Dabura

It was a dive. I remember laughing uncontrollably when he did it. ...Granted, I was drunk by that point.

Do they, though? Like I said, both Babcock and Bowman would dress Kopecky before Downey in the postseason. What does that tell you? That tells you Downey has his role, his place, his value, but when you get right down to it, his total package (or lack thereof?) puts him at the bottom of the totem pole -- i.e., as a healthy scratch in the playoffs. It's no coincidence that Mac, who many not fight as well as Downy in his old age but has a better overall game, got to play in the playoffs instead of the other resident tough guy, Downey. Sure, if fighting's the only thing Babs looks at. It's not, though. As such, your statement is arbitrary and inane. Downey barely played. There's a reason for that: he's a liability. This shouldn't even be up for debate; beyond fighting and yapping, the guy has no game. Poor comparison, poor argument. Drake played more minutes than Downey, and he spent those minutes on the fourth line. That's not going to do wonders for anyone's +/-. Bottom line: Drake got the nod over Downey because he's a much better player. Shucks howdy, GMR, thanks for giving me the thoughtful, intelligent, well-reasoned response I asked for! "Around the rest of the league"? Try "around watering holes and dinner tables." I've played hockey. I've coached hockey. I learned at a young age that toughness in hockey is a multi-dimensional thing. A coach of mine wanted to make a point about toughness (specifically, what it's all about). Did he teach us how to fight? No, he enrolled the team in a tournament in Toronto, where we (a AAA team -- a great team) had our asses handed to us, and in the process learned a lot about toughness and "grit" and "enforcing" and "balls" and "standing up for yourself." What we learned is that -- well, to bring this back to the Wings, an approach like Babs' is perfect for a team that wants to not only be tough, but also win it all. (We went on to win Nationals that season.) Babs doesn't get hung up on any one aspect of toughness -- especially the least important one, fighting. Fighting is a form of toughness, an expression of toughness. It's not toughness itself. Therefore, having two fighters on your team does not automatically make the whole squad a tough one -- and not having two fighters on your team doesn't automatically make the whole team a "soft" one. I've said it two dozen times already, and I'll say it again: this team tore through the postseason (you know, the season that's a lot tougher than the other one) and won the Cup with only one of its enforcer-types dressed, and he got very little playing time. And -- correct me if I'm wrong -- he had about one good scrum the entire run. And it was in the Avs series, so it meant practically nothing. What does that tell you?

I should add that the Wings will be carrying at least one tough guy next season. If anyone actually thinks Holland is going to cut ties with both Mac and Downey and then, on top of that, not add anyone as a replacement -- not a chance.

Thank you for the ammunition. The "anti-enforcing" crowd is not, in fact, anti-enforcing and is only referred to as such because some obnoxious loudmouths can't be bothered to have intelligent conversations about the matter, and instead prefer to spew garbage like "This team is going to be so soft!" in lame attempts to validate positions that they themselves have not thought through especially thoroughly. Honestly, what is it that you "pro-enforcers" are asserting? If it's that you enjoy seeing fights and therefore wish the Wings would do it more often, then congratulations -- it's a preference, and you're entitled to it. Have a cookie. If, on the other hand, you're trying to make legitimate argumentative assertions and want them to be taken seriously, then you're going to need to shape up -- e.g., not put words in people's mouths about Kopecky. Let's run with this Kopecky issue. I understand you're being hyperbolic, but it's not working for you in this case. No one has said anything close to "Kopecky is great" or "Kopecky has a brilliant future." Instead, people have hammered home a pretty solidly factual statement: overall, Kopecky is more valuable than Downey. I realize this notion drives you "pro-enforcers" up the wall, but here's a thought: if you think it's wrong and want people to agree with you, then assemble an intelligent, cohesive, and overall compelling argument for your point. As sick and twisted as it may seem to you, the argument for Kopecky's superior value is, at the moment, looking stronger than the opposing case for Downey's superiority. In saying this, I'm asserting neither of the following: Kopecky is amazing, Downey is useless. Rather, I'm saying that as much as Downey's assets may help the team, Kopecky brings more to the fold. Babs would probably agree, as he would dress Kopecky for a playoff game long before doing the same for Downey. And for good reason: Kopecky simply brings more to the table and is not a big liability like Downey can be. To put it another way, Kopecky has a rounder, better skill set -- and he still has room for improvement. So Babs gives Kopecky the nod. Scotty "The best coach ever, period" Bowman would make the same call, guaranteed. Should we start railing against Mike Babcock and Scotty Bowman, calling them out for being "anti-enforcing" *******?

I don't want to tell Matt how to do his job, but it might be worth making a Fight Fan Circle Jerk forum.

No one is denying the fact that Downey's actions tend to boost morale. I feel like we've got about 8,000 different wavelengths in this thread.

If Darren Haydard gets called up, he will not play on the first line. wtf

I grow weary of you.

The way I see it, there's really not a lot of pressure on the Wings' scouts at this point in time. That's because most of the key pieces for "the new guard"/"the team of tomorrow"/whatever you want to call it are in place. Hank and Dats will be Wings for life, imo. Mule and Flip will probably stick around. We have some good, hard-working up-and-comers in the forwards pipeline, e.g. Helm (aka The Next Generation of Motown Grinder). By some miracle, Hossa might even be here for a stretch. On D -- well, we all know about the logjam. There's some solid depth in the goalie pipeline as well. Worst comes to worst, the Wings suck for a season or two and get some great draft picks.

Hossa will do really well.

Those Wings. What a buncha softies.

Glad you agree. If I were to go to, say, a Blue Jackets forum and say something to the effect of "Well, yeah, I mean, the Wings are going to be awesome, but, you know, we're only going to have, like, one enforcer. GULP!" I think I'd be banned for trolling. Because he's the least valuable of the bunch, and because he and Mac seem to be the focus of this conversation. Downey's not an especially good hockey player; he just fights and yaps. Kopecky can actually play the game of hockey -- and without being a flat-out liability, at that. Furthermore, he hasn't reached his full potential. I'm not crazy about Kopecky, but he's more valuable than Downey. I'm hoping this wasn't directed at me, as I've never said I don't see the value in having a guy like Downey around. I haven't even said that I think Holland should axe him. My point is that these people running their mouths about "enforcing" all over LGW these days are, generally, overstating the importance of "enforcing." (Not that you're one of them.)

Joker just blew up their biggest hospital. Cut 'em some slack, will ya?

I don't know why anyone would be opposed to keeping the most dominant line in hockey together and backing it up with a monstrous line that would be the top scoring unit on most other teams. Sure, Babs can split Z and D. But why would he want to? To get a more balanced attack?

I've been a hockey fan since I was two years old. In that span of time, I've enjoyed success as a player and coach. Point being, kiss off. I never said Downey isn't valuable. What I said was "Downey's not terribly valuable to the team." Fact: a player who doesn't play in the postseason is not high up on the totem pole. That's neither anti-Downey nor anti-enforcing. If it's anti-anything, it's anti-exaggeration-of-the-importance-of-enforcers. The Wings just tore through the postseason and won the whole shebang without the aid of a serious enforcer. What's more, they didn't have many injury problems (from, you know, being beaten up because they're like, so soft) to contend with. Downey, like I said, didn't play. Sure, he helped morale in the regular season, but the Wings would have won the Presidents' Trophy without him. If the argument is that he kept our guys from getting injured or something along those lines -- well, I seem to recall this team incurring quite a few injuries during the regular season. Mac was a late-season acquisition who didn't do a whole lot in the way of intimidating, let alone legitimately enforcing. Dear "pro-enforcer" crowd, Give. it. a. rest.

Homer works wonders with Z & D because, in a Hilarious Cosmic Joke sort of way, his game perfectly complements his linemates. Downey...just fights and yaps. Mostly the latter.

The Wings' scouting system is all about finding diamonds in the rough. Why, then, would a lack of high picks in the coming years spell impending doom? For this scouting staff, having unenviable picks in the draft is the status quo. Sure, they're not going to find a Datsyuk or a Zetterberg every year. But there's no reason to panic. ...Unless Mr. Anderson jumps ship all of a sudden or something.

I'd settle for a double black diamond ski slope, though.

You know what would be cool? Hockey -- on a bobsled track.

(I c what u did there)

A lot. Just ask Jiri Hudler.

No, he really wouldn't.

Are you seriously asking how using a roster spot for someone who can't do anything but fight and run his mouth could hurt the team? I like Downey as much as the next guy. Really, I do. If I could get drunk with one Wing, it'd be Aaron Downey. But -- and even he'd probably tell you this -- he's not terribly valuable to this team. Where was he in the playoffs? Not in the lineup. Why? Because all he can do is fight and run his mouth. As such, he's a liability.

That's over-simplifying things a bit, though. What you really have to ask is, How does that five-man unit back in Atlanta stack up against the one Hossa will likely be a part of here in Motown? Even in a simple three-on-three matchup, I'd take the Wings; on paper, at least, Franzen-Filppula-Hossa is sheer pwnage. Blinding speed, size, strength, grit, loads of finesse (what a set of hands!), an almost limitless offensive upside, a uniform commitment to strong two-way play -- it's got it all. Then you go and add Kronner and Stuart and...well, even bigger PWNAGE. Something else to consider: this 5-man unit has the potential to be one of the most physically imposing ones in recent Wings history.

I had a drink with him once. No joke. In fact...I think I paid.... DARREN HAYDAR? THAT GUY OWES ME MONEY! But seriously, seemed like a very nice guy. And from what I've seen of his game, it's not too shabby. Point being, I doubt his "problem" has anything to do with his personality. It's probably his size, or lack thereof. If you're 5'9 and absolutely gifted in some area of the game, chances are you're not going to go too far in the big league. But here's to hoping he does, eh?