to back Cups. We were a team that people wanted to be a part of, and despite the fact that the cap era has minimized the leverage any one team can have, we still had what little of it was left to be had, and it's an incredible benefit more than ever in the cap era. And we also had a fair amount of mid-level talent that we ultimately could've afforded to move in order to make deals that might have solidified the future of this team. But that's where much of the problem began. We had tremendous luck with some of our low draft picks over the years, and I think it's fair to say that it might've caused management to become a little overly confident about certain guys. It's hard to even hold it against them though when you look at the string of luck we had. But whether or not some of the guys we got hung up on had even developed into the types of players they hoped they'd be, we had other needs to account for, and we no longer had the ability to buy our way out of a dilemma in the cap era. We also had golden opportunities to lock up already developed talent that we let slip away because we didn't want to part with younger players or prospects. In the cap era, you've got to give something up to get something in return, and we had assets to move. Sure, it'd sting if we moved a guy that went on to become another Datsyuk, but if you do so in order to bring in elite talent, or you do so to bring in people who can bridge the gap between the Lidstrom era and the post-Lidstrom era, you've got to make the move. You can't sit by idly waiting for Lidstrom to retire while hoping every draft pick turns into a star, but that's basically exactly what Holland did, and look where we're at now. Holland didn't prepare for the future, plain and simple. He dropped the ball. Whatever plans he may or may not have had do not matter, because the bottom line is nothing happened. We watched three of our top four defensemen leave in the span of one year, and Holland to this day has failed to address even a Stuart-sized hole. For the love, you go on about how it's ridiculous to think that we can sign everyone and give up nothing and basically run a team like it's a video game, but are you really going to sit on that high horse and suggest that at some point in the last five years, Holland couldn't have found a way to at least sign or trade for a defenseman that's on the same level as Stuart??? And do you want to tell me that even something such as that would be asking too much, despite the fact that he's the least talented of the defensemen we lost? I know I get wordy when I post (spending too many years as a history major screwed me over for life when it comes to being concise...), but I really don't think you are at all recognizing the simple point I'm making nor the fact that I'm not at all whining about a failure to land elite guys. What bothers me is that he can't even find a way to bring in good mid-level guys, and on top of that, the mediocre mid-level guys he keeps bringing in have mostly been colossal flops that amounted to cap space being burned for nothing. And the only thing that bothers me about Holland not wanting to overpay for elite players is that he says these things and then goes on to overpay for mid-level players that literally do nothing to help this team. And most of them are forwards!!! We still haven't filled a single hole on defense with a meaningful player that one could compare to Stuart, and we keep blowing money on completely ineffective forwards. For five years now, this team has been slipping, and Holland truly seems to be at a loss as to how to at all slow it down. Please, give me some examples of things that he's done that have made the team better and added some stability that can be relied upon to help the team over the next 3-4 years. What has he done in the last five years, while the team has gone from being at the top of the league to barely floating in the middle, to suggest that he is leading this club in the right direction? Again, believe me, I know full well that you have to be a fool to think that anyone could pull off a tenth of what some of the crazy fans expect out of the GM, but five years into this slide, I think it takes another sort of fool to think that Holland isn't largely responsible for the pace of this team's free fall into mediocrity. Even if you were to be completely objective with an extra dose of generosity, I don't think you could come close to finding as many good moves and decisions Holland has made in the last five years compared to his bad moves, his missed opportunities, and his inability to follow through on any sort of transition plan. And he's supposed to be the best GM in the league? Absolutely, without a single solitary shred of doubt, he has not come even remotely close to being the best GM in the league over the last five years. At some point the excuses have to end, and it needs to be very, very, very soon. Just as Rafalski's retirement should've been a wakeup call to start building a transition bridge for the defense, Z's back injury should be a wakeup call that we need to be start building a transition bridge for offense and perhaps more importantly, leadership. If he thinks it's been hard to deal with the struggles of the last three years, I shudder to think of how he'll react to the struggles to come as we near the end of Datsyuk's and Zetterberg's careers. I won't say that he doesn't have it in him to be a great GM somewhere, but I simply can't find a reason to say that I believe he has it in him to be an effective GM of the Detroit Red Wings anymore. Believe me, I wish I could, as I have nothing against him personally. But five years into an ongoing free fall from elite status to mediocrity marked by far more bad moves than good ones leaves me little hope of him turning it around. I'm not saying he's incapable of it, and it's totally reasonable to believe that maybe he will find a way of turning it around. Even I can admit that it's totally possible and that he has the general knowledge and skill level to do it, but at some point he's got to prove he still has the nerve and foresight to run this team well in the cap era, and if he can't do that very, very, very soon, he needs to be replaced.

I know you always get worked up about threads devolving into anti-Holland disasters, but as one who has become quite anti-Holland in recent years, I just wanted to point out that you're touching on one of the reasons I've lost faith in his ability to be an effective GM in Detroit. Five years ago this team was still a destination franchise, and that afforded us an advantage in signing guys and leverage in trades. We are no longer a destination franchise, and we haven't been in several years. And given that we seem unwilling to overpay and still haven't proven that we're anything more than a playoff-maybe team that'll likely exit early, we seem to becoming less attractive of a destination every year. Perhaps more than ever in the cap era, it's important to maintain that draw if you expect to be able to build from outside your organization. Despite the cliche line people drop nowadays about the importance of building from the draft, it's next to impossible to really put together a contender without making outside moves, especially if you don't plan on tanking for several years to hopefully get the chance to land even one guy who qualifies as truly elite talent in the draft amongst other core needs. I get that we weren't going to land Parise and Suter. I gave Holland no s*** about that and still don't. I certainly don't care about not getting Kesler, as I've never been a Kesler slappy and it's obvious that we had no chance, so it'd be silly to get mad. What ultimately bothers me is that Holland had plenty of time early on to do more to shore of the core of this team, especially knowing Lidstrom was nearing the end and Stuart was likely gone at the end of his contract. When Rafalski retired, Holland should've done a lot more to immediately plug that hole, not because it's a hole that in and of itself needed to be plugged, but because in a year, you're losing at least one more core defenseman, and potentially your captain and one of the beat defensemen in the game, even past 40. It doesn't take a genius to realize when you're in the best position to make a deal, and Holland let that time go by, like he's let other great opportunities slip by. He talks endlessly about prices being too high and not wanting to overpay, yet time and again, he's made bad deals for less effective, oftentimes older players, seemingly because of having a history with them. So instead of overpaying for stars that can make a difference, we overpay for mid-level talent that literally more often than not has been useless to us. And all the while, our image sinks further and further down. I don't like the idea of overpaying any more than the next guy, but we wouldn't have had to if Holland had done more to maintain the core of this team when he was in the best position to do so. Furthermore, had we been more aggressive early on in our dip and gone harder after another guy that helps the team and raises your status, we'd likely be in a position to still be getting the better end of some of these trades and free agent signings. It's not one thing that Holland's done that's caused me to lose faith in him, and truly, most of what shaped my perspective on him currently happened several years ago now. He's simply been in a free fall of bad decision-making since about 2009, and he seems completely unable to find a way to turn it around let alone slow it down. Has he been the victim of bad luck too? Sure. I don't think anyone expected the Weiss situation for example to go as poorly as it did, for example, but even with that, we ultimately made a good sized bet on a guy who we knew wasn't out of the woods on the injury front, so on some level, you almost have to question the signing, even if it's clearly in the hindsight category. Holland hasn't really done enough to buy the benefit of the doubt in recent years. In the end, to me, I look back and I see that Holland clearly did absolutely nothing to maintain the status of the team when we lost three important players, and he's done nothing since to improve matters, and if anything, he has only made the situation worse with numerous blatantly embarrassing signings. Barring a home run of an off-season, now that we've been continually slipping for five years, I'm really at a point where I can't see Holland keeping his job past this season. Maybe the guy could still be great on another team, and maybe he'd be best taking on another role in the organization, advising someone who's more capable of making tough decisions and taking some chances that might have the potential to turn things around. But any way you shake it, I just don't get how one can't objectively question on some level Ken Holland's current effectiveness given where we were five years ago and where we are now. When your status falls as far as ours has and we're as weak of a team as we are despite having a killer offensive core in Dats and Z, you've got to stop and ask what went wrong, and I don't see any way of not acknowledging Ken Holland's utter and complete inability to even come remotely close to maintaining the status we had for over twenty years. When you can't even come up with a Stuart-level replacement after several years and you also lost Lidstrom and Rafalski, you're doing something wrong. When you essentially throw cap space into the fire to burn by signing guys like Cleary and Sammy and Tootoo among others in recent years, when your defense is still in shambles after losing 3 of your 4 top guys, (not to mention the roster issues you create by having too many forwards) and you're still talking about not wanting to overpay for guys, you're doing something wrong. It does suck that we aren't in a position to land favorable deals. It's a bummer. It is what it is now and there's no easy way out of the mess we're, and also no way that doesn't involve taking risks that my or may not come close to paying off, but we are in this position because Ken Holland's failed to stop, let alone even slow down the free fall this team is in. At some point you have to get serious and call a spade a spade and stop making excuses just because you can find a way to minimize the impact of individual deals or missed deals. We're talking about a 5-year old trend of one way or another failing to slow the free fall. 5 years. This is something that can't really be argued, and however you spin it, there's really no way to defend against it without suggesting that you're content to be mediocre. If that's enough for you, congratulations, but you shouldn't be shocked when Red Wings fans of all fans expect a little more out of their team than to limp into the playoffs on the weakening backs of Pav and Z or the adrenaline-fueled overachievements of Grand Rapids. I called the Holland naysaying crazy talk 4-5 years ago too, but at this point, you're just not being objective at all about the big picture if you're still defending Holland's current effectiveness.

I am thrilled about this. The cap's going up, and let's be serious: Ken Holland is not likely to come close to hitting the ceiling even after signing Alfie. The guy was an important player down the stretch last year and really only slowed down after the Olympics for a few weeks, just like the notably younger Kronwall. He came back and played well after that all things considered and you'd have to be a fool to think that he wasn't an important locker room presence in a young room like we had. That presence will no doubt serve us well next year as well, perhaps even more so as the kids move into a full time role. I don't see the downside to it at all, especially knowing that we are moving on from other older players. He can still contribute, he can still lead, and he's hungry to win. This is a good thing. And I'll say it again, I really don't think this team would've made the playoffs without him last year. He was the most consistent veteran presence we had in the lineup throughout the season, and as all of his teammates said, when Pavs and Z went down, Alfie really stepped up and started taking on more of a leadership role, and that group of guys he was leading was ultimately the group that got the job done and earned a playoff spot. We also have to hope this seals Cleary's fate considering no one in their right mind would choose Cleary over Alfie and there aren't going to be that many spots available. But who knows on that one with Holland, where's what's up is down and what's wrong is right... Ugh. I just can't get over that news. Dan Cleary on the 2014-15 Wings roster...hold on, let me just check that off on my sadness scavenger hunt.

I'm no fan of Holland these days, but this is one of those deals that just makes sense when you really step away. It's not a blockbuster but it's hardly an obvious mistake. It's a solid, sensible choice, and the rather obvious one all things considered. This is a backup role, and Gus ultimately did pretty well in the role last year and again, he did his part in the playoffs as best as could be reasonably expected under very difficult circumstances and a lousy defense. He's not the greatest backup ever, but at the price and given what he did last year, there's just no real compelling reason to rock the boat. There are far more important areas to be focusing on then finding a new backup goalie. If he actually signs Dan Cleary to an NHL deal though, I really will question the sanity of anyone still trying to defend his effectiveness as the GM for the Wings. He may have great skill and knowledge to do the job well, but I think he's lost the edge he needs to do it right in Detroit. He just seems too sentimental here. A change of scenery (or simply a new role in the organization) could be good for him and a fresh perspective at GM with less fond memories for washed up players could be good for the Wings.

Good move, good price. The guy was a solid backup for us last year even in spite of his injuries. He got a lot of wins and stepped in under a ton of pressure in the playoffs and played well there too. Gives the Wings a year to see how Howard is going to bounce back from his worst season before assessing what to do with Mrazek. If Howard comes back and plays well next year, there's no reason he wouldn't play a lot of games as usual, and it doesn't make sense to have Mrazek on the bench for that given Howard's usually high workload. He'll get more games in GR next year and if Howard struggles, the next year it's easier to sell more of a split time which is better for Mrazek.

I didn't want to open this thread but how can you not. All I have to say is that bringing Cleary back last year was nuts, and I'm not even a Cleary hater in general like some. To bring him back this year, especially for two years, would be totally ******* bats*** insane. I don't care about them giving their word, the guy is clearly past the point where he can be relied upon to contribute. This is an utter and complete joke and a colossal shame if true.

I'd love to see him back in Detroit if we have room. I think the guy's tremendously underrated at the price point he's at and if given more of a standard role, I think he stands to offer a lot more than other like players. It's hard to see it happening, but who knows given that we could see trades go down that create more openings than expected. I noticed a thread about Cleary coming back. I'm afraid to even open it. It would be insane to me to bring Cleary back and not someone like Eaves who would be cheaper and better at this point. This guy deserves a role and deserves to be playing every night.

I just voted Rangers in 7 because that's obviously how it'll go at this point, right?

So, I'm guessing then that Quick gets 3 shutouts and the Kings sweep just to give the proverbial middle finger to history...? No, in all seriousness, I hear you. I don't think it'll come easy, but I'm just not going to be against the Kings at this point, and I'm just not really sold on the idea of the Rangers as Cup winners. Something about them just screams "bound to fail in utterly stellar fashion!!!" But again, this year, who the hell really knows? It's crazy that it's been twenty years already. I remember watching it clearly as that's when the feeling of dread hit because that's when the Wings Cup drought really started to come into the spotlight.

Edzo hates the Bruins, you know...he hates them like we hate Pittsburgh. And there's a lot of good things to say about Chicago because they're a really ******* good team, like it or not. Please don't take that as me defending that ass clown though. I can't stand the guy at all, and oftentimes want to punch my TV when he talks. But I think some get a bit carried away with how much they dislike him because of his comments on the Wings, even though we are far from the only team he inanely dumps on. In reality, he is a self-aggrandizing and bitter failed coach who's colossally full of s*** 95% of the time no matter what or whom he's talking about. He's just a s***ty commentator, plain and simple. Thankfully, he really wants to coach again, so hopefully someone will give him another chance to make a fool of himself again soon. Then, instead of having to listen to his phenomenally horrible ramblings during NBC games, we can simply laugh at his sure to be hysterical post-game interview rage fits instead.

Wow. I wouldn't have been as worked up as some if Chicago had won, but I'm plenty glad that we're able to stay the last team to win back to back Cups. The Kings are having such an unbelievable run in these playoffs in the way that they're winning these series. It's a whole lot of ugly but they're finding a way to finish. After that first round, maybe it was fair to assume that this was destiny, but Chicago proved they're still one of the best teams in the NHL the way they came back in this series. The Kings got the lucky overtime bounce tonight to seal it for this year, but I'll be surprised if the Hawks aren't right back in the thick of it next year, and more surprised if they don't win another Cup or two in the next five years. Like it or not, they're just too good of a team, even with Crawford in net, and they've got a GM that seems to know how to keep the team competitive, salary cap be damned. I don't know what to think about the Finals. I think the Kings win, but given how things have gone, who knows? Maybe they've used pump all their luck. Quick has been terrible too so unless he tightens things up, it won't be easy. But eh, I don't know. It hasn't even started yet somehow I already feel underwhelmed.

This is the Stanley Cup finals to me. One of these teams is likely to win the Cup. This is the series that matters. But this year, who knows...?

And anyone who still really believes that any team making the playoffs has a legitimate chance is delusional. There is a big gap between teams like Chicago and nearly everyone else. If the Wings want to have a prayer or truly contending in the next few years, a lot has to change.

Not even close. Osgood had some dud games in that run, sure, but overall, he was fine. He bounced back from some of his bigger gaffs strong too. I double checked some of the games logs to be sure, because I don't recall many blowouts, and it turns out he gave up 4 goals or more in 3 games, and only more than 4 once. Quick has been rocky the whole time and given up 4 goals or more now 7 times in less games and more than 4 in 3 games, and he's accomplished this in 1 less game. Osgood was much better in 2008 and 2009 than in 1998, but he wasn't nearly as lousy in 1998 as Quick has been this year. NHL hockey...

Sometimes it sucks to be right.

Definitely agree. You had to know LA had a chance going in, and obviously things are looking real good for them right now, but teams that are as good and experienced as Chicago can never be counted out.