Dabura

Personally, I firmly believe Athanasiou has the potential -- real potential -- to be a 1C. For me, he's right up there with Larkin, maybe even slightly ahead. That being said...if we're talking Trouba, then I'd consider moving AA.

I've gotta think Svechnikov's trade value is reasonably high, for what it's worth. (No pun intended.)

KYLE QUINCEY OR BUST

Eh, I think that's a bit of stretch. Based on what he's shown thus far in his career, he's a good middle-pairing defensemen and that's probably more-or-less it. If he becomes a staple on a team's top pairing, it'll probably be because his partner is an excellent #1 defenseman who can really "drive the bus." We don't have an excellent #1 defenseman, and that, honestly, is the most pressing concern for us.

I haven't heard anything about them wanting to trade Jenner. Again, though, I haven't been paying much attention to them -- really, the rumor mill in general -- this summer. If they are looking to move Jenner, it'd be for a big return. Johnson, to me, has always been overrated. If I'm the Wings, I've zero interest in him. I like Savard more, but I'm not sure I'd move Nyquist for him. I doubt there's much of a correlation. Personally, when I point out that the Red Wings have made, like, 25 trades over the past decade (next fewest: the Devils, with something like 50), my point isn't "See? That's why we've been struggling!" Rather, my point is that Ken Holland has his head up his ass.

They would probably want to move, say, David Savard or Jack Johnson. At 23 years old, Boone Jenner is coming off a 49-point season (30 goals, 19 assists). He's going to be a very good 2C, possibly even a 1C. Zach Werenski projects as a top-pairing defenseman. Another thing to consider: the Jackets are -- or, at least, were (I haven't really read up on them in a while) -- facing a cap crunch. Nyquist's cap hit is reasonable, but if the Jackets are taking him on, then they're probably unloading some money.

Last eleven years. No one has made fewer trades, and it's not even close.

Nyquist + Smith + 4th would get you neither Werenski nor Jenner, never mind BOTH.

http://www.wingingitinmotown.com/2016/8/10/12429838/ken-holland-s-hockey-news-interview-is-a-step-backwards We're f***ed.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: in today's NHL, the best defense is an overpowering offense. The emphasis shouldn't be on defending. The emphasis should be on forcing the other team to defend. Get the puck, hold on to the puck, make plays with the puck. Own the puck. Look at the season the Penguins just had. Struggled mightily under Mike Johnston, who believed they needed to play an ultra-conservative "defense-first" brand of hockey. Couldn't score for beans. Then Mike Sullivan comes in, completely flips the script, lets all his horses run free, and the team transforms into a juggernaut. Granted, we lack elite-level forwards, which complicates things.

In theory, yes, it is. But the Red Wings take it to a ridiculous extreme. We are (or, at least, should be) a team in transition, not a perennial contender. Overripening is something we need to be moving away from. What we've seen with Jurco -- and the fourth line in general -- is boneheaded usage. I'm ok with using Jurco on the fourth line if we're trying to roll four scoring lines. I'm not ok with slotting Jurco on a line with Miller and Glendening. I'm not ok with using the fourth line as a sacrificial "shutdown" line (i.e. we hard-match it against the best players in the league) when its centerman is Luke Glendening and one of its wingers is a redundant grinderbangershotblockerpenaltykiller. Our fourth line could be Jurco-Athanasiou-Mantha and we could roll four dangerous lines. Ideally, at least two of those players are playing higher in the lineup -- but, point is, we need to rethink everything we think we know about a professional hockey team's fourth line. We need to stop associating fourth lines with grinding and banging and killing penalties and trying to shut down Sidney Crosby and Patrick Kane and Connor McDavid. Fourth lines are allowed to be scoring threats. You don't (necessarily) need a "defensive fourth line with real good defensive players and real good defensive defensiveness." http://www.sportingnews.com/nhl/news/la-kings-news-darryl-sutter-quotes-corsi-for-definition-sidney-crosby/1ty2k6440ww8213spqckr4u09n "The big thing in today’s game is you have to be able forecheck and backcheck, and you have to have the puck," Sutter said over the weekend (h/t Ryan Lambert). "You can’t give the puck up. We don’t play in our zone, so there’s not much defending." The numbers back him up. LA takes 56.9 percent of all even-strength shot attempts in their games, an effective way to measure puck possession. That's more than any team in the league. Last season, the Kings were at 58 percent. That was more than any team in the league. In 2011-12, they were at 54.9 percent. That was less than only the Pittsburgh Penguins — and the Kings wound up winning the Stanley Cup. So, Sutter would seem to be an authority on the topic: Don't mistake dominance for "defensive responsibility" or physicality. Having the puck is the most important part of the game. “I’ve coached in three decades now and this stuff where they said Marian had to play in (former Minnesota Wild coach Jacques) Lemaire's system is a bunch of bullcrap," Sutter said. "The game’s changed. They think there’s defending in today’s game. Nah, it’s how much you have the puck. Teams that play around in their own zone (say) they’re defending but they’re generally getting scored on or taking face-offs and they need a goalie to stand on his head if that’s the way they play,” said Sutter. Add that to from Edmonton Oilers coach Dallas Eakins earlier this season: "You know what the perfect game is? The perfect game is no hits. You know why that is? It's because you have the puck. You don't have to hit anybody. You have the puck." And this from a member of Team Canada's gold-medal winning team: "Our defense were pretty good at skating themselves out of trouble, but I think everyone talks about our defensive play — we just have the puck for most of the game. I think we possessed the puck, and we were able to control the puck a lot in the offensive zone. When you do that, teams don't get a lot of time or energy to come against you. "Defensively, there's no doubt that we backtracked really hard when we needed to, but I think that's something that's preached on every team and something that's important to every team winning. … I think on the flipside, you see the effect that playing the offensive zone has, and you want to make sure that that's something you continue to do (in the NHL)." That was Sidney Crosby. On the other end of the spectrum, you have the Wings, who are obsessed with "defensive responsibility" and "being able to play without the puck" and having "grit" and being able to block shots and kill penalties and *bangs head on table repeatedly*. The Wings used to be all about high-end skill. Now they're all about blue-collar blue-collarness. And they wonder why we can't put the puck in the net. I've actually defended the front office on these very grounds (albeit, in a devil's advocate way). But, lately, I'm really starting to question The Plan. It sounds great in theory, and, sure, you can point to a supporting piece of evidence here and there. But, really, what you're saying is "Have blind faith in Team Holland and everything will be ok. You don't understand now, but one day you will." Which is 1) almost more pretentious than anything that even I would say, 2) somewhat ignorant of recent history, and 3) wonderfully trusting (bordering on naive). Ken Holland is the general manager. Jeff Blashill is the head coach. Jeff Blashill works for Ken Holland. A couple years ago Mike Babcock wanted Xavier Ouellet on the opening night roster. Babcock said that if it were up to him, Ouellet would be on the opening night roster, but he -- Babcock -- was allowed to cast only one vote, while Ken Holland was allowed to cast "two." Babcock's point being, Ken Holland has the first and final say in anything and everything personnel-related and Ken Holland knows it. And this, to me, is a problem, because it's Ken Holland, whose way of doing things represents and perpetuates everything that's wrong with the Red Wings today. He is an arrogant dinosaur who is struggling mightily to reconcile his way of doing things with the harsh realities of the cap era. As a result, we haven't won a damn thing in close to a decade, and right now we're probably at least three years away from being a serious contender. The Wings, under Ken Holland, are all about treading water, selling tickets, getting a little bit of playoff revenue, and then repeating the whole cycle again. They're about maintaining the status quo, not truly moving forward. I'd totally forgotten about Street. Good call. Still, y'know what I'm saying.

And, again, the Griffins lost Miele and Zengerle. That's two high-quality AHL centermen. Dominic Turgeon will be making the jump and Nosek is a solid AHL centerman...but, to me, the loss of Miele and Zengerle is, by itself, all the reason Holland needs to start Athanasiou in Grand Rapids and not call him up until injuries force his hand. I hope I'm wrong. But history says I'm probably right.

I want both Mantha and Athanasiou on the Wings' opening night roster, but I wouldn't count on either of them making the cut. Because this team is run by assholes. I mean, c'mon. We know how this works. We see the same scenario play out every October. "We'd rather have [insert kid who should be playing regular minutes as a Red Wing but isn't, because reasons] playing key minutes in the AHL. We don't see any point in him sitting in the press box or playing on the fourth line. We see him playing big minutes for the Griffins, playing in all situations, being a leader, a guy they count on. We feel that's what's best for his development. We feel that's the next step he has to take. We like to fart in our own mouths." Ott will probably get one of those two extra spots. (Blashill might even slot Ott higher than Jurco. Because reasons.) The other spot might go to Callahan. I dunno.

Straight out of training camp or 2-5 months into the season? Because...if we know anything about the Detroit Red Wings and Ken Holland and Jeff Blashill...then we know there's a good chance the forward group is going to look something like this on opening night: Zetterberg Larkin Abdelkader Helm Nielsen Nyquist Tatar Sheahan Vanek Miller Glendening Jurco The Griffins lost Miele and Zengerle; I assume Holland wants AA to be the Griffins' 1C this season. "If he can prove he's a legitimate 1C in the AHL, then we'll give him another look, at some point. blah blah blah blah blah."

I think he's better suited for the wing. Playing wing is a lot of North-South skating, forechecking, backchecking, not much intelligence or artistry involved. His speed and tenacity make him a reasonably effective forechecker and backchecker. When he's on his game, he's a wrecking ball F1, chasing down pucks in the o-zone and crunching defensemen against the backboards. When he's really on his game, he can hold the puck in the o-zone for extended periods of time and make some positive stuff happen. Granted, that rarely happens (and it was, in fact, what led to that backbreaking Tyler Johnson goal in that game that shall not be named), because he's not really a playmaker. But sometimes he draws a penalty! *shrug* Also, HE CAN KILL PENALTIES AND BLOCK SHOTS AND PLAY WITHOUT THE PUCK. And, as we all know, that's all that really matters. So there's that. To be clear, I like Helm. What I don't like his deployment (top-six, power play). Oh, and his contract. If you're paying him $4M, you don't understand what kind of player Darren Helm is and what role he should be playing. He should be a cheap bottom-sixer who gives you some quality bang for your buck, like an overachieving kid on his ELC.

We don't need Steve Ott. For the love of God. I actually like the guy, but, dude, c'mon. We won the Cup in '08 because we were lights-out amazing. We had high-level skill for days. We had insane depth. We were a crazy-dominant possession team. None of these things apply to today's team, and that's The Problem. We. do. not. need. a. Steve. Ott. We. do. not. need. a. Dallas. Drake. We. do. not. need. an. Aaron. Downey. We. do. not. need. a. 2008. Darren McCarty. If Mantha starts the season on the farm "because he's not a fourth-liner and Steve Ott is," I'm done. I will embrace full-on apathy.

I was being sarcastic. I'd hoped Jeff Blashill would (at least try to) do for the Wings what Peter Laviolette has done for the Predators or what Mike Sullivan did for the Penguins. Instead, we got...well...you know.

What is this "offense" you speak of?

If I'm a GM with an interest in a high-profile RFA who's due for a raise, I'd probably want the player to sign his new contract before I try to pry him away. So, basically, a sign and trade. Now, I'm not saying that's what's going on with Barrie or Trouba. It's just something to keep in mind (read: "provide some false hope").

Sign me up. You know that basic stats -- goals, assists, time on ice, +/-, etc. -- are all rooted in mathematics, right? I like that some stats are ok while others HOLY MOTHER OF GOD GET YOUR DEVIL MATHS OUT OF MY HOCKEY YOU SATANIC WIZARD THIS IS A MATH-FREE ZONE!!!

I believe Saarijarvi is our most tantalizing D-prospect; he has legitimate top-two potential, IMHO. Mind you, I'm not necessarily expecting him to reach those heights. But I think the raw talent and potential is there.

There are defensemen on that list who I would take over DeKeyser. At any rate, I don't believe DeKeyser has demonstrated that he's an espcially great defenseman. If the argument is "He's just so damn good on the defensive side of the puck and steady and reliable," well, I don't think we've seen enough supporting evidence. His underlying numbers are bad -- and that includes shot suppression. He doesn't put up many points. Granted, like I said, there may be some noise in the data based on how he's been deployed. But, y'know, I watch DeKeyser...and I see...a pretty good middle-pairing defenseman. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't see a cornerstone defenseman who we absolutely needed to lock up for 6 x $5M. I see a middle-pairing defenseman who's being overvalued because he's from Michigan and our blue line is awful. If he becomes part of a powerhouse top pairing, it probably won't be him who's driving that bus. It would be a Shattenkirk/Trouba/Barrie type. I mean, look, I get that you need "defensively responsible" players. But 1) again, I'm not even sure DeKeyser's all that great on the defensive side of the puck, and 2) this team cares too damn much about being "defensively responsible." We need a Tyson Barrie in the worst way. And that would just be a start. We'd still have a long way to go before we could claim to have a Cup-worthy D corps -- never mind a Cup-worthy team.

Subban is a possession monster. He was one of the few Canadiens who could actually play elite-level possession hockey -- all while playing in Therrien's firmly (and self-defeatingly) anti-possession "system." Also, if Doughty is a "hybrid," then so is Subban. Dude can Kronwall a hulking power-forward and score a breakaway goal on the same shift. He's incredible. It really doesn't, though. +/- is a bad stat. If a guy has a sparkling or horrible rating, then maybe it's telling you something useful. Beyond that, though, it's pretty worthless. To be clear, I don't think Karlsson is an especially good defender. But he makes up for it by being so insanely good at driving possession and generating offense and putting up points. These qualities make him a great defenseman. In today's day and age, the best defense is a good offense, and few of today's players can create offense like Karlsson can. He, like Subban, is an incredible talent.

I didn't say Karlsson makes the Sens a perennial contender. I said they're nothing without him. He's a borderline-generational, Hart-caliber franchise defenseman -- i.e. exactly the kind of guy you'd want to build a team around. But the Sens are a budget team and their front office seems pretty ok with perpetual mediocrity. The Habs play awful hockey and fetishize all the wrong things. Michele Therrien is a dinosaur who's always disliked Subban. If Subban were a Blackhawk (the Blackhawks being a team that truly do Play the Right Way and let their high-skill players play high-skill hockey), he'd be the most popular, celebrated player in the league. (See? I can complain about other teams. It's not just the Wings that piss me off.)

Karlsson doesn't have to defend. Why? Because when he's on the ice, the other team is being forced to defend. Why? Because Karlsson is a powerhouse possession-driver. He is the engine that drives his team's attack. He is his team. They are nothing without him. DeKeyser can "defend well," but you don't win by playing well without the puck and reacting and enduring. You win by having the puck and forcing it down the other team's collective throat.