NeverForgetMac25

If I had to pick one ref to call every Wings game, McCreary would be it every time. He's the best in the game as far as I'm concerned.

The Wings have already beaten the odds by staying just as competitive as they were before the Cap era, and you want to give Kenny more ammunition? Damn you're greedy, HS. That idea would be great for anyone that's a Wings fan.

This utterly ridiculous given the level of play Z exudes on both sides of the ice. This is by no means a shot on Pav because the guy is simply incredible in so many areas of the game, but there's a reason Z goes out with Lilja and Lids on the 5-on-3 PK. While Dats certainly has more how-the-f***-did-he-do-that moves than Z and probably even creates space a little better than Z, Hank is still the better defender. For all we've been told it also seems he's continuing to groomed for the captaincy and the guy steps up as much as anyone when it counts (playoffs, late game scoring ability). Z is not as replaceable as you seem to think he his.

QFT

It seems the last paragraph of my previous post overshadowed the initial part (my doing) which I didn't intend for. That being said, you and I know full well it just takes a few to start with the trashing the moment something like this comes up and it goes from a normal discussion to a debate that is in no way relevant to the OP's post. That's what I was trying to get at with that statement, but the initial reply to ben_usmc was the point of my post. See Above

I most certainly never let the fact that the salary cap is going to go down out of my mind. I understand that must be taken into consideration, but the situation is still apples to oranges given that the cap may fall to $55 million as opposed to Dats signing when it was *at the time* $44. I agree that Z should take a fair discount and replace it with length, but he's also due a sizable raise. Once again, the contracts between Datsyuk and Z are only loosely related, not directly like some people claim. What gets me is that more than a couple people in this thread have made comments like yours stating "screw Z if he doesn't take $6.7 (or $7 or your suggestion $7.2)" without even the slightest shred of evidence that Z is playing hardball and rejected a contract offer. This is some blogger who probably had nothing but fluff to begin with and people are already jumping on Z for being greedy.

No need to be sorry for posting something like this. The thing is, there are so many people on LGW that are so quick to jump to conclusions they don't even take a second to see if what they're stating is relevant. As far as I'm concerned, its also the OP's job to make sure they post as much relevant information *as needed* in order to make sure their thread goes in the right direction.

Apples to oranges. Contracts signed at completely different times under completely different salary caps.

Yeah....this blogger. People (not you) really need to stop jumping to conclusions. My guess is if this offer was put on the table, Z would've inked it in a heartbeat.

How convenient that this was buried in the middle of his blog when it (if it was confirmed) should be front page news. I don't buy this one bit.

Wow, that's not stereotypical at all.

That stat is the furthest thing from useless. If anything, its very helpful in narrowing down a winner to the top 2 per conference. Granted, most of us probably would've assumed this but its still telling.

You do realize this rule change is for the OHL, not the NHL....right?

Just playing devils advocate, but I'm fairly confident the OHL is more concerned with people's faces and heads than they are with their knuckles. More than anything, I found the Sanderson incident to be a freak accident. Obviously there's the potential for it to happen but you're probably more likely to get killed in a Nascar wreck than you are the way Sanderson died. I don't agree with penalizing players for taking off their helmets, but I see where they're coming from. There's more to this than just the purity of the game. Incidents like this are an insurance nightmare for companies, and thats what the OHL is....a business. This most certainly doesn't mean I agree with it (because I don't), just that there's more to it than just purity of the game. If that was the issue, this rule never would've came to fruition.

The tough part about this will be those with visors. They'll never fight with this rule change (or might not even be challanged), but I can certainly see why the league feels they need to do something given the circumstances the past month.

It's tough enough to break up a wholesale fight, but when guys start coming from the bench. I feel for those refs. Dumbass move on the bench-leaving players' part.

^ Even better! What a great ending to a horrific story. It's nice knowing there are still people out there willing to do the right thing. Bobby Pappert is out money, Lori Pappert is without what she thought was "her" Winter Classic-used Zetterberg stick, and yet they didn't even think twice about doing the right thing.

What do you consider a "letdown", because I can guarantee you throughout both Boston and SJ's seasons they've had much more than just one "letdown". I've watched the Sharks plenty and they've had other poor games aside from the 6-0 loss to Detroit that they've not only lost, but some they were lucky to win. The same goes for the Bruins. You're just more critical of the Wings because it seems as though you're one of those people that likes to think the worst so they aren't as disappointed if their favorite team doesn't win. That way of viewing the game also makes for a distorted view because you're only looking for one thing. I know you haven't watched the Bruins or the Sharks with this mindset because I've seen much more than just one example from both of them that would fall under what you would call a "letdown".

Being in complete control of the game throughout the first period (aside from one screened/deflected goal), controlling the first half of the third and putting up 4 goals on the road is far from "nothing working". As for the defense, it was poor (especially the second period), but you're missing my point. The fact is, the Wings played 6 straight fully solid games coming into this one. Do you realistically expect any team to play at that level at all times during a season without a single letdown? Do you realize how unrealistic that is?

Let's forget Detroit for just a second, and answer me this: Do you honestly believe its possible (or even realistic) for any team at any level to play hard every second of every game? You make it seem like the Wings pick and choose different times to give a s***. That's not how it works and anyone that truly watches/plays the game enough understands that. Momentum swings are a massive part of sports.

Wrap it up, I'll take it! (anyone remember those damn commercials they kept running during Wings games that one December?) Aah, but what you didn't mention: Week 13 Results: 7 NFM25 13 22 Edicius 11 33 FinRedWing 10

Is that what you say when someone proves you wrong with logic?

Extremely strong 1st period all around.

OMG Hossa crashes the net and gets rewarded!

Great screen in front. That sucks after having all the momentum.