Coaching part of the problem?

[Hockeytown0001 7,652]

They need to utilize the talent the team has and translate it into success. That's not happening at this current point.

[Guest ToMaToToWnWinGsFaN_24]

maybe the wings should hire coach 0'ryan

and averman too :D

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Keeping Draper and Maltby on the team...while letting Kopecky go in FA and trading Leino for nothing...was one of the most infuriating occurences I've ever experienced with this team. That really sent the wrong message. That was really - really - being too loyal. That was really, really ridiculous.

But as much as I hate to do it, there are two sides. You have to appreciate management for being able to draft that kind of talent in the first place (before mis-managing it).

Kopecky was let go because CHI paid far more for him then anyone should have. Leino was moved because his style of play was never going to be successful in Detroit and it would've been pretty damn hard to get his value up high enough to trade him for the value he showed playing in PHI without compromising the style the Wings play.

[The Secret 304]

The coach can't make the players go and win the puck battles. He has been saying they need to shoot more but they don't. Maybe if he puts on some equipment and goes out and does it him self it will inspired the rest?

[Red Wings Addict 787]

Get to work, Blashill.

[cjm502 165]

Babs needs to grow a pair and do this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9AajQn7b18&feature=related

[gcom007 1,465]

I have less faith in Holland lately than Babcock. Holland seems to be getting spottier and spottier with his signings and too many times now in the cap era has been caught unprepared in the offseason. They're too loyal to guys we develop and not willing to let guys go to mix things up. He's simply not adapting to changes in the game and with this team in general. Adaptability is everything in life, and Holland has struggled to adapt since...hmm, since when Scotty Bowman become a consultant for the Hawks.

[Detroit # 1 Fan 2,204]

I've liked the defense so far this season, turnovers are what are leading to goals. We really have cleaned up positionally, so I like what Bill Peters has done. But whatever Blashill is telling the forwards and the PP units aint working right now. Hope we can get it turned around, if this slide goes on much longer it'll be a battle to make the playoffs.

[NvrFrgtRussian5 85]

I'm just waiting for the classic Babcock post game "I think we played well; just didn't get the bounces" it never fails.

[Lonewuhf 47]

I'm just waiting for the classic Babcock post game "I think we played well; just didn't get the bounces" it never fails.

And another night of giving s***ty undeserving players too much ice time.

[Cali-Wing-Nut 102]

So after the last game vs the Wild, I've come to the decision that coaching is still a problem. I'm not nearly as confident in Babcock anymore. He's consistently giving players chances that have proven time and time again that they don't deserve them (Cleary, Holmstrom), he refuses to put players together that have worked incredibly well in the past (Dats and Fil), and in the last 5 minutes of the game, he played the same line for seemingly 80% of the time. I don't care how good a line is, those players are going to be too tired to be effective.

We need better decisions behind the bench. We need players who are consistently playing badly to be pushed down to lower lines, so at least they get hungry for top line minutes again. Currently we're just handing players playtime who don't deserve it.

Players like Helm and Fil, who are working their asses off every game aren't getting chances they deserve either. They've been two of the best players this year, and two of the players that are giving more effort than pretty much anyone else on the team.

Dats, Z, and whoever isn't working. They played great for one game, but just plain haven't worked for a long time now. Z still has 3 points and a -4 and yet was given nearly 24 minutes. I don't understand how it works if players who are working hard are still not given opportunities when other players are playing like this. What kind of motivation is it to work hard if someone who's not producing is still given nearly 10 minutes more per game than you and much more PP time than you?

Edit: I'm not bashing Z, I'm just saying he hasn't deserved the play time he's gotten recently. Other players who are playing badly are getting time taken away, but Z is just handed more play time every game no matter how he plays. Same thing goes for a few other players too.

Coaching is by far the biggest issue on this team. We started this season with a NEW system and BY GOD WE ARE GONNA STICK WITH IT!!

We dont have a new team, the same guys that rolled teams on a regular basis are now running after each other trying to get the puck.

I thiught we had it bad with McCrimmon and Co. but I didnt thing we would down grade the way we have.

We arent a rebuilding team. We should be WELL ABOVE 500 right now. I did see the tidbit that we won the Cup after going 6 flat but man I dont see a Cup team here.

I am considering selling my tix for the SJ game knowing that we will probably get pasted all over the ice and then get to listen to the cheers and jeers.

I cant afford 400 bucks for tix and travels and ect to go to a game that is a crap shoot at best if we will even have a chance.

Back to the coaching. At this point we need to go to a trap and hope we can get SOG. That is our only hope right now.

Man am I depressed. I bet 200 on the us since Im in vegas for the SEMA show and we were +200 with a 1.5 point spread. Of course it lookes like the might beat the spread but NO they had to shoot it out their ass. I put my money on them and they still cave. I am finding few things to keep me optimistic with the team since this debacle if you cant call it a disaster.

[Firsov 0]

Barry Smith would be available

http://www.eishockey.ch/Barry+Smith+kehrt+Lugano+den+Ruecken/513709/detail.htm

the article says he has stepped down because he had the feeling that he couldn't reach his team anymore...

don't know if that would help the wings right now...

[Cali-Wing-Nut 102]

Barry Smith would be available

http://www.eishockey...3709/detail.htm

the article says he has stepped down because he had the feeling that he couldn't reach his team anymore...

don't know if that would help the wings right now...

At this point anything could help

BTW dont post to forums when you just got royally f***ed in the sports book for a lot of dough (there were quite a few games and most didnt cover the spread or I just picked wrong) then get free drinks for the evening only to go to your room and try to type. Ive seen Swedes and Russians spell better than I did last night .

Regardless they gotta say, "screw our new system" and just go back to the old s***. We did have a fighting chance most nights playing that way, I dont even know what to call their plan now but its total crap, its a crap burger, a s*** dog, a fecal salad. Its bad and its gotta stop.

[Scott Stevens 44]

Everyone else in the entire league thinks that:

a) Holmstrom is old, slow, and stinks

b) Bertuzzi is olds, slow, and stinks

c) Hudler is small, slow, and stinks

Replace these three guys with FAST, YOUNG, and GOOD. That's the answer.

We've got a Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Filppula, Franzen, Helm, and Abdelkader. Those 6 forwards are worth their salt. The coaching staff and GM should have enough brains to know what to do with the other 6 spots. Unfortunately, they think Holmstrom and Bertuzzi are 40 goals scorers. Babcock and Holland need to pull their heads out of their butts and realize that they don't have to throw 2011-2012 down the drain to save face with their signings and loyalty. Just put the crappy guys in the stands, and fess up to the fact that you signed them for too long.

[IllinoisRedWingsFan 49]

I have less faith in Holland lately than Babcock. Holland seems to be getting spottier and spottier with his signings and too many times now in the cap era has been caught unprepared in the offseason. They're too loyal to guys we develop and not willing to let guys go to mix things up. He's simply not adapting to changes in the game and with this team in general. Adaptability is everything in life, and Holland has struggled to adapt since...hmm, since when Scotty Bowman become a consultant for the Hawks.

I am going to have to agree with you on this one because I have noticed with some of his signings e.g. Ericsson don't make sense. I am thinking we are at the point where this team has become too loyal to the guys that have been developed. IF he was smart he wouldn't have resigned Ericsson or Bert.

[clutchngrab 12]

According to capgeek his NTC is up 30 days prior to this years trade deadline.

Swweeeet. Picks will help.

[clutchngrab 12]

Kopecky was let go because CHI paid far more for him then anyone should have. Leino was moved because his style of play was never going to be successful in Detroit and it would've been pretty damn hard to get his value up high enough to trade him for the value he showed playing in PHI without compromising the style the Wings play.

Oh yeah? What style was that? Somehow worse than Hudler? Ridiculous. Babcock and Holland can't manage personnel - it's been obvious for a while. For example, not finding legit wingers to play with Dats is borderline criminal. Here we have one of the top few players in the game playing with no line mates. What a ******* waste.

Edited November 6, 2011 by clutchngrab

[Red Wings Addict 787]

Another interesting symptom to report. Part of it could be coaching:

"What happens is, the game is tight; the game is tight, and suddenly as you loosen up and you score, then there's more room out there. There's not more room that they created or even that you created, it's just you feel it, because you're executing and you're fluid. When nothing is going right, you're grinding, and that's just the natural way the game is."The Wings beat Anaheim, 5-0, on Saturday, scoring one fewer goal than during the entire six-game losing streak. It was a nice reminder of how much easier it is to play with a good lead.

"Once everybody got more relaxed," Johan Franzen said, "then it's easier to get goals. At the same time, they let up, which hasn't been the case the last games. We've been down, and they've protected leads, and then it's really hard to create something. When you get the lead and they have to come at you, they will open up and we will create more chances. It's as easy as that."

http://www.freep.com/article/20111108/SPORTS05/111080434/Everything-s-better-Red-Wings-after-win-even-practice

[Guest Crymson]

Six years of big success under Babcock and you're calling for his head after a five-game losing streak. 14 years of GMing from Holland that has EVERYONE--columnists, fans of other teams, etc.--calling him the best overall GM during that period, especially in the salary-cap world, and you're saying he's the wrong guy for the job because of a short spell of losses. Give me a break. This is typical spoiled, ridiculous, grass-is-greener thinking. It comes from a line of success so long that many of you can't remember how it is to be on the other side. Go ask fans of most other teams, and they'll tell you they'd kill for their team to have the same level of success the Wings have had in the recent and distant (~20 years) past. Yet you want to axe a hugely successful coach and a tremendously successful GM over two weeks of unsuccessful hockey that still sees the team over .500. And I'm sure you're certain that their theoretical replacements would be better. That's a hoot. The idea that any replacement of any personnel anywhere will bring about positive change is always uncertain. The idea that you'll be able to easily find better personnel than Holland and Babcock is asinine. They each have their faults, but they're nevertheless amongst the best in the world at their respective positions. All the success the Wings have had has simply bred in many fans a mentality of "More, more, MORE!" It's runaway perfectionism that often does not even remotely meet with reality.

I'm sure I'll get responses along the lines of, "just because things are good doesn't mean that they can't be better." Well, sure, that's true--but there's a line beyond which desire for improvement becomes ludicrous perfectionism born of a complete lack of perspective.

Edited November 8, 2011 by Crymson

[Lonewuhf 47]

Six years of big success under Babcock and you're calling for his head after a five-game losing streak. 14 years of GMing from Holland that has EVERYONE--columnists, fans of other teams, etc.--calling him the best overall GM during that period, especially in the salary-cap world, and you're saying he's the wrong guy for the job because of a short spell of losses. Give me a break. This is typical spoiled, ridiculous, grass-is-greener thinking. It comes from a line of success so long that many of you can't remember how it is to be on the other side. Go ask fans of most other teams, and they'll tell you they'd kill for their team to have the same level of success the Wings have had in the recent and distant (~20 years) past. Yet you want to axe a hugely successful coach and a tremendously successful GM over two weeks of unsuccessful hockey that still sees the team over .500. And I'm sure you're certain that their theoretical replacements would be better. That's a hoot. The idea that any replacement of any personnel anywhere will bring about positive change is always uncertain. The idea that you'll be able to easily find better personnel than Holland and Babcock is asinine. They each have their faults, but they're nevertheless amongst the best in the world at their respective positions. All the success the Wings have had has simply bred in many fans a mentality of "More, more, MORE!" It's runaway perfectionism that often does not even remotely meet with reality.

I'm sure I'll get responses along the lines of, "just because things are good doesn't mean that they can't be better." Well, sure, that's true--but there's a line beyond which desire for improvement becomes ludicrous perfectionism born of a complete lack of perspective.

I clearly said I haven't been happy with some of the things he's done for the past few years, not just the previous 5 games. I still stand by everything I said in the first post. Babs rewards players who don't deserve it, and punishes those who don't deserve it. If you somehow can disagree with me, fine, that's your opinion, but I guarantee most of the posters here don't disagree.

[Guest Crymson]

I clearly said I haven't been happy with some of the things he's done for the past few years, not just the previous 5 games. I still stand by everything I said in the first post. Babs rewards players who don't deserve it, and punishes those who don't deserve it. If you somehow can disagree with me, fine, that's your opinion, but I guarantee most of the posters here don't disagree.

That's a pretty bold claim. Whatever the case, do you think that this means he should be replaced, and that there's a replacement out there who's indisputably better?

[Wing Across The Pond 196]

I clearly said I haven't been happy with some of the things he's done for the past few years, not just the previous 5 games. I still stand by everything I said in the first post. Babs rewards players who don't deserve it, and punishes those who don't deserve it. If you somehow can disagree with me, fine, that's your opinion, but I guarantee most of the posters here don't disagree.

I disagree.

That's a pretty bold claim. Whatever the case, do you think that this means he should be replaced, and that there's a replacement out there who's indisputably better?

This. It would take a hell of a lot for me to lose faith in, and replace, the only coach in history to be part of the Triple Gold Club.

[Frozen-Man 144]

I clearly said I haven't been happy with some of the things he's done for the past few years, not just the previous 5 games. I still stand by everything I said in the first post. Babs rewards players who don't deserve it, and punishes those who don't deserve it. If you somehow can disagree with me, fine, that's your opinion, but I guarantee most of the posters here don't disagree.

Like the previous poster I disagree as well.

[Jesusberg 1,256]

Six years of big success under Babcock and you're calling for his head after a five-game losing streak. 14 years of GMing from Holland that has EVERYONE--columnists, fans of other teams, etc.--calling him the best overall GM during that period, especially in the salary-cap world, and you're saying he's the wrong guy for the job because of a short spell of losses. Give me a break. This is typical spoiled, ridiculous, grass-is-greener thinking. It comes from a line of success so long that many of you can't remember how it is to be on the other side.

While I completely agree that a ton of people have this mentality, there's also some legitimacy to the complaints about management on this team. Babcock has made questionable decisions with different players for a few years now (Hudler, Holmstrom in my opinion). He gets stuck on wanting things a certain way, and sometimes it feels like he's too stubborn to make changes or try new things. This team has found success for years, I agree...

But at some point that formula just isn't going to work anymore. You can only get so lucky with the draft picks this team gets for so long. Babcock said himself he wanted to bring in new coaches for some new perspective, and yet it seems like there's a lot of the same going on to me. This team has been the class of the NHL for 20 some odd years, but it's going to fall eventually. Hell, Metallica was the greatest (arguably) metal band for 20 years... then Load and Re-Load hit... I don't want this team to become St. Anger.

I don't think this team is doomed. I don't think this team is going to crap the bed, and I don't think the grass is greener on the other side. What I do this is management is a little bit out of touch these days, and I think it's a good idea to catch this stuff before the team really DOES slip. I don't think it hurts to TRY some new things. Tossing out some new line combinations instead of beating the same old ones to death isn't a bad idea in my opinion. While there are too many fans who are spoiled and demand change now, there are also too many fans who go, "oh, we're the Red Wings, we'll be fine." Just because some people would like to see a little change doesn't mean they're looking to blow things up completely.

For one, I'd like to see some other guys rewarded with time instead of Bertuzzi and Cleary. I don't think that's blowing the team up, or going with a doom and gloom mentality; I think it's realizing two players are struggling and trying something new out.

[Dynheart 42]

Boy people here overreact. No, coaching is NOT part of the problem. IF the boys looked disintresed, would they be able to put up 40+ shots a night? And 30+ against Minnesota (that's a difficult task). They want to win, you can see it, but they were snake bitten. Babcock and the coaches are doing what they do, the players get used to the new system/coaches (they are human) and they have to wait for it to gel.

At least their forecheck doesn't look as predictable. The D looks more aggressive than recent years... they seem to have some diffrent plays up their sleeves. Thats good. But as far as a diffrent system on the ice, let the players and coaches(2) work it out. It can't all gel together at the same time like some miracle. If this was truely a coaching issue, the Wings would be getting dominated game in and game out (scoreboard or not)... Not skating circles around their opponents most nights.

Wait till the first quater is over before /panic. And even then, they can go on a tear and still make it... Look at San Jose. They were out of it for sure until the last quater and they made 2nd friggin place in the league or conference...can't remember heh. (Wings did help them, though).

td;dl: Two new coaches, some new players... new systems whatnot... Give more than 12 games for it to gel? Plus 6 games of being snakebitten doesn't mean it's a coach problem.

Edited November 8, 2011 by Dynheart