paulwoodsfan

I would love to see THN's 2001 ranking of RW prospects. I bet Datsyuk was not even on the list. So it's not a huge stretch to think that someone who is outside the top 75 in hockey today (Pulkinnen, say) might turn into a top-line NHLer.

That may be precisely why -- he provokes reaction.

There's a real shortage of centres with good offensive skills. The Leafs did not have any realistic way to replace Grabovski, hence they (over)paid for him. Fil will get a very nice payday after next season.

Did you see Orr play? To suggest he was "only" an offensive defenceman is just wrong. And yes, it was easier to score back then, yet no other defenceman came even close to the kind of points totals Orr piled up. Weren't they all facing the same goalies? Look, I love Lidstrom and I have already said I think he's second-best all time, but he's not first.

Seeing as how it is apparent Stuart is leaving after this season, and Lidstrom is going to retire within a year or two at the most, will someone please explain to me how the Wings will kill penalties if Ericsson gets jettisoned the way some folks are hoping? I like White, Quincey and Smith but those are all PP guys, not PK guys, especially once Lidstrom's gone. Even if Suter is signed, he and Kronwall can't be the only penalty killers. Tons of people on here bash Ericsson but IMO he has proven to be an effective penalty killer, and that's an important thing to have on the blueline. If Ericsson never develops into more than an effective PKer who can play third-pair minutes (a la Lilja), I'll be fine with that. I don't think he's even close to overpaid considering some of the insane contracts around this league.

Lidstrom is the second-greatest defenceman of all time, IMO, but it is folly to suggest he was as good as or better than Orr. There has never been anyone else in hockey able to do what Orr did. Even with bad knees most of his career, his skating was as good as or better than Coffey's, his vision was almost Gretzky-esque and he could more than hold his own physically. The idea that his accomplishments should be downgraded because he won his Norris trophies in a smaller league is a logical fallacy. When Orr played (mostly in a 12-team league), the worst player he faced was about the 240th best player in North America at that time. Lidstrom plays against guys every night who are at best the 500th- to 600th-best player, albeit in the entire world and not just North America. There's no surefire way to compare eras, but I am convinced that if 18-year-old Bobby Orr came along today, he would become as dominant a force as he was back then. He would not put up as many points as he did because hockey is less wide open, more well coached and has goalies who are both better and have much bigger equipment. But he would dominate, especially considering that when he played, obstruction was standard practice and now it is (somewhat) gone. And of course if he came along today, his first knee injury would have been fixed with a simple arthroscopic procedure and he likely wouldn't have suffered the ongoing deterioration in his knee that ruined his career.

I'm amazed the Preds aren't being mentioned. They have no stars up front, but the best pair of defencemen in the league and a world-class goalie. And a coach who constantly gets them playing above their abilities. I see both them and St. Louis as serious threats to come out of the west (along with the Wings and Canucks, moreso than the Sharks, Hawks and whoever else gets in) but if I had to pick between St. Louis and Nashville I'd say the Preds are likelier since they now have some playoff experience.

I really, really want to see the reversed version of the current logo brought back. For many years the Leafs and Wings had completely reversible logos -- one for home and one for away. Around 1983 or '84, the Wings dumped the one with the white dot in the centre of the wheel and started using the other one both home and away. I'd love to see them go back to using both all the time. I'm sure that won't happen but it would be fantastic if they could bust out the reverse logo for this one game.

If this question had been asked 10 years ago, when Nick had just one Norris Trophy under his belt, would he have been the lock he now is? No. Therefore it is way too early, IMO, to suggest Zetterberg or Datsyuk are unlikely to warrant having their numbers retired. Z probably has almost half of his career still to play, and I bet Datsyuk will play another six or seven years as well. There are many potential accomplishments for both of them still to come. Neither guy is likely to win a major award eight times after the age of 30 the way Nick has, but I could certainly see either of them winning a few more awards and a few more Cups. Bottom line, I think it is quite possible that both will have their numbers retired some day.

Not the only one. I enjoy the up-tempo style of play in the West way more than the grinding style of the East, and I like all of rivalries the Wings have out west. The best answer, IMO, would be to do a complete revamp that has every team travelling across time zones about the same amount, but in the absence of that I could support this compromise although to be truly "fair" it should also eliminate conferences altogether for the playoffs.

What, no love for the Troll Patrol?

You have to hunt through a lot of non-Wings stuff, but there are quite a few other vintage Wings clips here: http://www.youtube.com/user/pxw13?feature=mhee

Another Z goal, this time his first ever in a Wings uni:

So the answer to Bower question was No? Care to answer the same question re Dryden? Smith? Fuhr?

As I asked, where you alive when Bower played? As I asked, could the same thing you are saying about Smith be said about Osgood?

Sorry, Bower was not an "average goalie." Were you even alive when he was playing? To suggest that Fuhr was less of a goalie than Moog or Ranford is utterly ridiculous. Aside from making every save he absolutely needed to make behind a team that seldom deigned to play defence, Fuhr was also good enough to be chosen as the starting (and winning) goalie for Canada in the 1987 Canada Cup. And won the Vezina Trophy that season. And finished second in balloting for the Hart Trophy. Osgood ever do any of that? As for Smith, although for some reason you mention Edmonton, I assume the point you are trying to make is that the reason he won Cups is because he played for a dynasty. Hmmm, could the same be said about Osgood? Oh wait, the Red Wings actually did change their goalie and win the Cup. Happened three times, actually. To suggest the Grind Line was not a key component in 2002 is, to quote myself, utterly ridiculous, but I grant it was not a hugely significant component in 2008. As for a Russian Five banner, that's actually a good idea -- I'd do both (R5 and GL) if I were Mike Ilitch.

1. I don't think Osgood has Hall of Fame credentials. He is certainly not at the level of Smith, Fuhr or Bower (four Cups each as starters, IIRC, and considered among the league's top goalies for much of their careers). Worsley and Cheevers may or may not be legitimate HoFers but there are are a lot of guys in from that era who are not, IMO (e.g. Bob Pulford, Clark Gillies). Basing someone's credentials on how he compares to others in an already overstocked Hall of Fame is a way to further degrade the Hall's status. IMO Osgood was a good goalie for a long time an an outstanding team, but was never an elite player. And I want the Hall reserved for elite players. 2. I think the Grind Line was a key component of four Cups and was in some ways symbolic of the team's evolution into the top organization in hockey. The three main members of the line were character/heart-and-soul guys whose importance to the team far outweighed their statistical contributions. Putting them up there as a unit on a single banner would go over very well with Wings fans without overstating their overall importance. Kocur was on the line only briefly in 1997 so I don't see him being included. As for the Bruise Brothers, there are lots of people with fond memories of that pair (I'm one of them) but the Wings never won anything with the two of them in the lineup together, and Probert's well-documented personal issues which led to his eventual departure from Detroit will prevent him from being so honoured.

Much as I loved him, I don't believe Osgood will (or should) make the Hall of Fame or get a banner. Obviously Lidstrom gets both. Datsyuk and Zetterberg, if they remain Red Wings for the rest of their careers (Z almost certainly will, Datsyuk has another contract to negotiate in three years) are very likely to get banners and could end up in the Hall as well (Datsyuk more likely for the latter at this point). I think the Wings will do a "Grind Line" banner honouring Draper, Maltby and McCarty together at some point.

I did. IMO there have been only two players I would consider superstars in the last 30 years -- Gretzky and Lemieux. Before that there was Orr in the 1970s, Hull in the 1960s, Howe in the '50s and '60s and Richard in the '40s and '50s. All of those guys transcended the game itself and all of them also had particular attributes that set them apart from everyone else. Lidstrom absolutely has some attributes that set him apart. He is by far the greatest in history at controlling his stick and corralling loose pucks at the blueline, and he may also be the best ever at skating guys off the puck through exceptional positioning and anticipation. And of course he does pretty much everything else (except hammer opponents physically) exceptionally well. But IMO he does not transcend the game the way the others on the above list did. In the galaxy of stars Lidstrom is one of the brightest of all time, but IMO he is not a superstar.

This will not happen. it has happened only four times in four decades, and of those four, two (Howe and Gretzky) were widely considered the greatest player of all time when the decision was made, one (Orr) was unanimously considered the greatest defenceman of all time and the other (Lemieux) was widely considered the most talented player of all time. And the last three guys were generally considered superstars from the moment they arrived in the NHL. As great as Lidstrom is, he has never been considered a "superstar" at any stage of his career. And his reputation as possibly/probably the second-best defenceman of all time emerged only in the last five or so years. If you had asked this question a decade ago, after he had already played 10 seasons, no one would have taken it seriously. At that point he wasn't even a surefire Hall of Famer. Don't get me wrong, the guy is a guaranteed first-ballot selection. But to have the waiting period waived, a player will need to be of Gretzky-like stature almost from the moment he arrives, and for his entire career.

Agree 100%. The lack of right-hand shots is one of the main reasons (maybe the only reason) the lamentable Jason Williams stuck around as long as he did -- to play the right point on the second PP. It's bizarre how heavily skewed hockey in general (not just the Wings) is to left-hand shooters.

I've been going through some of my old Wings footage and have posted some clips on youtube. They include: Also, And this one:

And this one: And this one: