Dabura

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcLrq9Do1Mk LGRW

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc-RiTy5HZg

Nolan Patrick?

Everything's coming up Zatkoff!

This has basically become Office Space.

Take a shot every time the Wings register a shot on goal. Don't worry, it's not a dangerous game.

Speed (or the lack thereof) could be an issue.

A few years old, but still a good read: Systems Theory: Ken Hitchcock and the Nonstop Blues Hitchcock is known for being an extremely demanding taskmaster whose coaching style and systems tend to lead to burnout and disillusionment among his players. What I like about him, though, is that he truly loves, loves, loves, loves, loves, loves, loves hockey. He's not just a student of the game -- he's an obsessive, fanatical nerd. Hockey -- anything and everything about it -- is his lifeblood. This is the "softer" side of his reputation and, to me, it's something that sets him apart from many other hockey minds. If Ken Hitchcock couldn't be a hockey coach...he would find a way to be a hockey coach.

The Lashoffs will Glendening until morale improves!

Don't listen to Mabus! Turn back while you still can! You have so much to live for!!!!!!

Fire Blashill.

At this point, I want a 10-1 blowout loss. Pour it on, baby. Pour it the f*** on.

He's real good and real steady and he's real good. Also, he's real good. He's a big body and he's real mobile and he's real good. Also, he's real good. Also, he's real steady. Real responsible defensively. Real good. Also, he's real good.

K. Imma go drink now.

Wooo!

Needs more Lashoff.

I've been high on Anthony DeAngelo for a long time. If I'm the Wings, he's on my list of potential trade targets.

Krupa: Weak Wings should lean on youngsters Preach!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjN6xh8nsf4

HE'S A SENSITIVE MAN, OK?? HE LIKES PUPPIES.

It almost seems like he's constantly half a step behind real time. (Sort of like NHL.tv feeds!) His anticipation, his decision making, his first few skating strides...he just doesn't seem to be entirely "present," mentally and physically. Maybe it's just a confidence problem, one that's become really self-compounding and draining.

I dunno, I do see problems with our collapse scheme and I do think we're spending an inordinate amount of time defending in our end. (Maybe you and I are simply working with different standards/definitions.) I've never claimed that that's the only reason why we're struggling offensively, though. Overall, we're playing too passively, too conservatively. That's my #ScorchingHotTake. We're too willing to give the puck up and "Assume the defensive position!" I think this team can play a more assertive game. I think this team can play a more controlled game, a better possession game, a game that puts the other team under more duress. We don't have top-end talent, but there's a good amount of skill on the roster. To me, the problems you're citing -- and I fully agree that they're problems -- can't just be chalked up to "Well, mediocre team is gonna mediocre." I see a team struggling to play a brand of hockey (or, "execute a strategy") that they're not comfortable playing, one that isn't working for them. Again, the lack of top-end talent is a major problem. But I don't think that (fully) explains why, for example, our passing game has gone to hell or why we're struggling to get into the zone and establish possession.

Of course Sutter's being hyperbolic. So am I, to an extent. I'm not really sure what "defensive hockey" is. I guess, to me, it implies a disproportionately large emphasis on defending. But if we're just talking about fundamentally good, structurally sound team defense, then, sure, teams today are playing "defensive hockey." Good team defense remains the engine of success. Good team defense drives possession and offense. Good team defense wins Cups. ...and I don't think the Wings are playing good team defense. We spend too much time in our end and lean far too heavily on our goaltending. Sure, it's largely a talent issue. And, sure, there are two teams on the ice and each has a say in how the game is going to do down. And, sure, Wings fans have been spoiled by powerhouse Wings teams that made everything look so easy. But I maintain that this team is playing bad hockey. I think it's poor execution of flawed strategy (the former following from the latter). Maybe the strategy itself isn't inherently flawed, but, to me, it isn't working for this team. (Obviously I have a long list of gripes that goes beyond just the team and the coaching staff, but I guess that's sort of outside the scope of the discussion. Still, it felt good to rant in my previous post.) The ceiling for the 2016(-17) Wings is set at well below Serious Cup Contender status, but I firmly believe this team can and should be better than it's been thus far. I think we're seeing, among other things, a disproportionately large emphasis on defending, to the detriment of our overall ("200-foot") game. Like I've said, I'd point to our form of collapse defense as one of the big reasons why we're struggling as much as we are. It's hurting our transition game and our ability to generate offense.

Personally, I don't think goals are down because the whole league is now playing decidedly "defensive hockey." I think goals are down because 1) NHL goaltending is, on the whole, probably better than it's ever been, and 2) we're living in The Age of Parity. Now, don't get me wrong -- I do think points are so valuable today that coaches are indeed stressing the importance of being responsible on the defensive side of the puck, maybe more than they were a few years ago (before The Parity Plan had really started to bear fruit). But I wouldn't describe today's game as defensive hockey. Are teams generally playing well defensively? I guess you could make that argument. But I'm with Darryl Sutter -- today's game isn't about defending. It isn't about trapping. It isn't about clutching and grabbing. It isn't about how well you play without the puck. Today's game, when you get right down to it, is about having the puck and doing good things with the puck. Unless you have lights-out goaltending that can compensate for fundamental shortcomings, you have to play a strong two-way possession game if you're going to have any real success. If we're talking defense, you need a defense that defends well and, just as importantly, drives possession well and generates offense well. The Wings...man, they're just playing bad hockey, period. Everything they're doing, in all three zones, is bad. I think you're right in suggesting "we're not doing defensive hockey as well as everybody else" in the sense that our collapse/box-out scheme is an awful, ultra-defensive version of what other teams are employing. And losing Lidstrom and Rafalski and ending up with the current D group definitely has and continues to hurt us (in all three zones). But then, it's not just how we're defending in our end, and it's not just how our defense is(n't) driving possession and isn't generating offense, and it's not just the actual quality of our D group. I believe our struggles go beyond just those things. Hell, I believe our struggles go beyond the team itself. It's bigger. It's bad decisions made by management. It's Ken Holland's hubris. It's the organization's misguided, outdated ideological convictions. It's an organization-wide lack of accountability. It's an institutionalized complacency. It's fetishizing things that don't necessarily contribute to winning (e.g. being from Michigan, being "good in the locker room"). And, yes, it's also Blashill and the self-evident problems with the brand of hockey he's having this team play and the long list of questionable decisions he's made regarding personnel and usage. And, yes, it's also the players, who simply aren't playing well enough. I think the Wings are living in a fantasy. I think teams are getting smarter, more calculated, more ruthless...while the Wings are getting dumber and more self-righteous. LOL, probably!

Agreed.