Echolalia

Any and all Futurama references accepted regardless of situation under Echolalia Ordinance

Ive mentioned this a couple times in GDTs in the past, but I think the two biggest things Pulkinnen needs to improve upon are supporting his teammates in the offensive zone ie being more active in the cycle, behind the net, along the boards, and secondly, being smarter with his choice of shots. To the first point: there have been many times when Pulkinnen has looked (and found) the quiet area of the ice where he can rip a one-timer. The problem is his linemates are struggling to retain possession of the puck on the other side of the ice. It's difficult to find the open man and get him the puck when your back is to the play and you have a defender hounding you down. So instead of getting a one-timer off, these plays often would result in a change of possession and the puck gets cleared out of the zone. To the second point: Pulkinnen has taken so many shots that, against NHL quality goalies, are almost never going to go in. I'm talking about unscreened shots from the point with no rebound support. It's essentially a turnover. I'd rather Pulks hold onto the puck and rely more on his teammates instead of trying to put one in when the odds of him actual scoring are quite minute.

Marchenko has looked solid the same way that most of our defensive prospects look solid when they're brought up: they do they're best to stay out of trouble, don't bring much attention to themselves, and occasionally do something offensively. And of course Marchenko looks a bit better than Oulette because he's right-handed, which gives us a new dimension. But for as much flak LGW gives Smith, he's solidly on a level above all of Oulette, Marchenko, Lashoff, Kindl, and any other defensive prospect we currently have. And Marchenko's right-handedness isn't enough of an advantage for me to trust him over Smith in the playoffs. We're essentially upgrading our right-handed defender from someone with no experience, to someone with quite a lot of experience. But oh my gosh our defensive depth: Kindl, Lashoff, Oulette, Marchenko, maybe even Sproul all NHL-ready. That's almost a whole defensive team of players we aren't dressing.

In all aboard the Motor City Smitty train. Also he biggest thing keeping me from wanting Phaneuf is that contract, so if Toronto is willing to eat a bunch of that change I'd make the trade. But I don't want Phaneuf's contract handcuffing the Wings down the road.

Friendly advice: If you didn't include your first paragraph and the last line of your response, nobody would be giving your a hard time right now. But bringing up your fan history and thumping your chest for being a die hard Wings' fan (on a Wings' forum where 90% of us can easily claim the same credentials or more), then following it up with the snarky comment about "thanks for playing" to close your post came off badly. Very badly. Most of us try to be friendly to one another here, even if we disagree with something, but when comments like that are made, people are going to gang up on you. Likewise, if you stated an opinion in some other thread and jimmyemeryhunter (or whoever) posted something belittling and arrogant in response, myself and probably several others would come to your aid and attack the perpetrator. Its just how we roll. edit: sorry I was typing this up as your warning was being posted Mabus. I do think its worthwhile for anyone interested in having an engaging and respectful conversation to be informed of this, though. As for the trade itself (to get back on topic), I stated my views a couple pages back in a long-winded post I don't feel like retyping up here, but tl;dr: Cole will contribute here, the prospects we gave up won't. Cole fills a need that the Wings have. Looks like a good trade.

dood hes 29. He knows hockey.

Actually it sounds like its ONLY vibes. "who I believe brought way more..." "I believe Holland was created by other good front office people." "He does not seem to be a great stand alone GM". These aren't facts. This is what you believe. And you didn't even bother to try to support these opinions with anything empirical or quantifiable. As far as any of us are aware you're going off of vibes. Also, you say Holland's ability to make good trades has nose-dived after people like Nill left. Nill left in 2013. Holland only made two trades since then (Legwand and Cole). That's not exactly a good sample size to base criticism on, especially because the Cole trade isn't even 4 hours old yet, and we haven't had a chance to see what these players can do for their new teams (but considering Holland moved two players who will never see ice as a Red Wing, if Cole plays just one game then the Wings are coming out ahead). If Holland made any s***ty trades prior to Nill leaving in 2013, are you willing to point the blame on Nill for those screwups? Or does he only get credit for the good trades, and it was all Holland's idea for the bad ones? And also, will you be basing your answer off more than vibes again?

I agree with this. Nyquist has been money on the powerplay this year, where he has time and space to work. 5 on 5 hasn't been as friendly to him, and I think a lot of that has to do with how tightly the opposition checks him. He spent a good deal of time last year on the third line, and even when he was bumped up to the top six during all the injuries, nobody in the league knew anything about this Nyquist kid, so other teams gave him time and space to make things happen. I think playing him against third line opponents will buy him some of that time and space back, and we might see him produce more as a result. The only question would be who will take his spot in the top 6, and will the production from Nyquist on the third line + player X on the second line be greater than Nyquist on the second, and player X on the third? The only way to know for sure is to give it a try. And ho hum the Wings picked up a top 6 forward, so Nyquist getting bumped becomes a little more convenient. On the other hand, because this forward is Cole, if they were both on the same line, Nyquist might get that extra time and space anyway with Cole feeding him pucks and pulling the piano. Frankly I'd like to see both options tried out. Worst case scenario is it doesn't work out, and we can always go back to the old lines. Its not like he's been completely ineffective anyway, and he'll always have the powerplay.

I guess I'm joining the party a bit late. My thoughts (which seem to echo many of the folks in here based on my read-through): Cole, conditional 3rd <-> Backman, Janmark, 2nd. Backman is a nonasset in the Wings' organization. He couldn't break the lineup in GR (or refused to), and high-tailed it back to Sweden. Combine that with the fact that half of our NHL lineup is relatively young (Smith, DeKeyser, Quincey, Kindl, Lashoff) and we have several guys banging on the door (Oulette, Marchenko, Sproul), and its pretty clear that Backman didn't have a future in Detroit. So kudos to Kenny for turning a nonasset into a roster player, and if Jim Nill can get Backman over to the NHL, then good for the Stars and good for Backman. But that opportunity doesn't exist for him in Detroit. Janmark I don't know much about, admittedly. I know a couple posters are pretty high on the kid, but I personally haven't heard much, but he's also buried pretty deep on the depth chart. We have a lot of young forwards on the team that are playing well, and again, a lot that are in the pipeline. I don't know if Janmark will ever have the opportunity to break the Wings' lineup, so again, this looks like Holland is getting value out of a player who, by himself, likely doesn't have any value in the Wings organization. So from how I'm looking at, the 2nd round pick was the Wings' most devastating loss in this trade, and if we don't get to the ECF (or we do but Cole doesn't play in at least 50% of the games to get us there), then the Wings have a 3rd round pick from Dallas coming back to soften that blow. So as far as trade value, I think Holland did a good job. I'm not sure what the Stars prospect pool looks like, but if its pretty shallow and these kids can come in and contribute, then Nill probably did well also and its a fair trade. As for what Cole brings to the table: I have him pegged as someone similar to Abdelkader, except Cole has been scoring a bit more this year, but both are big bodies that can wear down on the other team, and are most comfortable in the greasy areas of the ice. With Franzen out until further notice, it will be good to have another big body to round out our top six, and I can see that coming in quite valuable in the playoffs, especially considering the manner in which the Wings lost to the Bruins last year. So I think Cole can contribute and be a difference maker. The biggest knock on the guy is that he's up there in age, but looking at his ppg over the last few seasons, he's actually been trending upward. 2011-2012 was his most productive year at .74ppg and 35 goals. The following year he was destroyed by injuries and posted .276 in only a handful of games. The year after he played 75 of 82 games and had a .39ppg. This year he's at .578ppg and has played 57 of the Stars 62 games. So as far as how much age is allegedly slowing him down, its pretty hard to assess, actually. His numbers took a sharp hit when he had that injury-plagued year in 2012-2013, but since then he's steadily been getting better, and hasn't missed too many games either, although he has yet to reach his .74ppg from 2011-2012. At the very least he has shown he can still contribute, and its even more encouraging to see that hes trending up and not down. Overall I'm pleased with the trade. I think Holland did a good job of getting something out of "nothing", and I think he targeted a piece that will make the Wings a more well-rounded, and more difficult team to play against. Also, for those of you upset about the trade, think of it this way: Cole on the team likely bumps Andersson from the top 12.

I agree with everything except the bolded. Again, my saying "I think it needs to be addressed" is in response to the posters in this thread who have implied the issue isn't a big deal because we've been winning. It has no bearing on what I think is or isn't happening in the lockerroom. It's akin to a mechanic working on my car in his garage, and my girlfriend in the lobby says the alternator on the car doesn't need to be fixed because it's still driving, and me replying to her that the alternator problem needs to be addressed. My conversation with my girlfriend in the lobby doesn't mean that I don't think the mechanic is fixing the car. It means that I think there's a problem that needs to be addressed, and I'm conveying that thought to someone who suggests otherwise.And just a side note: talking about and practicing correcting a problem doesn't = problem is sufficiently addressed. I'm sure Babs and co have been focusing on the blown leads theoughout this entire road trip, considering it's been a common theme, but based on the fact the Wings blew a two-goal lead yesterday, I wouldn't consider the problem sufficiently addressed. They're working on it, sure, but the problem as of our last game is not yet solved, and thus still requires attention.

Based on your response it sounds like you believe I don't think they are currently trying to address the blown leads, which is a bad conclusion to jump to based on my comment, and particularly what you bolded. To clarify: my comment is aimed more in response to the comments in this thread, where the general consensus seems to be that wins are the important thing, and how we got there not as much. I can't respond to anything the coaching staff says or does because I don't have access to their conversations and focuses in the lockerroom and during practice, but I'm sure it's something they've talked and will continue to talk about. And as I stated earlier, it's something I think they should talk about and continue to talk about.

We have a pretty young team right now so I kind of expect to see that kind of instability to a degree, and its been nice that our guys have been resilient and confident enough to consistently claw back and walk away with points. But I do agree that its something that the coaching staff and the team as a whole should address. The playoffs are a tighter game of hockey, and its going to be much more difficult to win games after blowing the lead. At the very least the Wings are gaining the confidence that they can do it, so maybe it'll turn out to be a blessing in disguise that they keep blowing leads (and winning).

Yeah I didn't like that at all, and was pretty surprised that Mickey kind of wrote it off as nothing, especially after he got up in arms about just about every other call/noncall in the game. He seemed pretty emotionally invested in this game, though, so I'm guessing he was too busy focusing on the impending win to let the penalty get to him.

Jesus that looked dirty

lol what does this mean

lol Mickey "oh s***!"

That goal can be traced back to Jones who pinced way deep on a 4 on 4

Brendan Smith reminds me of Podrick Payne

Ya thats crazy.

lol when in doubt, go with the backhand Glendening

Isn't it James Ear Jones?

I think that might be Helm's actually

when in doubt, go to the backhand Pavel

100%

I think Jurco has looked pretty bad tonight, and much of this year. Andersson is as bland as it gets for an NHL player, but at the very least he's playing NHL hockey. I don't think Jurco has been.