Downey cleared waivers

[bogeygolfer 4]

here's the deal, the wings plan to have a 22 man roster, instead of a full 23 men to acumulate some cap space for emergency purposes.

so instead of 3 players scratched every night, you have two. Right now those players are quincey and meech.

Chelios, Maccarty and howard are on IR!!!!! they dont count as any of the 23 player max!!!!!

when quincey is traded or when they've built up that extra cap then maybe downey is recalled (thats ofcoarse if you think he won the battle for the enforcer role from maccarty)

[Opie 308]

That's a pipe dream. You have a very unrealistic vision of what an enforcer is, especially since several of the men you named are Hall of Famers.

Hey we agree on something!!!!!

here's the deal, the wings plan to have a 22 man roster, instead of a full 23 men to acumulate some cap space for emergency purposes.

so instead of 3 players scratched every night, you have two. Right now those players are quincey and meech.

Chelios, Maccarty and howard are on IR!!!!! they dont count as any of the 23 player max!!!!!

when quincey is traded or when they've built up that extra cap then maybe downey is recalled (thats ofcoarse if you think he won the battle for the enforcer role from maccarty)

I researched this better last night and found that this is the correct answer, yes they can not be sent down but I was

claiming they counted against the roster and was wrong, they cannot be send down, but you are right they do not count

against the roster. Meech and Quincey are indeed holding those spots and with the impending trade of Quincey one would have

to figure he is holding the spot that will be either Mac or Downey.

[Heaton 1]

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/20...turn_to_pr.html

Cleared.

[evan_a2 0]

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/20...turn_to_pr.html

Cleared.

Good, I'd like to see him back in the lineup when we play the Penguins

[2probert4 8]

Good afternoon. Yes, my first post, but I had to register on this board as a long time Wing's fan. I think some posters clearly are missing the point of having Downey or such a player on the roster.

I have been following the Wings for almost 30 years, season ticket holder for 12 years, and my family has been attending Wings games since early days at the Olympia.

However, these posts that it's a 'good move' to send Downey to GR is simply hogwash. When your own Captain says they appreciate having Downey on the bench, it's silly to me that he gets ignored. This year more than ANY other year the Wings will have huge targets on their backs from opposing teams. They'll look to crush the Wings physically and impose a gameplan to throw their finesse system off-track.

Will it take Holland and Babcock to have a key player injured from a Cam Janssen style hit until the Wings then realize they made a mistake sending Downey to GR?

It will take what you posted and McCarty getting his brains beaten in 5 or 6 times to make them think. They rate DMac ahead of Downey as well, and im not sure where that comes from. Im sure I'll get flamed from the locals for daring to say DMac is not the fighter / player that he once was.. but whatever.

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

It will take what you posted and McCarty getting his brains beaten in 5 or 6 times to make them think. They rate DMac ahead of Downey as well, and im not sure where that comes from. Im sure I'll get flamed from the locals for daring to say DMac is not the fighter / player that he once was.. but whatever.

QFT.......and this coming from someone who's S/N is a tribute to him.

Anyone that would flame you for that comment clearly hasn't been watching Mac close enough since his return. He's good enough to make a lot of rosters but he isn't the player or fighter he once was.

[vangvace 12]

through page 2... this thread delivers

[savaking72 0]

Really glad to hear of Downey clearing waivers. He is a team/role player that our team needs. I sort of wish it was DMac that was waived, but it's nice to have both.

[Shaman 713]

I hope he never comes back up, no need for him to waste time on the bench for the maybe if else then situations everyone here brings up that almost never happen, and if they do usually would with or without an enforcer

[uk_redwing 495]

I hope he never comes back up, no need for him to waste time on the bench for the maybe if else then situations everyone here brings up that almost never happen, and if they do usually would with or without an enforcer

Good to see you have respect for the game of hockey and its traditions Not to mention a good knowledge of what the slight difference between the 06-07 and the 07-08 team was that resulted in a Stanley Cup.

Is your name Bettman by any chance? Or do you just like ballet?

[norrisnick 1]

Good to see you have respect for the game of hockey and its traditions Not to mention a good knowledge of what the slight difference between the 06-07 and the 07-08 team was that resulted in a Stanley Cup.

Is your name Bettman by any chance? Or do you just like ballet?

1. A freak injury to Kronwall on a nothing check.

2. A blown call and then blown clearing attempt.

3. Dom digging a hole in the 1st period.

[ManLuv4Clears 7]

1. A freak injury to Kronwall on a nothing check.

2. A blown call and then blown clearing attempt.

3. Dom digging a hole in the 1st period.

Whether I agree with uk's point or not, I hate when people use "could have," "would have," "should have" points. That's like saying Pittsburgh would have turned around the series and won the cup last year because they got a bad bounce and "should have" scored on their last second chance in game 6. I respect your opinion, but not the "what if" defense.

[norrisnick 1]

Whether I agree with uk's point or not, I hate when people use "could have," "would have," "should have" points. That's like saying Pittsburgh would have turned around the series and won the cup last year because they got a bad bounce and "should have" scored on their last second chance in game 6. I respect your opinion, but not the "what if" defense.

If the Pens outplayed us for a meaningful portion of that Finals series they likely could make semi-legitimate arguments that they were a bad bounce or two away. But that wasn't the case.

Wasn't uk's point that if we "would have" had an enforcer playing 50 meaningless games in the regular season that we'd have won the Cup?

[ManLuv4Clears 7]

If the Pens outplayed us for a meaningful portion of that Finals series they likely could make semi-legitimate arguments that they were a bad bounce or two away. But that wasn't the case.

Wasn't uk's point that if we "would have" had an enforcer playing 50 meaningless games in the regular season that we'd have won the Cup?

Notice I didn't say I agreed with him or disagreed with him just that I dislike when people use hypotheticals when trying to make a point, and you did 3 times. Unfortunately, compared to your position, his defense does hold more weight with me because the season that the Wings had "an enforcer playing 50 meaningless games in the regular season" they did complete the task of winning the cup. That is fact, like the 4 seasons before when there wasn't a legitimate enforcer in the lineup and they didn't bring Lord Stanley home.

We can go 'round and 'round about this, but neither you or I will make the line-up decisions, so time will tell with what happens this year. Like yourself, I'm hoping for a repeat, but when stars like Lidstrom publicly say they support having an enforcer in the line-up, that's going to hold more meaning to me than what some people on these boards say.

[therock48880 14]

Whether I agree with uk's point or not, I hate when people use "could have," "would have," "should have" points. That's like saying Pittsburgh would have turned around the series and won the cup last year because they got a bad bounce and "should have" scored on their last second chance in game 6. I respect your opinion, but not the "what if" defense.

I agree. I hate "what ifs". It's quite simple really, THE WINGS LOST. Could they have won? Sure. But they didn't.

He's been spouting this anti-fighter nonsense for years, even when faced with quotes from some great Wings saying how important it is to have a tough guy on the team. Guys like Yzerman and Lidstrom don't know enough about the game of hockey to be making comments in support of having a tough guy on the team.

He'll also tell you that Fedorov was better than Yzerman, Kovalev is the second coming, etc.... Just take it with a grain of salt.

[Shaman 713]

Good to see you have respect for the game of hockey and its traditions Not to mention a good knowledge of what the slight difference between the 06-07 and the 07-08 team was that resulted in a Stanley Cup.

Is your name Bettman by any chance? Or do you just like ballet?

So, if you are willing to take in the change of a sport you like ballet or are a pansy? In baseball they had period called the dead-ball era, where every team played small ball all the time and stole a lot of bases, players who could hit for power werent the norm on every team, so just like me saying 'I hope that X-player shouldnt be in the batting order because we need more power hitters than someone who can bunt' is that disrespecting baseballs tradition? Or if were to say I like the forward pass in football, is that disrespecting football's traditions? Is having visors/helmets/netting disrespecting hockey's traditions? Just because I think the Red Wings are better off with someone like Helm or Leino on the ice then downey or mac because they bring more to the team night in and night out disrespecting hockey. Sports change, evolve, get over it, or don't watch, simple as that.

Is your name Grandpa or George W? Or do you just like everything to stay the exact same no matter what?

Edited October 9, 2008 by Shaman464

[Shaman 713]

Notice I didn't say I agreed with him or disagreed with him just that I dislike when people use hypotheticals when trying to make a point, and you did 3 times. Unfortunately, compared to your position, his defense does hold more weight with me because the season that the Wings had "an enforcer playing 50 meaningless games in the regular season" they did complete the task of winning the cup. That is fact, like the 4 seasons before when there wasn't a legitimate enforcer in the lineup and they didn't bring Lord Stanley home.

We can go 'round and 'round about this, but neither you or I will make the line-up decisions, so time will tell with what happens this year. Like yourself, I'm hoping for a repeat, but when stars like Lidstrom publicly say they support having an enforcer in the line-up, that's going to hold more meaning to me than what some people on these boards say.

Because Downey played in the playoffs? Because Mac miraculously came in, and stopped all the thugs from going after our players...oh wait, their were still atleast 3 cheap shots in the playoffs where the players who did them got away and Dmac didn't do anything. It was their skill that won the wings the cup, their ability to play great team defense and adjust their game to what the other team did, not because someone who played 3-7 mins a game scared the other team into forfeiting...

Edited October 9, 2008 by Shaman464

[norrisnick 1]

I agree. I hate "what ifs". It's quite simple really, THE WINGS LOST. Could they have won? Sure. But they didn't.

He's been spouting this anti-fighter nonsense for years, even when faced with quotes from some great Wings saying how important it is to have a tough guy on the team. Guys like Yzerman and Lidstrom don't know enough about the game of hockey to be making comments in support of having a tough guy on the team.

He'll also tell you that Fedorov was better than Yzerman, Kovalev is the second coming, etc.... Just take it with a grain of salt.

Then call out uk.

I'm not anti-fighter. I'm pro-hockey player. Find a player that can play and fight. I have no issues whatsoever. Keep bringing up scrubs like Norton, Downey, washed up McCarty and I'll argue against their placement on the Wings until my fingers cramp up.

As for Yzerman and Lidstrom quotes... what are they going to say when asked about a teammate and the role they provide? Is either one going to say that Downey is worthless? Of course not. Ask either one straight up whether Downey makes the team better than Helm and see if they manage to come up with a straight answer or if they squirm their way out of that question without possibly slighting either player.

As for Fedorov/Yzerman... depends on what you're asking. Career as a whole? Yzerman. Best all around player? Fedorov. Who was better when both were on the Wings? Fedorov. Heart and soul of the team? Yzerman. Most important for the three Cups they won together? Equal. Neither one wins without the other.

As for Kovalev? Second coming is a bit strong. But you can't deny that he's managed one hell of a resurgence in Montreal. And at the time I believe it was a Shanahan or Kovalev debate or something and in that situation it's Alexei in a rout.

[norrisnick 1]

Notice I didn't say I agreed with him or disagreed with him just that I dislike when people use hypotheticals when trying to make a point, and you did 3 times. Unfortunately, compared to your position, his defense does hold more weight with me because the season that the Wings had "an enforcer playing 50 meaningless games in the regular season" they did complete the task of winning the cup. That is fact, like the 4 seasons before when there wasn't a legitimate enforcer in the lineup and they didn't bring Lord Stanley home.

We can go 'round and 'round about this, but neither you or I will make the line-up decisions, so time will tell with what happens this year. Like yourself, I'm hoping for a repeat, but when stars like Lidstrom publicly say they support having an enforcer in the line-up, that's going to hold more meaning to me than what some people on these boards say.

Mattias Ritola also suited up for a couple games. Can't win without Mattias Ritola playing a couple. He better get a call up or we don't repeat...

Correlation =/= causation.

[Shaman 713]

Mattias Ritola also suited up for a couple games. Can't win without Mattias Ritola playing a couple. He better get a call up or we don't repeat...

Correlation =/= causation.

My psychology professor would love you...

[russianswede919293 95]

Is anybody surprised he wasn't claimed?

I'm not.

[Shaman 713]

Is anybody surprised he wasn't claimed?

I'm not.

Why would anyone? I am sure every other team has enough dead weight players.

Please note, its not because hes an enforcer, its because hes a one trick pony, if he could even give the Wings 10 goals or 20 Assists I wouldnt be so against him.

[norrisnick 1]

Why would anyone? I am sure every other team has enough dead weight players.

Please note, its not because hes an enforcer, its because hes a one trick pony, if he could even give the Wings 10 goals or 20 Assists I wouldnt be so against him.

I'd take zero points if he could skate, forecheck, play some defense or even some PK. But he can't do anything.

[Guest Crymson]

We had 2 enforcers on the roster last year for our championship. Did you forget?

Two days late, but I feel obligated to refute this ludicrous argument.

Downey did not play in the playoffs, and McCarty is no longer an enforcer. He'll fight, but he's not a threat.

[Detroit # 1 Fan 2,204]

I dont know why the fight fans even post in these topics. It's lose lose, people dont see the importance of an enforcer. Fine, that's there opinion, there view, etc. Nothing you can say will change there minds. Be happy to know that Downey and McCarty will see time this season, because it will happen. Holland has said as such, otherwise they wouldnt be on the team.