Why no Enforcer in Motown?

[Kp-Wings 3]

You're absolutely right and the reason is their salary demands.

I think it's funny that you and Lou seem to believe that Holland is the only one making these decisions on who the Wings go out and get.

So I guess the majority of the Wings front office prefers weaker players then?

I love how you like to brand me in the same group as Lou, but I'm not on this purely for entertaiment sake like he is. Look at our team right now. Over half of our forwards are under 6'0. The ones who are over 6'0, like Samulesson and Kopecky, all play like Grade A pansies. Not all of them, but most.

They have nobody that will go out and defend each other. I know earlier you questioned that logic, but look at it in a different view. Look at what Raffi Torres did to Williams. Look what Dallas Drake did to Lebda. Did anybody go after those guys after they did blatent cheapshots? No. Those plays were not big checks that were clean. They were dirty hits that should have been dealt with by the players, but weren't at all.

Instead, everybody sit around and waits for the referee and Colin Campbell to deal out the punishment, which I'm getting really sick of. It makes the Wings look like wusses.

Why is it so God awful that I question Ken Holland? I don't understand it. He hasn't and doesn't replace the toughness that's been lost over the years, like Harold said. Look at all those guys we lost. Who have they been replaced by? Nobody.

Edited July 20, 2007 by Kp-Wings

[StevieY9802 6]

If we won the cup last year, would you be saying the same thing?

People wouldn't be complaining as much but they still would. They would be complaining about how the team has lost the size but couldn't be using the lack of an enforcer as the wings reason for losing.

Size is only good when the size comes with good hockey sense and the ability to contribute in our game plan.

You're absolutely right and the reason is their salary demands.

Exactly. The Wings would love to have someone like I have said a few times already, like back in the first cup years of the 90's, a Shanny or more so a McCarty, Lapoitne or Kocur. Those guys could drop their gloves when needed and stick up for their teammated but would play within the system and not be liability on the ice during the playoffs. A figher does nothing. Moen and May weren't out getting in fights during the playoffs. It's a lot easier said then done to find those types of players. We can say whatever we want in here but you want to go tell Holland where to look for these guys? No one knows what teams hes talked to or what players. Him and Babcock know a lot more about what they need and how to get it then anyone in here.

[Lou_Siffer 1]

Why make a statement like that when last year proved it was wrong? While we didn't keep Bertuzzi, Calder and we may potentially lose Markov what leads you to believew we're not going to be "adding size"?

Size is only good when the size comes with good hockey sense and the ability to contribute in our game plan.

You're absolutely right and the reason is their salary demands.

I think it's funny that you and Lou seem to believe that Holland is the only one making these decisions on who the Wings go out and get.

It seems everyone else does too going by all the "way to go Kenny's" and the "Kenny's doing the right thing by not signing anybody" threads. What makes us any different than them? Other than the fact we happen to be complaining?

[Kp-Wings 3]

It seems everyone else does too going by all the "way to go Kenny's" and the "Kenny's doing the right thing by not signing anybody" threads. What makes us any different than them? Other than the fact we happen to be complaining?

Because apparently complaining makes us bad or spoilied fans.

That's a good example though. Everybody else acts like Holland is the only one who has a say in things, because people around here compliment the guy until they turn in the face. I don't hear any "Good signing Jim Nill" or "Good signing Steve Yzerman" topics or anything like that, even though they all have just as much as much say in the matter as Holland does.

But, whatever. Like you said earlier in the topic: Holland has brainwashed everybody into his line of thinking, that toughness does not belong in the new NHL.

[Lou_Siffer 1]

So I guess the majority of the Wings front office prefers weaker players then?

I love how you like to brand me in the same group as Lou, but I'm not on this purely for entertaiment sake like he is. Look at our team right now. Over half of our forwards are under 6'0. The ones who are over 6'0, like Samulesson and Kopecky, all play like Grade A pansies. Not all of them, but most.

Kp - You must have misread what ive posted. I did NOT say the need for tough and physical players was from strictly an entertainment standpoint. I said its my belief you need it to win! The entertainment thing had to do with someone like Brian McGrattan. Would a guy like that help the team? I definitely think he would, but at the same time i dont believe you necessarily need a full fledged heavyweight scrapper to go all the way. But you do need the Asham types, absolutely.

[Kp-Wings 3]

Kp - You must have misread what ive posted. I did NOT say the need for tough and physical players was from strictly an entertainment standpoint. I said its my belief you need it to win! The entertainment thing had to do with someone like Brian McGrattan. Would a guy like that help the team? I definitely think he would, but at the same time i dont believe you necessarily need a full fledged heavyweight scrapper to go all the way. But you do need the Asham types, absolutely.

Well, that is definitly a true statement. The Arron Ashams of the league are all very important parts of teams, much to the disbelief of those who always try to discredit players of that role.

It's the way you worded it before. I probably did misread it.

[Lou_Siffer 1]

Because apparently complaining makes us bad or spoilied fans.

That's a good example though. Everybody else acts like Holland is the only one who has a say in things, because people around here compliment the guy until they turn in the face. I don't hear any "Good signing Jim Nill" or "Good signing Steve Yzerman" topics or anything like that, even though they all have just as much as much say in the matter as Holland does.

But, whatever. Like you said earlier in the topic: Holland has brainwashed everybody into his line of thinking, that toughness does not belong in the new NHL.

Exactly! If he's gonna get the kudos around here, why shouldnt he get the complaints aimed at him as well?

[Yzerfan1999 81]

Because apparently complaining makes us bad or spoilied fans.

That's a good example though. Everybody else acts like Holland is the only one who has a say in things, because people around here compliment the guy until they turn in the face. I don't hear any "Good signing Jim Nill" or "Good signing Steve Yzerman" topics or anything like that, even though they all have just as much as much say in the matter as Holland does.

But, whatever. Like you said earlier in the topic: Holland has brainwashed everybody into his line of thinking, that toughness does not belong in the new NHL.

I really don't think Holland believes toughness is not a part of hockey. No GM of a NHL franchise thinks that, so its silly to assume Holland thinks it.

It IS safe to say Holland doesn't think an Enforcer has a place on his team - but toughness? Anyone is hockey knows the value of it - Holland just knows toughness is not always brought through enforcers. If Holland thinks the team needs toughness he will add it before the trade deadline. He has 2 million left to work with, no need for him to go out and sign an some 6'5 thug cause he will rack up Fighting Majors this year. Lets judge the toughness of the team Holland ices once the season begins.

[sticknmove 0]

"If we won the cup last year, would you be saying the same thing? "

I dont know, it doesnt really matter though becasue we did not win the cup, nor make it to the finals.

"I think it's funny that you and Lou seem to believe that Holland is the only one making these decisions on who the Wings go out and get."

Well he gets all the credit when things go well, so i guess its kind of a 2 ways street.

Edited July 20, 2007 by sticknmove

[Lou_Siffer 1]

I really don't think Holland believes toughness is not a part of hockey. No GM of a NHL franchise thinks that, so its silly to assume Holland thinks it.

It IS safe to say Holland doesn't think an Enforcer has a place on his team - but toughness? Anyone is hockey knows the value of it - Holland just knows toughness is not always brought through enforcers. If Holland thinks the team needs toughness he will add it before the trade deadline. He has 2 million left to work with, no need for him to go out and sign an some 6'5 thug cause he will rack up Fighting Majors this year. Lets judge the toughness of the team Holland ices once the season begins.

Well in the case of talking toughness fighting-wise, there's no need to wait to see what happens on the ice. There's none of it, I dont think that case is even arguable. If you dont think its needed thats fine, but it is non-existant.

[Kp-Wings 3]

Exactly! If he's gonna get the kudos around here, why shouldnt he get the complaints aimed at him as well?

That's something I can't figure out.

Everybody acts like we're speaking in greek or something everytime Holland is involved. Those of us who don't believe in the fact that Ken Holland is God have generally good reasons why he isn't, but yet again, it's like talking in a foreign language to them.

I really appriciate the attacks that I get around here at that same time, like if I question Ken Holland, it's insulting the entire Red Wing organization, and all of a sudden I'm labled as a spoiled fan.

I don't see any of this making a difference though. These people all seem to believe that Ken Holland is the highest authority in the entire world, and if you talk down to him, you'll be banished to hell.

[therock48880 14]

We've been over this, but where we disagree is in your thinking that the Wings are pretty far away from winning the cup, even with going to the conference finals last year, I disagree, I believe going to the conference finals last year showed how close we actually are.

I think we have the right team makeup to win a cup, I'm not saying you're alluding to this, but you don't have to use Anaheim's philosophy to win a cup. Hell, look at Carolina, while they had more players who fought during the year, their team makeup really isn't that much different from ours when they won it all.

I've seen a lot of people say, one playoff year doesn't prove anything, alright, what if the Wings do the same thing next season or go further? Does that prove that they're "tough" enough? If we won the cup last year, would you be saying the same thing?

Look, you believe the team needs to get bigger and stronger to compete with the cup, I look at last year and believe that we have all the tools, we just need less injuries.

Pretty hard to get excited about seeing the Wings bulldoze through the regular season with little to no competition.

Pretty broad statement. I was at the second of back to back games against Nashville on March 14th. To refresh memories, this was a huge game in terms of the division lead and it was the game after Tootoo had suckerpunched Bootland. It was loud in the arena when Bootland tried to get Tootoo to fight. Then it gradually subsided. There were numerous empty seats, btw. Granted, it was the middle of the week but in years past the Joe would have been rocking for such an important game. I'm not saying the reason for the empty seats was due to a lack of fighting/toughness on the team, just making statements. The Joe was like a morgue at times last year. Maybe it's because of the success of the Pistons and Tigers, I don't know. But it was different this year.

For those wondering how I got the tickets, a fellow seventh grade teacher is married to a man that is a big shot with Taco Bell. Taco Bell has seats at the Joe and they didn't have anyone to use them. She offered them to us and we gladly accepted.

p.s. I meant to quote the post from Heaton that stated something to the effect of "It's hard to get excited when the Wings were bulldozing through the regular season" or something to that effect. Heaton, did you remember that the Wings trailed Nashville most of the year?

That's something I can't figure out.

Everybody acts like we're speaking in greek or something everytime Holland is involved. Those of us who don't believe in the fact that Ken Holland is God have generally good reasons why he isn't, but yet again, it's like talking in a foreign language to them.

I really appriciate the attacks that I get around here at that same time, like if I question Ken Holland, it's insulting the entire Red Wing organization, and all of a sudden I'm labled as a spoiled fan.

I don't see any of this making a difference though. These people all seem to believe that Ken Holland is the highest authority in the entire world, and if you talk down to him, you'll be banished to hell.

I don't understand why it's so bad to say anything negative about the guy.

Edited July 20, 2007 by therock48880

[Heaton 1]

So I guess the majority of the Wings front office prefers weaker players then?

Obviously they're on board with the philosophy.

. The ones who are over 6'0, like Samulesson and Kopecky, all play like Grade A pansies. Not all of them, but most.

What makes them pansies?

Why is it so God awful that I question Ken Holland? I don't understand it. He hasn't and doesn't replace the toughness that's been lost over the years, like Harold said. Look at all those guys we lost. Who have they been replaced by? Nobody.

Did I say it was awful to question Holland? He hasn't "replaced" the toughness that has been "lost" over the years, instead he's built a sound competitive hockey team that is at or near the top of the league every season without being handcuffed to any bad players. I feel like he has a solid plan on how to operate in a capped era and 2 years in we're already in the conference finals. You can disagree with his views and how he does stuff, I don't really care. I don't agree with a lot about what he does, but I'm ultimately satisfied in the direction the team is going.

All I meant is Holland isn't the only one making decisions, Holland doesn't run the draft and I'd bet anything there'a room full of people who give their input on who the Wings go out and get including Scotty, Stevie, Jimmy D ect... And of course Holland gets the credit and of course he deserves the blame, but I bring it up so there is an understand when it's been given or received.

Look at a team like San Jose, big, fast, physical, but they don't know how to win. That's what you need, you don't need genetics to be successful, you need the know-how on what to do to win games and this team knows how.

All I'm getting at is if the organization didn't believe in the way the team was going, you'd see changes. Obviously Babcock, Holland, Nill, Jimmy D and Illich believe we're going in the right direction and while I don't care if you disagree and I may disagree at times, at the end of the day I trust them. They've given me no reason not to.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Why make a statement like that when last year proved it was wrong? While we didn't keep Bertuzzi, Calder and we may potentially lose Markov what leads you to believew we're not going to be "adding size"?

Size is only good when the size comes with good hockey sense and the ability to contribute in our game plan.

You're absolutely right and the reason is their salary demands.

I think it's funny that you and Lou seem to believe that Holland is the only one making these decisions on who the Wings go out and get.

Did we win the Cup last year and I missed it?

What leads me to believe we won't be adding size? Holland's track record. I'm hoping they will in some capacity. But it's going to take several moves. And year after year, few are made. Adding Bertuzzi was hardly a legit move at size.

I never said it was only Holland making these decisions alone. There's obviously several people's input, including Jimmy D, but ultimately Holland is the GM and the one responsible for running the team. If you like I could say "Holland and Wing's management" every time I talk about them.

[Heaton 1]

Did we win the Cup last year and I missed it?

No? Did I lead you to believe we did?

[Kp-Wings 3]

Obviously they're on board with the philosophy.

What makes them pansies?

Did I say it was awful to question Holland? He hasn't "replaced" the toughness that has been "lost" over the years, instead he's built a sound competitive hockey team that is at or near the top of the league every season without being handcuffed to any bad players. I feel like he has a solid plan on how to operate in a capped era and 2 years in we're already in the conference finals. You can disagree with his views and how he does stuff, I don't really care. I don't agree with a lot about what he does, but I'm ultimately satisfied in the direction the team is going.

All I meant is Holland isn't the only one making decisions, Holland doesn't run the draft and I'd bet anything there'a room full of people who give their input on who the Wings go out and get including Scotty, Stevie, Jimmy D ect... And of course Holland gets the credit and of course he deserves the blame, but I bring it up so there is an understand when it's been given or received.

Look at a team like San Jose, big, fast, physical, but they don't know how to win. That's what you need, you don't need genetics to be successful, you need the know-how on what to do to win games and this team knows how.

All I'm getting at is if the organization didn't believe in the way the team was going, you'd see changes. Obviously Babcock, Holland, Nill, Jimmy D and Illich believe we're going in the right direction and while I don't care if you disagree and I may disagree at times, at the end of the day I trust them. They've given me no reason not to.

Read my later posts. I never said Holland was the only one who makes the decisions.

Edited July 21, 2007 by Kp-Wings

[LeDs 0]

True.

LOL I knew it a bunch of soccer fans on here.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

No? Did I lead you to believe we did?

You asked why I made a statement like that when last year proved it was wrong.

I took that to mean you were saying the Wings had enough toughness to win the Cup this past year, and that's how the statement was proven wrong.

Edited July 21, 2007 by haroldsnepsts

[alienanxiety 23]

random scary hockey photo #1...

whatchyoo talkin' bout messier?

[Lou_Siffer 1]

random scary hockey photo #1...

whatchyoo talkin' bout messier?

Wow he looks so young there....was that taken back in his midget league days?

[alienanxiety 23]

no, it was gary coleman who was in the midget league my guess would be this was during the oilers dynasty. seems in sync with when diff'rent strokes was popular.

Edited July 21, 2007 by alienanxiety

[Heaton 1]

You asked why I made a statement like that when last year proved it was wrong.

I took that to mean you were saying the Wings had enough toughness to win the Cup this past year, and that's how the statement was proven wrong.

I meant in terms of Holland adding size/toughness.

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

We've been over this, but where we disagree is in your thinking that the Wings are pretty far away from winning the cup, even with going to the conference finals last year, I disagree, I believe going to the conference finals last year showed how close we actually are.

I think we have the right team makeup to win a cup, I'm not saying you're alluding to this, but you don't have to use Anaheim's philosophy to win a cup. Hell, look at Carolina, while they had more players who fought during the year, their team makeup really isn't that much different from ours when they won it all.

I've seen a lot of people say, one playoff year doesn't prove anything, alright, what if the Wings do the same thing next season or go further? Does that prove that they're "tough" enough? If we won the cup last year, would you be saying the same thing?

Look, you believe the team needs to get bigger and stronger to compete with the cup, I look at last year and believe that we have all the tools, we just need less injuries.

And don't anybody come at me with...."Well if we had an enforcer," Pronger wouldn't have injured Holmstrom in game 3 of the Anheim series. That game was all but settled when it happened, you knew the game was going to get chippy, and Pronger isn't going to change his game for you, me, Bob Probert, Georges Laraque, or anybody else (and let's save the overdramatic Chris Pronger is the anti-Christ posts).

Edited July 21, 2007 by SouthernWingsFan

[vangvace 12]

I've seen a lot of people say, one playoff year doesn't prove anything, alright, what if the Wings do the same thing next season or go further? Does that prove that they're "tough" enough? If we won the cup last year, would you be saying the same thing?

Look, you believe the team needs to get bigger and stronger to compete with the cup, I look at last year and believe that we have all the tools, we just need less injuries.

One playoff year doesn't prove they're tough enough yet, but it can be a start in a better direction. If they return to playing soft during the season then this past playoffs "tough" showing was a fluke or overachieving toughness.

One thing that does bother me about this team though is the apathy shown towards their teammates. They just don't seem to care what happens as long as they're in position. Talent wise they reminded me of the 1995 team minus the toughness.

It seems to me that Holland and Co. aren't fond of drafting naturally tougher players (with or without size. Domi was only 5'10" after all) and don't/can't sign them via free agency until 1) they've had a career changing injury, 2) are well past their prime, or 3) are AHL talent.

From the beginning through the 1999 season Detroit was known for tough, if not always good, hockey.

Edited July 23, 2007 by vangvace

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

One playoff year doesn't prove they're tough enough yet, but it can be a start in a better direction. If they return to playing soft during the season then this past playoffs "tough" showing was a fluke or overachieving toughness.

How many consecutive years will it take then to prove how tough they are then? Two? Five? Ten? Fifteen?

Why can't we just give them fair credit where it's due? Last season when it matter most they showed "toughness" and "desire" more often than not.