Dabura

Bifröst, bro.

I think one of his legs is messed up and, if memory serves, he's considering corrective surgery.

For sure. (See: Hitchcock, Ken.) I think what I like about him is that there appears to be precious little bulls*** in his approach to coaching this Pens team. He's logical, rational, reasonable, calculating. When he took over for Mike Johnston, he assessed the team's strengths and built the team's new systems and sensibilities around those strengths, whereas Mike Johnston had decided the Pens were going to be a team that tries to win games 2-1, "because defense" (or something). Sullivan got everyone to buy in; the players embraced a new team identity, one which helps make this team more than the sum of its parts. He seems to treat players fairly and the players seem to enjoy playing for him. By all accounts, he's extremely demanding -- but, at the same time, his troops always understand where he's coming from and what he wants from them and why he wants it. No behind-the-scenes drama. Players playing to their full potential. Good, winning hockey. A couple pretty good pieces: How the Mike Sullivan effect turned the Penguins into playoff bullies How does Pittsburgh seemingly put every opponent, even the offensively elite Washington Capitals in Round 2, back on its heels? The straightforward answer is speed. The Conor Sheary-Sidney Crosby-Patric Hornqvist line skates. The HBK line, Carl Hagelin, Nick Bonino and Phil Kessel, really skates. The Chris Kunitz-Evgeni Malkin-Bryan Rust line skates. Fleet-footed Rust put daggers in the Bolts' hearts in Games 6 and 7. The D-corps, from Kris Letang to Olli Maatta, skates. But it's more than that. This team's personality changed completely Dec. 12, 2015, when coach Mike Sullivan took over. They ranked 20th in 5-on-5 score adjusted Corsi and 28th in goals per game at the time of coach Mike Johnston's firing. Sullivan came in, and the Pens were second only to the Los Angeles Kings for the rest of the season in 5-on-5 score-adjusted Corsi. It seems Sullivan unlocked or unshackled this team. And, talking to Sullivan and his players on media day at the Stanley Cup final, it's clear this is no shoehorned narrative. Pittsburgh didn't just happen to wake up under a new coach and bust a slump playing the same way they did under the old coach. No. Everything about the franchise's turnaround this season has been deliberate. Sullivan had a specific vision when he came in. Right wingers Kessel and Hornqvist both mentioned Sunday that Sullivan is a serious man. Hornqvist said he likes Sullivan's honesty. But what both players, and seemingly Penguins player, praise most consistently about their coach: his organizational skills. Everything he does is structured and calculated. “One of the things we tried to do as a coaching staff is instill a game plan where we could play to our strengths," Sullivan said Sunday, his gaze hardened with focus and conviction. "When you look at our core players, they all want to play a speed game. They can all skate. They all have really good hockey sense. They have the ability to move the puck and change the point of attack. So speed in all its forms, whether it’s foot speed or team speed and your ability to move the puck and change the point of attack quickly, and to create opportunities or to create a competitive advantage, is what I envisioned with this group. So we’ve tried to implement some strategies to give these players an opportunity to play to their strengths.” How Mike Sullivan's Magic Took the Penguins from Underachievers to Champions Is Mike Sullivan the best coach in the NHL right now? Too early to say either way. However, I do think he's starting to make a case for himself. If the Pens repeat as champs this year, with a D group of Ian Cole, Justin Schultz, Olli Maatta, Trevor Daley, Brian Dumoulin, Ron Hainsey? I think it becomes a worthwhile discussion.

Yes. I also realize that "Bylsma tho" doesn't necessarily have any bearing on Sullivan's abilities or the success Sullivan had last season or the success Sullivan will/won't have over the next five years. I don't disagree that what really matters is having great players, that great players can, potentially, make any coach look great. Still, I'm starting to think Mike Sullivan might be the best coach in the NHL. He burned Mike Johnston's offense-killing system to the ground and the team hasn't looked back since then. Will he ultimately crash and burn? Maybe. (Probably.) But, at this time, there isn't much to criticize, beyond pointing to Bylsma.

I mean, sure. I'm not outright saying he's the best coach in the NHL. The sample size is far too small at this time. But, like xtrememachine1 said, he does seem to have a Babcockian ability to get the most out of his team. It helps to have the kind of talent he has at his disposal (Crosby alone could probably make Mike Milbury look like a tactical genius), but I don't think just any coach could've led the Pens to the Cup last season and I don't think just any coach could have this Pens team -- missing the personnel it's missing -- performing as well as it's performing right now. I guess the million-dollar hypothetical question is this: If you switch the head coaches in this series so Sullivan is behind the Caps' bench and Trotz is behind the Pens' bench, are the Caps leading the series 3-1? Just some food for thought, nothing more.

Was being facetious.

I'm starting to think Mike Sullivan might secretly be the best coach in the NHL.

So I was thinking. The current narrative is "The Wings must become a team that is hard to play against. To that end, they must get bigger, tougher, more physical." In terms of forwards, we're actually not necessarily all that far from being "big and hard to play against." In terms of defensemen...well, looking at our top D prospects, it's skill and skating and possession prowess. (Good!) A part of me wants to live in a reality where Ken Holland has privately gone full mad scientist and is building a Frankenstein's monster: a Godzilla forward group + a Speedy Gonzales defense group. Klim Kostin, Victor Ejdsell, Givani Smith, Mantha, Nosek, Svechnikov, Abdelkader, Jagr/Hanzal... Green, Jared Spurgeon, Hronek, Jensen, Hicketts, Cholowski, Saarijarvi... Crazy? Yes.

Are you saying we should...bounce a Czech?

Go easy on Pierre. Kris "Kristopher Letang" Letang is out for the postseason and Pierre doesn't know what to do with himself.

https://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/Malkin-Non-Suspension-The-embarrassment-continu?urn=nhl,167172 Call it karma.

It's great that you'd trade our roster for the Leafs' roster. But, tell me: Would you also trade our past ten years for the Leafs' past ten years? Before you answer, understand a few things. First, that the Leafs haven't won a damn thing in the past 500 years. Second, that the Leafs under Shanahan didn't get to where they are now by blowing it all up, trading all the veterans, playing all the kids. In fact, they signed some veterans so that they could flip them for picks at the trade deadline, which would seem to go against your "DON'T SIGN VETERANS. NO VETERANS ALLOWED. ONLY KIDS. THE MORE KIDS YOU HAVE, THE STRONGER YOUR TANK WILL BE AND THE BETTER THE KIDS WILL BECOME. THIS IS SCIENCE" line of reasoning. Third, the Leafs of the past ten years or so were the ultimate example of a team that isn't a contender but won't admit it and is therefore stuck in no man's land. Fourth, most of the Leafs' current leaders were acquired when the Leafs were in denial about their situation and were trying to compete for the Cup. They drafted Luke Schenn 5th overall in 2008 and traded him to the Flyers for James van Riemsdyk in 2012. They drafted Nazem Kadri 7th overall in 2009. They drafted Morgan Rielly 5th overall in 2012. They traded for Jake Gardiner (Ducks, 13th overall in 2008) in 2013. You could argue the Leafs began to accept reality in 2014, but there was no "All kids, no veterans" scorched earth tear-down, and they ended up drafting William Nylander 8th overall. Again, the Wings aren't in a hopeless place. We missed the playoffs for the first time in a quarter century and 9th overall is our highest position since Keith Primeau. Not the pot of gold we'd hoped for, but it's a start. And that's where we are: the beginning stages of a rebuild. Your take on the situation? "Everything is awful, blow it up, trade all the veterans, play all the kids, forget what's best for the kids' development, forget flipping UFA signings for picks at the deadline, all that matters is having a roster full of kids and getting the best lottery odds. Odds, odds, odds, odds, odds. Buffalo knows what I'm talking about. Toronto knows what I'm taking about. Edmonton knows what I'm talking about. Florida knows what I'm talking about. They all traded their veterans and played all their kids and got awesome lottery odds and got awesome young players and they only had to go through maybe one or two years of pain and now they're all Cup contenders and all their fans are like, 'Yep, it's been pretty awesome for us. Thankfully, we've been blessed with awesome owners and awesome general managers who have consistently done awesome things. We pity you, Wings fans. Truly, we do. You've suffered for so long. You deserve better.'"

Machovsky interview (100% real): I think we've found ourselves a keeper.

I mean, "Who do you see on D with higher upside than Larkin and Athanasiou?" is sort of an unfair question for that reason. Granted, I realize you were asking that question in response to the claim that we need centermen more than we need defensemen. Personally, I've been extremely impressed by Hronek and Saarijarvi. Red Wings prospect Filip Hronek named Saginaw Spirit MVP Vili Saarijarvi Nominated For OHL Defenceman Of The Year Excellent skaters, high-end skill sets. They know how to move the puck, make plays, generate offense, create goals. If a defenseman comes along and singlehandedly saves the Red Wings' blue line, he'll be a player in this mold. Jordan Sambrook has had a good year. Red Wings' defensive prospects set to faceoff in OHL Finals Hicketts put up 7 goals and 34 points for the Griffins this season, which is pretty good for an undersized AHL rookie defenseman. Cholowski...not sold on him, but The Powers That Be clearly believe in his potential, so I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. Overall, I like what we have in the D pipeline. No sure things, but we do have a couple players worth getting excited about. In terms of centermen...dunno that we have anyone in the pipeline who looks like a potential Zetterberg replacement. Ehn and Holmstrom and Turgeon are probably bottom-sixers, if that. Larkin's good, but I think the jury is still out on his career potential. AA, to me, is indeed looking like a winger. I dunno. We need both centermen and defensemen. And we don't not need wingers and goalies. Take the best player available with the first-round pick and maybe the second-round pick. If we're going to draft for perceived need, we should do it with the later picks.

I love Hronek and Saarijarvi.

I think Lefty's got the right idea, actually. I suspect Holland isn't interested in moving Howard at this time (assuming no one's throwing any tempting offers his way). That being said, if he does look to move Howard, it'll probably be because he's desperate for cap space. Maybe Hampus Lindholm becomes a realistic target and the only stumbling block is cap space, so Holland trades Howard somewhere for a pick.

We don't know that, though. A .927 Sv% is very impressive, but it's less impressive when you consider his 26 games played. Does he post elite numbers if he plays twice as many games this season? I'd lean towards no. Last season (2015-16): .906 Sv% in 37 games played. Not trying to s*** on him, just saying. Teams aren't exactly drooling over the possibility of acquiring Jimmy Howard. He's a question mark. Acquiring him would be risky, unless it's a basement team that has tons of cap space to burn.

For what it's worth: McKenzie wouldn't be surprised if Lightning traded Drouin (April 15th)

You do realize the 2016-17 Red Wings were really bad, yes? ROW: 24 (28th in the league) GF: 207 (24th) GA: 244 (25th) Goal Differential: -37 (25th) Corsi For Per 60 Minutes (5 on 5): 50.1 (29th) Corsi For% (5 on 5): 48.2 (24th) That's the work of a bottom-five team. We want the team to be bad, yes? Well, Bad Team status: attained. Also: We did call up and utilize kids. Not sure which season you were watching. Also #2: Leaning more heavily on kids wouldn't necessarily weaken the team. It's not like Kronwall, Ericsson, DeKeyser, Glendening, et al. don't make costly mistakes and don't have a hand in the losing. Maybe we ice a more kid-heavy team and finish 10th and pick 12th. Would that be something to celebrate? Also #3: Player development is kind of a big deal. Playing for a bad NHL team and making costly mistakes isn't necessarily good for a prospect who's learning the pro North American game. This is exactly the kind of mentality that the league is trying to discourage. And good on them! "Your organization iced a bad team? Well, don't expect to be 'rewarded' for it. And, no, the lesson you should take from this is not that you should've iced an even worse team. You're a professional sports franchise, not Gollum." The Wings aren't in a hopeless place right now. We missed the playoffs for the first time in 25 years, we're picking in the top ten this year, and we have some good young players that aren't necessarily inferior to the average top-ten pick. (Mantha, Larkin, Hicketts, Hronek, Sambrook, Svechnikov, Saarijarvi, Athanasiou. And we might land Victor Ejdsell, who, from what I can tell, is very promising.) The team is getting younger. We're a bad team (but not actively trying to fail, i.e. we're trying to maintain a winning culture, which is indeed important) and we're probably going to be bad for at least the next three years, no matter what we do. It's early days, but next year's draft class is looking incredibly deep. Rasmus Dahlin is phenomenal. Andrei Svechnikov might not even go in the top five. Players who might've challenged for the top spot in this year's draft class could be available in the 5-10 range. Sucking sucks. But burning everything to the ground is a measure of last resort. It's the pinnacle of pathetic desperation and it guarantees you nothing. Indeed, the most likely outcome is many years of pain with no real "reward." The Sabres got Eichel and they're not a playoff team. The Islanders got Tavares and they're not a playoff team. The Hurricanes got Hanifin and they're not a playoff team. The Avalanche have Duchene and Mackinnon and Landeskog and Erik Johnson (drafted 1st overall by the Blues) and Rantanen and they finished the season with FORTY-EIGHT POINTS. The Coyotes suck every year. The Blue Jackets had their first really good regular season in franchise history...and were blown out in the first round. You can blow it up. Just don't be surprised if it blows up in your face. (Because that's what tends to happen.)

Comcast owns the Flyers and NBC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_Comcast

I don't think anyone here is "blaming the lottery." They're just pointing out that we were one number away from the #1 pick and that this is a bummer. It's not like we pulled a CBJ and went on a late-season tear. And it's not like Holland loaded up at the deadline and hurt our ability to suck. We were bad all season long, including the final stretch. Wait...what? You've decided that our season has provided "no rewards at all" because we didn't get a lottery pick. ... And you're asserting that "trying to increase our odds" is "for sure better than" what it is we did, even though "it doesn't always work out." ... So, we should've tried to suck harder (how? By not trading Smith and Vanek for picks? By telling the players to wave the white flag and deliberately lose games? "Hey! Red Wings! Stop scoring so many power play goals! The power play is too good!") because that for sure would've been better for us, because all that matters is a top-three pick, which no team is guaranteed. Seems legit.

If the Caps can't get it done this season, do they look to shake things up? Or maybe even blow it up? We can haz Kuznetsov? We can haz Orlov?

Size is overrated, IMO. Players may be getting bigger on the whole, but the game is getting faster and there are countless non-big players with high-end talent that are thriving. Jean-Gabriel Pageau is 5'9" and he just scored four goals in a single playoff game, including the double-OT winner. I mean, I don't disagree that Suzuki's stature is a big reason why he's not ranked higher. But I think that's more a reflection of institutionalized bias (Michael Rasmussen is getting a lot of love from scouts because he's big and he "goes to the net") than it is a significant point of concern regarding Suzuki's NHL potential.

It's been posted before, but... http://www.wingingitinmotown.com/2017/4/13/15288602/dr-dangles-prospect-profiles-nick-suzuki-c-owen-sound-attack-37 I've seen him play and I really, really like him. Potentially a big-time sleeper pick. Could just as easily be a reach or a bust, though, so I get where you're coming from.