haroldsnepsts

Just for the sake of trying something new, let's all keep a few of these threads on topic and not about Cleary. Thanks.

If it's specifically from fans of other teams: "Even though they've lost some great players, I don't think the Wings will decline this year." "That Nick Lidstrom should be ranked higher than Bourque on the list of all time defenseman, even though Bourque was a good canadian kid." "You know what, it's not the system. The Wings have had some really great individually talented players."

Which is a good indication of how much sway Babcock has on these matters. I'm guessing he's made his feelings about Nyquist known, but even the coach doesn't know his own roster the day before the game. Great news! Sad that it took a long term injury to DeKeyser for this to finally happen.

To repost my ones from that thread: Wings fans really don't complain about Cleary as much as they should. Good thing we've got our tough guy dressed, we're playing the Wings tonight. That Henrik Zetterberg, he should just give up trying to grow a beard.

His first time around Sammy was a bargain and probably didn't get enough credit for what he brought to the team. This time around kinda makes it hard to remember all that though.

I'm definitely not defining it on 2012 alone. Holland's success over the years at keeping a championship team going is pretty undeniable. But rebuilding is a different thing, and so far his track record has been a lot spottier.

That's promising. Hopefully Khan will verify it. I don't put that much stock in St. James.

According to capgeek Cleary has a NTC. I don't know where they get their info but they're usually pretty good about those things. Take it for what it's worth. And the horse is well beyond dead.

People keep repeating this as if it's a fact, but I've not seen anything to indicate why the coach should bear more responsibility for signing Cleary than the GM who offered him multi-year deals in June, only to finally sign him a few months later. Babcock starting Cleary on the top line in some games doesn't mean he somehow strong armed Holland into re-signing him. And that's going way too easy on the Sammy signing. It was a desperation move after Holland failed at his other desperation moves in the Suter/Parise sweepstakes. He gave a raise, 2 year deal and a NTC on a 35+ contract as the league was headed into CBA negotiations that he had to know would result in a much lower cap. Now he has a $3 million fourth liner who's often a healthy scratch to show for it. The only reason Sammy's deal hasn't looked even worse is because he was on LTIR for most of last season. For a guy who's the king of "the cost was too high" this was a terrible signing by Holland, which many people here predicted. Holland did pretty well this offseason (minus Cleary) but he's paying for his big mistakes in 2012. He couldn't even give away Tootoo because of the contract he has. If this were any other GM in the league people here would be pointing and laughing at what he'd done to his team's roster this season.

That last goal in particular looked like the result of exhaustion. Weak backhand pass across the middle that gets picked off, he dogs it getting back to his own end, then is soft on the puck when it's right on his stick. He just looked like he had nothing left.

Hopefully not, but he definitely showed why he's not ready for the top line.

I joked that even if he scored a hat trick Holland would send him down because of the roster situation, but how the hell can he send this kid down now.

Gus scored again?!?! I should probably set a better example, but suck on that Kenny.

That's freaking awesome! Talk about making a case for yourself. Think Gus has got something to prove?

Honestly I don't think any dmen coming up can be counted on as surefire. I hope what you say is true but it's so hard to know for sure with prospects. For example Kindl was a highly touted first round pick who if I remember correctly was expected to be a top pairing guy. Yet in his 4th NHL season, he still struggles with the same issues in the NHL as he had in the AHL. He can play the middle pairing but the more responsibility he has the more he's exposed. I would be for moving Kindl though. For whatever reason he can't take that full step forward here. He's not bad but they might get something for him and a change of scenery might allow him to develop more.

As I said in the Nyquist thread, I understand why people are pissed about the Nyquist situation, but are letting their rage taint what Babcock is saying here. It's the reality of the situation. And if you read between the lines, if anything he's probably implying that he plays so good that Holland can't possibly justify sending him back down. Nyquist is screwed because of the roster situation Holland put together. He's the victim of his contract status. Babcock isn't threatening Nyquist that if he doesn't play well he gets buried in the minors. He's just stating the obvious. That the dream is that Nyquist plays so unbelievably great that even Holland can't justify burying the kid in the minors anymore, no matter what it does to the roster. That the waste of talent and loss to the Red Wings would become so glaringly obvious, the outcry from the coaches, players, and fans so great, that Holland would have to make a drastic roster move to remedy his mistakes and get the kid up with the team.

Holland offered him a 3 year contract in June. That's what I was referring to as coming back for less money.

I think they'd get $925,000. Even if Holland were inclined to do that it seems extremely unlikely. Aside from admitting his mistake, it sets a bad precedent to sign a player, especially someone who took less money to come back to play with the Wings, then waive him two months into the season. I understand people are frustrated with the Nyquist situation but don't you think this is a bit of an overreaction? Babcock wasn't threatening Nyquist. He was stating the obvious. Given Nyquist has 2 games left and the wings ridiculous roster situation, he would have to absolutely dominate for them to even consider keeping him and dealing with all the roster and cap implications. I'm guessing Babcock is as frustrated as most people here are regarding Nyquist. The Wings need offense and he can provide it. Yet he's in the minors because of Holland's contracts. Babcock on Nyquist: http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2013/11/red_wings_recall_gustav_nyquis_3.html

Even if he scored a hat trick they'd almost certainly send him down, painful as that would be. I'm not totally clear on all the implications but I think Nyquist losing his eligibility would handcuff the roster even more than it already is.

In the strongest version of this team, Tootoo and Eaves should be off the roster but I agree Nyquist has been serious collateral damage. He's the victim of his contract status and Holland.

This has been repeated more and more here lately. Is there some source on this? Babcock obviously likes Cleary as a player but I'm wondering if there was an article referring to Holland not wanting Cleary and Babcock did. Because it doesn't ring true. If Holland didn't want to re-sign Cleary, why would he have offered him a 3 year deal in June? Babcock doesn't have that kind of influence over Kenny that he'd offer a 3 year deal to a player he didn't want to re-sign. http://kuklaskorner.com/tmr/comments/holland-on-signing-cleary http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2013/09/red_wings_offer_to_daniel_clea.html

Honestly I think the worst part is that Holland has put himself in a position where he can't make any moves to try and fix his mistakes. Like I've said before, Holland has been the master at tinkering the Red Wings machine he inherited. A piece here and there to keep it running. But as the machine is falling apart and needed an overhaul (and lost the engine in Nick Lidstrom), he's being exposed.

More than 12? (or more than 5 if you count regulation losses)

We all know the issues going on so I won't bother to recap. But the team needs to figure out how to tip it that little bit to go from these OT losses to coming away with two points. It's not a huge gap between them. Eliminating a key mistake or two. Finishing on one more chance. Making one more key save. They can get there.

A tie was an acceptable outcome for the first 20+ years I watched hockey. In Detroit. In America. And is how the game has been played for decades before that. One could just as easily argue that the NHL got rid of ties to appeal to fans who lack a deep understanding of the game, where the need for a winner is more important than having that winner actually decided by playing hockey. Ones who are ok with teams being awarded a point for losing. The shootout also cemented the need for the loser point, which inflates standings and artificially forces parity. As a result you have an artificially constructed event to determine the outcome of the game that also artificially influences the standings. So I see your jingoistic tripe and raise you the integrity of the game.