Dabura

Zetterberg will be protected no matter what. This is the Red Wings, he's the captain, and -- like kickazz said -- he continues to be one of our best players. Kronwall, to me, is a different story. Protecting him would be damn near indefensible. That would be a "stupid loyalty thing."

You didn't miss anything, except for some sweet passing on the Nyquist goal. And, yeah, that Vanek shootout goal was awesome. Overall, though, these Detroit Red Wings are playing like hot garbage. More and more, I find that watching this team is making me want to punch myself in the face for watching this team. But I'll keep coming back. Because I'm an addict a diehard fan. In conclusion,

The hero we need, but not the one we deserve.

WE WON A GAME

What is this "goal" you speak of? How does one go about "scoring" one?

Shut up, Ken. I had O'Reilly pegged as a future first-line center three years ago.

In this case, I think it was more that the refs had jobbed the Sabres with an early whistle in the first period, negating what probably should've been a Sabres goal. Also, refs generally don't like overruling their own calls.

Those little handheld pads the refs consult for goal reviews? You think they're watching replays, but, really, they're watching porn. Then they flip a coin and make the call.

We don't know how to take control of a game.

Also, pro tip: blowing third-period leads is not conducive to winning.

I was literally just about to post, "Ken and Daren really need to stop talking s*** on Evander Kane. It's going to come back to bite us. Karma and all that." And then Kane helps set up a goal. Well, it's under review, but it's probably a good goal.

Good pressure to close out the period. Carry that into the third and seal the deal. Skate to throat.

I guess he's ok...? Not really sure what happened. I mean, I saw the replay, but it almost looks like Larkin was trying to sell a trip.

Larkin...hurt?

That right there? That was pretty. Good heads-up pass by Sproul.

Well, the other team didn't score. So there's that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhbZupJJgNw

Ugly hockey, from both sides. Looks like an AHL preseason game.

Larkin and Mantha break out tonight. Or they don't. FWIW, the Wings' official projected lineup has Larkin's line as the top line. (Source: Facebook.) In terms of ice time, though, they'll likely be the third line.

I mean, I don't think the pain element is necessarily all that important. But you do have to get to the puck and somehow come away with possession, and we definitely haven't been good enough in that area. Often, our forecheck does indeed look like an exercise in futility. What really bothers me is the fact that we're playing dump-and-chase hockey in the first place. The team is clearly being coached to lean heavily on a tactic that doesn't seem to suit the team as a whole, doesn't seem to play to the team's strengths. Blashill has apparently decided that controlled zone entries are overrated and/or something this team isn't capable of executing effectively on a consistent enough basis and that our game should therefore be built around throwing the puck away and then trying to retrieve it. Like, I get it. I get that we have some very good skaters and that it's easier to skate without the puck than it is with the puck. I get that we have a few gritty forwards who like to dump and chase, crash and bang. I get that on most nights the other team is going to be the more talented team. I get that there's this desire to cultivate a blue-collar, Made in Detroit/Murica, junkyard wolfpack identity. But it's not working. Thus far, it's been self-defeating. We have enough trouble shooting and scoring even without gambling on 50/50 puck retrievals.

I wouldn't continually go out of my way to assert that the Wings could've landed Burns if I didn't have good reason to believe they really could've landed him. While I hate to play the "I know a guy..." card, I do have it on what I consider very good authority (three decidedly "inside" sources, two of whom are friends of mine) that the Wings 1) had pieces the Wild were very interested in (one of them being Hudler), 2) could've made an offer that would've at least matched the Sharks' offer, and/but 3) ultimately didn't go all-in and make such an offer. The Sharks' offer was fairly big, but my understanding is that they succeeded in landing Burns because Doug Wilson was the only GM who came forward with such an offer. There was a ton of interest in Burns all around the league, but the Sharks were the ones who stepped up and offered a "proven" (*cough*) top-six goal-scorer and a high-end prospect.

"Suck it up and suck!" Our ultimate revenge. >:}

This is your quarterly reminder that we could have and should have acquired Brent Burns when he was with the Wild. http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/brent-burns-trade-moves-sharks-closer-to-stanley-cup

Again, I don't think I'm taking this quite as seriously as you guys are. I suppose I shouldn't have said anything in the first place, but, well, I'm bored. What I'm trying to say is that Holland will definitely trade Mantha and Athanasiou for Roman Polak.

He refuses to get rid of them and then loses them on waivers for nothing or trades them for Dennis Seidenberg at the trade deadline. I'm only being half-serious here. I don't actually believe we're going to lose Mantha to LV.

I guess my attitude these days is "Hope for the best, expect the worst."