barabbas16

Ok then - my bad. I do see/hear that type of comment on a semi-regular basis... guess it annoys me to the point of feeling the need to post in response. Sorry I misread, though.

Wow! How DARE he suggest that you've only been watching Detroit Red Wings hockey for 20 years!? Thank you for straightening that out and expaining that YOU are not one of those second citizen Red Wings fans that don't belong in the same room as your fandom.... ....or did I misintepret the underlying tone of your message?

What a horrible piss-poor disgrace of a performance. Every player that played in a Detroit jersey tonight needs to be hanging their heads in shame.

Don Cherry is a clown. His thoughts and opinions are as predictable as the sun rising and I put no stock in anything he says simply because he said it.

Not sure if you're the only one or not, but I don't agree with you. It is comparable in my opinion. I could argue that you could listen to almost any rap or hip hop song and hear the 'N' word used in a non-derogatory manner, but that's not really the point. We all know exactly what Simmonds and Barch meant when they said whatever words or phrases. They both said something derogatory to someone else because of something personal about them that has nothing to do with hockey. Personally, I don't care whether there are suspensions for this or how severe the possible suspensions are... as long as everyone is treated the same. It's an issue of preferential treatment, in my eyes. Is the league going to give preferential treatment to one player over another? Or one 'group of people' that were isnulted over another? That said, if that happens... life will go on, and I will still watch hockey.... while thinking less of those who dish out the punishments for these sorts of things.

Like this..? http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/display_players.php?tmi=5492

Agreed on both points. I would throw Hudler in that list as well (and maybe more so than Cleary imo). If he got hurt, Sammy could potentially step into that role. I actually would have preferred for the Wings to have found a way to hold on to Samuelsson after 2008-09 instead of the alternative that we ended up with (Bertuzzi/Williams).

I don't think anyone expects Brandon Dubinsky to fight on a regular basis. If he were a "weasel" and had no value to the team, he wouldn't have a roster spot. I think it is a bad time for Shelley to be calling people weasels, seeing as he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with the puck, let alone the net. Additionally, if he were expected to back up his big mouth in the upcoming meetings with New York with anything other than fighting, he won't be able to... because he IS a terrible hockey player. I don't like Shelley and I view him as a player that has no mind for the game and is only there to fight, which is all he is capable of doing on the ice. Unfortunately, Claude Giroux, Danny Briere and Scott Hartnell will have to score all of his points for him. Not like they aren't used to it, they score all of Zac Rinaldo's points for him too. No offense or anything, I like a lot of your posts... just trying to show the opposite perspective from which I view this situation.

I agree with this. I disagree that they 'got nothing' on San Jose or Chicago forwards. Am I saying that our top six forwards are better than that of those teams? No, I am not. I was saying that the statement NeedMoreToughness made was an exaggeration. I do not think that the gap between the Detroit forwards and CHI/SJ/etc. is as big as that post made it sound. This is still a team that has a chance to win this year (yes, probably with a move to improve the top six, but the Wings have the cap room to do this and I think they will).

Oh I see... only look at less than 25% of one season, but completely ingnore the previous full regular seasons and playoffs. That seems logical. Or perhaps you actually mean "Don't bring up things that don't support my statement. Only look at what I want you to." Sorry, I'm not going to do that. I know it may seem difficult, but if you could remember WAY in the distant past to last season. Detroit won the Central Division, beating Chicago - AND they scored more goals than Chicago. This happened in a season when the top six forwards for both teams were almost identical to what they are THIS season.

Datsyuk has 3 Selke trophies saying Detroit has the best defensive forward in the game. I would say that Detroit's top six "has that" on Chicago's and San Jose's. San Jose's top six has won a combined zero Stanley Cups. I would say that Detroit's tops six "has that" on them.

Yeah, I can see that line of thinking. Basically, what we automatically think of as 'average' is a career NHL player that was just ok, because guys liek Doug Brown, etc. were around for a long time and were "average". When really, these are the guys who would probably fall more into the writer of the article's "excelled at being average".... which makes them no longer average, doesn't it? I would say maybe those guys were 'solid' (for lack of a better word - it's late) players, instead of average. Now, I'm not saying it makes them exceptional or anything, but an average NHL player would probably actually be someone who played just 2 or a few seasons in the NHL - someone more like Maxim Kuznetsov or... Jamie Pushor. I don't really think that saying Kris Draper excelled at being average is necessarily an insult. Plus, I thought that the 'weak face' being thrown in at the end of his section was pretty funny, honestly.

Wow. So many things I would like to respond to. The grass IS always greener on the other side, isn't it? If San Jose and Chicago are such high powered offensive teams, why didn't they outscore this 'disheartening' Detroit Red Wings team that hasn't had a 30 goal scorer is SO long? And Vancouver had a whopping ONE more goal than Detroit last year with their '2 out of the top five players in the game' <--- (That was quite a bit of a stretch to say imo). By the way, why are those teams so deep in high level scoring talent? Maybe because those teams had some garbage years and therefore had some really high draft picks to get some of those guys. Where were the Wings during those garbage years for those teams? Oh that's right - they had teams of a caliber to compete for the Cup those years and so they didn't get really high draft picks. Well, shame on them for not sucking for a few years and then drafting the Sedins and Jonathan Toews for us. And why in the world are Dave Bolland and Michael Frolik being brought up in this discussion when it seems to be bash Dan Cleary day? I mean, correct me if I am wrong please, but I kind of put Dan Cleary at the very LEAST on par with guys like Bolland and Frolik. Why do they get mentioned as additional scoring when Cleary gets run through the mud? And, 'three if Franzen is on a roll'... please. Do you think Franzen is the only streaky scorer in the league? I would argue his scoring ability is comparable to that of Patrick Sharp, who gets included in the "4 deep" of Chicago... or Joe Pavelski or Martin Havlat at this point in his career, as they seemingly get included int he "6 deep" of San Jose. Also - more of a side note really on something I found humorous in your post....We had a guy that shot the puck a lot a couple of years ago. His name was Mikael Samuelsson, and 98% of LGW hated him with a passion because he shot the puck all the time. I actually thought it was kind of refreshing to have him on the team because, as is being discussed, there are several players who many feel do not shoot the puck nearly enough. But really, if they did that and still weren't scoring and the Wings weren't winning, everyone would complain about them exactly like they did about Samuelsson. Btw, totally not saying that Samulesson is the answer for this team or anything, although I did like the guy.... just found some humour there.

The sky is falling!

Well, maybe it is some small consolation to Columbus that they aren't alone on the starting 0 for 16 on the power play part.

That won't help in the playoffs. You can almost book it right now that at least half of the teams that make the playoffs in the Western Conference will be from the Pacific time zone. I suppose any less travel is some help, but I care way less about trips out west in October-March than I do about the ones after that.

Haha ok man, you're right - end of discussion. I don't even think you ever really knew exactly what the discussion was about anyway. On a completely unrelated note... I saw a movie the other day... it had Adam Sandler and Jack Nicholson in it and they sang a song from West Side Story... can't remember the title though, can anyone help me out? Anyone?

First of all let's try and be a little less 'boo-hoo somebody doesn't agree with me so I'm going to pitch fit about it and curse at them' and be a little more grown up, shall we? Also, please stop trying to anticipate arguments…. I was not going to say anything about peewee hockey. I have never disagreed that fighting is a PART of the game and its heritage. But, your seemingly equal comparison between fighting and shooting/passing/defense/goaltending/ice/etc. is, again, way off. No, taking fighting away from the game would not be the same as taking away the ice and turning it into roller hockey. Based on your assessment, the Wings have played in zero hockey games this year, since there have been no fights. Oh, and how many "hockey games" (with fights) did they play in last year – 10? How many NHL games have you seen without shooting, passing, defense, goaltending, or ice? None. How many have you seen without fights? An extremely large number. These are not equivalents. You are delusional if you really think that. I never said I didn’t like or care for the fighting. I don't want it taken away from the game or anything like that. I just said I didn’t care for it in some circumstances and clearly I do not care for it nearly as much as you do…. although it seems to me that doing that would hardly be possible for anyone. Your sport, huh? Sounds to me like you should go watch some boxing or UFC instead since the fighting is all that matters to you – or at least you should go watch the Penguins or some other team that fights a lot more than Detroit does. Maybe you would be happier and less prone to snap at someone who is just trying to have a discussion.

Yeah, maybe it wasn't the best place for that post as I was speaking more toward generalities than about Nystrom in general. I have no problem with the guy, I just don't see why we would want him on the Wings instead of any of the guys they have already. I kind of thought Commodore was the guy to 'keep the flies off,' and I liked that because I thought he could be useful in other areas of the game as well. That said, I really don't think that the 'flies' are really that much of an issue at this point. I didn't mind Downey or Brad May, etc... I just didn't think they were really necessary is all. I am genuinely and pleasantly surprised that there is no thread on McGrattan, though. Maybe I'm wrong and it's not like I said...maybe I'm just overcompensating the other way because it seems like (to me) there are so many people are so pro-fighters and think it is absolutely necessary and I just don't. I think it can be entertaining, but many fights are not necessary.

I agree with this. Sad for Columbus, though.... they really made legitimate efforts to improve, and they did....but they will have nothing to show for it. I wonder where they would place in the Northwest Division.

I do not disagree with the aforementioned argument that it intangibly affects the game. Obviously, it does do that. Yes, it is a part of the game and I feel that this is well incorporated in my previous post. There are also many other parts of the game that one could easily argue are bigger parts... skating, passing, shooting, hitting, defence, goaltending... or others more along the lines of fighting - roughing, cross-checking, or even face washes, etc. My issue, which I feel was stated clearly, was with your statement that fighting "is the game." That was a false and ridiculously eggagerated statement. I find it humorous how hypocritical it is of you to accuse me of not listening.... and to say that I am dead wrong. You love fighting in hockey and think that it is a quintessential part of the game. I enjoy fighting in certain circumstances and feel that it adds to the game in those circumstances, but there are also times when I feel that it takes away from the game. I think that is a correct assessment of our disagreement.... but fighting isn't hockey. That's just a ridiculous thing to say. You are overstating its importance by a long shot, in my opinion.

No. It isn't. The '20 minutes of game time where the puck is in play' (per period) is the game. And yes, we all realize that fighting has been around in hockey for a long time. That's why I have to hear my dad give me the old 'I went to a fight and a hockey game broke out' joke every time I bring the game up. Fighting is fewer and farther between than it used to be, and while I do not think that fighting should be disposed of from hockey or anything like that.... but I do think that the changes we've seen as far as fighting goes is for the better. I enjoy a good fight when it IS part of the game. I enjoyed the Wings in the 90s as much as anyone else. I loved Shanahan and McCarty, but they were hockey players who could fight. I do not like players who fight just to fight for no real reason and that is basically their sole purpose - guys who wouldn't be playing otherwise.... fighters who play hockey. If you seriously think fighting IS the game - go watch UFC or something.

Mmm... I see what yoiu're saying with Nyquist and I wouldn't have been upset if it was his roster spot instead of Brunnstrom's, but I like the decision that was made there. I say keep as many assets as you can. Giving Brunnstrom a spot gives us another potential asset for the future - some have said they see him as a potential replacement for Holmstrom, etc. I think Nyquist is still too small - Brunnstrom as a full size NHL player. And, Nyquist will benefit more, I believe from playing all the time in GR instead of rotating games and plkaying 10-12 minutes when he does play, as Brunnstrom will. The Wings will lose a few players next year and Brunnstrom and Nyquist can potentially both step in and fill full-time roles at that time. Just my thoughts. Also, totally agree with the bottom part of your post. Well, I can't speak to the parts about you specifically, but I just do not understand the pro-enforcer faction on this board. It seems as though they all want a fighter at all costs and it doesn;t really matter which one or if he even knows how to skate. It's like they all really love fighting and find hockey boring without it, but they don't want to say that. So, they make all these hollow arguments to justify wanting this goon or that goon without revealing that they just want a fighter because they fight - end of discussion - no other reason. I mean, a guy that drops the gloves becomes available.... you can bet that there will be a thread with his name on it on LGW within the hour, doesn't matter who it is or what else he can do, if anything. Somebody call Brent Severyn - we need him on this team.

I'm not disappointed. If that is not what you meant, then I am glad, and I agree. I still disagree about that being the worst embellishment this year... someone later in the thread mentioned that it seemed to them that Abby raised his arms as if to say 'WTF?'.... I believe this is a more accurate assessment, but again you are entitled to your opinion. I do not consider Justin Abdelkader to be a flopper. Maybe you should try listening to other people. Obviously, I was not the only one who mis-interpreted, as you say, the point you were trying to make. And this has clearly happened in the past, because it seems that you have developed a repuatation for stirring up trouble or something like that. I would think that you would want to effectively make your points. I could tell you not to make a habit of communicating because you are apparently not very good at doing that effectively. But instead.... pay attention to what other people say and adjust your postings in the future to clearly state your point. Change the way you post to avoid misinterpretation. "I think this is what you are looking for" followed by a clip of the hit on Abby is pretty open for interpretation. And, I'm not a regular poster on this board, so I was not biased against your posts or anything, but how I said I read it is how I read it. It can be annoying, but communication is a two way street... and it really doesn't matter all that much what you were trying to say if that's not what people think you were saying. It just makes things more difficult for everyone.

You said that here. Obviously, you didn't say it verbatim, but you clearly were implying 'Cooke=Abdelkader' or something similar with this post. But then, you already knew that....as did anyone else with a fully functioning brain. See - I didn't actually say in the line above that you have a full functioning brain, but I implied it. There's no need to play dumb. Go ahead and stand up for the point you are making. I don't agree with it and neither would most, I would imagine. But, you're entitled to your opinion, so don't be fickle and back off from it. Unless 'Bring Back the Bruise Brothers' is right and your whole purpose in posting was to stir up trouble.