• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

redwingfan19

Cherry rips Holland

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Guest Hatethedrake!

Well, he did ragdoll Jared Boll that year.

Lilja tried out for the movie 300 but was turned away because it was not realistic. The army had 300 Spartans and Lilja take on armies all by himself.

Edited by Hatethedrake!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I notice you didn't actually admit we were soft in 08, nor that we can win now. You got the histrionics covered though.

"Large amount ridiculously attached to the current team"? Name them. I'll bet most just don't see any need to change, but wouldn't object. Most have particular players they like, and others they would like to move. Some might think it would cost too much to trade for someone, and so don't think it would be worth it. Some may not like the same players as you. I'll bet you can't find many at all that would actually be unwilling to change our current roster. "Dead team"? Commodore the "only one who will go to the aid of a teammate"?

Miller and Eaves haven't stepped it up, so they aren't "warriors"? They may not be the grind line of '02, but they're as effective as Draper/Maltby were in 08. Remember, didn't doesn't mean couldn't. Some of us have confidence that Miller and Eaves are capable of filling the same role.

You give a pretty colorful (but exaggerated) description of what we lack, but no evidence that it's actually needed. Just "we've lost two years in a row and we don't want to lose again do we". So when we lost 3 years in a row (twice in the 2nd round to the same team) with our supposedly tough teams, what did we do? We swapped the likes of Lapointe and Verbeek for Hull and Robitaille. Were we too tough? That wouldn't make sense since we also won back to back cups with a similar roster. You think maybe teams can lose in the playoffs for reasons other than toughness? Like when an almost identical 03 team got swept in the 1st round.

Helm had 28 hits in 18 games in 08. Last year he had 28 hits in 11. He scored more last year too.

When Jimmy got hit by Hansen, Lidstrom, Zetterberg, and Hudler all got involved in the ensuing scrum. When Ozzie got bumped by Sykora in 08, it was Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and Franzen. No one really fought either time, though Pittsburgh escalated things a little further than Vancouver did.

I'd like to see some stats on how often Howard gets run or bumped, compared to goalies on our past teams and around the league. I haven't noticed anything unusual. The comments from Howard are not actual evidence that he takes more contact than he should or otherwise would.

It may be fun to reminisce about the glory days of the Grind Line or Shanny or the Brawl, but "remebering fondly" is not sufficient evidence to establish a causal relationship between toughness and winning Cups.

This team was definitely the toughest its been post lockout in 2008, not the toughest in the league but had the personnel to handle rough stuff when push came to shove pretty easily. This team is definitely softer than that team was, I dont know how you could think any different..

And what? You disagree that Commodore is the only one who will willingly defend a teammate? Abdelkader and Ericcson are capable but mostly unwilling to stick up for guys, Commodore (probably to hold down a job)will be the first one into scrums and ready to defend a teammate, since hes a 6th dman he doesnt get played much however.

As for Howard getting bumped, do you watch the games? There was a point where he got hit like 3 games in a row and it led him to basically call the team out in the media. If you dont want to take that as evidence as him getting hit a lot then thats fine, but if a goalie is hit enough to complain to the press than I'm pretty sure hes getting bumped more than he is comfortable with. Even if he isnt getting bumped MORE than other goalies in the league, if he is getting bumped more than he is comfortable with the team should listen to him and go after someone for doing it. Just to show the team has their vezina level goalies back.

As for my argument having no evidence, you seem to think they can win with this current lineup with no evidence at all. At least I can say the wings have never won a cup without a lineup tougher then the current lineup now. It may not be causation but I'm willing to bet that it helps quite a bit for a team to have that balance.

Eaves may be as effective as Draper was in 08, but with the way he was playing earlier and the way he and Miller both played the last playoffs, they are definitely no Draper or Maltby in my eyes. They also didnt provide his veteran presence or faceoff ability, even if tthey were as good as he was in the regular season.

As for that last bit, it might be a bit of remembering fondly, but I'm sitting here trying to remember a team with a bottom 6 as soft as the wings (not to mention top 6 really) winning the cup. And now that I think about it, there has NEVER been a team that has won the cup with a bottom 6 this soft. Now there is a first for everything and sure MAYBE this team could pull it off, but to say I'm the one lacking evidence is pretty pathetic considering its never been proven a team built like the wings can win a cup. If you want to think so, go ahead. Ill happily be proven wrong but I just dont see it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't speak for Newfy, but it seemed to me that he was suggesting the team in '08 was not as soft as the current team, a sentiment I agree with. The '08 team was probably not the toughest in the league, but as Newfy points out, they had some balance and some bottom-six guys who played much more physically than any players on the team now as a unit. I would not call that team "soft" in relation to the current team, that's the point.

...If they win the cup with the current roster, I will admit my assessment was wrong. Until then, please stop treating it as a given that anyone is "ignoring".

...

I wasn't saying he was ignoring any established fact, I was making an observation.

It's my opinion that people in these debates tend to argue from emotion rather than reason. When someone starts one of these threads calling the team soft and saying we need to make this or that roster move, I believe the majority of contrary responses are more a rebuttal against the "insult" than an actual disagreement with any proposed change, or even the basic premise that being tougher might help us. I believe for the same basic reason that few people will be willing to call the 08 team soft. Finally, I believe much of the demand for a tougher team comes more from frustration when we lose and the insecurity of some people who don't like being associated with "weakness" than it does an actual belief in the need for toughness.

Forgive me for waxing psycho-analytical. The debate itself is pointless. No one is ever going to change their stance, regardless of what evidence is presented. If the Wings win the Cup with the current roster, you may change your opnion regarding how soft the current team is, but you won't admit that soft teams can win.

This team was definitely the toughest its been post lockout in 2008, not the toughest in the league but had the personnel to handle rough stuff when push came to shove pretty easily. This team is definitely softer than that team was, I dont know how you could think any different..

And what? You disagree that Commodore is the only one who will willingly defend a teammate? Abdelkader and Ericcson are capable but mostly unwilling to stick up for guys, Commodore (probably to hold down a job)will be the first one into scrums and ready to defend a teammate, since hes a 6th dman he doesnt get played much however.

As for Howard getting bumped, do you watch the games? There was a point where he got hit like 3 games in a row and it led him to basically call the team out in the media. If you dont want to take that as evidence as him getting hit a lot then thats fine, but if a goalie is hit enough to complain to the press than I'm pretty sure hes getting bumped more than he is comfortable with. Even if he isnt getting bumped MORE than other goalies in the league, if he is getting bumped more than he is comfortable with the team should listen to him and go after someone for doing it. Just to show the team has their vezina level goalies back.

As for my argument having no evidence, you seem to think they can win with this current lineup with no evidence at all. At least I can say the wings have never won a cup without a lineup tougher then the current lineup now. It may not be causation but I'm willing to bet that it helps quite a bit for a team to have that balance.

Eaves may be as effective as Draper was in 08, but with the way he was playing earlier and the way he and Miller both played the last playoffs, they are definitely no Draper or Maltby in my eyes. They also didnt provide his veteran presence or faceoff ability, even if tthey were as good as he was in the regular season.

As for that last bit, it might be a bit of remembering fondly, but I'm sitting here trying to remember a team with a bottom 6 as soft as the wings (not to mention top 6 really) winning the cup. And now that I think about it, there has NEVER been a team that has won the cup with a bottom 6 this soft. Now there is a first for everything and sure MAYBE this team could pull it off, but to say I'm the one lacking evidence is pretty pathetic considering its never been proven a team built like the wings can win a cup. If you want to think so, go ahead. Ill happily be proven wrong but I just dont see it

So where's the threshhold between soft and tough (or at least 'not soft')? It seems like it's somewhere just below the 08 team. And it still seems an ill-defined concept. The definition seems to be a moving target and now includes veteran presense and faceoff ability. To me it looks like it just means anything in which you can point out something different between the Cup team and this one. Seems a lot more about what a team wins than how a team plays.

I may not have evidence that this team can win a Cup; it's a future event, there can't be actual evidence either way, especially without an actual definition of "soft" that can be quantified.

What I do have is the following stats from the last 13 Cup winners:

Team	        MP	PIM	Hits	Blk	Avg				
Detroit	        25	21	2	23	17.8
Dallas	        21	21	12	8	15.5
New Jersey	9	8	8	19	11
Colorado	14	22	8	17	15.3
Detroit	        30	24	26	23	25.8
New Jersey	19	29	23	13	21
Tampa Bay	24	28	28	17	24.3
Carolina	28	26	25	1	20
Anaheim	        1	1	10	30	10.5
Detroit	        30	29	25	30	28.5
Pittsburgh	23	17	6	4	12.5
Chicago	        21	25	25	17	22
Boston		3       8       21      15      11.8
Averages	19.1	20	16.9	16.7	18.1			

Top20%	        2	1	2	2	0			
Bottom20%	4	6	5	3       2 (Both Wings)
Top Half	4	3	6	5       4				
Bottom Half	9	10	7	8       9				

That's the rank where each team finished the regular season in major penalties, PIMs, hits, and blocked shots, and the average ranks for each. At the bottom is the number of Cups won by teams in the top or bottom 20% of the league, and top and bottom half.

Of course there are "toughness" factors that aren't precisely measured by stats, but considering the high rankings for the Ducks and Bruins and the late 90's teams, it seems to coincide to what is generally regarded as tough. (While this data suggests an inverse corollary, it's likely to be skewed by lesser skilled teams being more physical to compensate.)

This does show that teams that aren't very physical can and have won Cups before. Incidentally, the Wings are currently last in majors, 29th in PIM, 24th in hits, and 22nd in blocks. Actually slightly "tougher", by this metric, than the 08 team, and about the same as the 02 team. We hit more and block shots better than than the 08 team.

So I don't really see how, aside from fighting, we're any softer than the 08 team. But that just puts us back at the ill-defined stage. Since the numbers don't support you, you'll just say it's something you can't measure.

Honestly, the way you talk about being tough sounds more like what most people mean when they talk about character or "heart". If you want to questions this team's heart, I think that's fair. I don't agree, but I think it's a reasonable concern. But if you want to talk actual physicality, the measurable numbers are against you.

Edited by Buppy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can't he start that career at the JLA?

Good point. I just hope there would be some NHL-ready enforcer from Finland. Because you know how biased I am.

Jonne Virtanen is still young and already the most feared fighter in FEL. He can play the game as well. Maybe we could sign him.

Edited by Finnish Wing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point. I just hope there would be some NHL-ready enforcer from Finland. Because you know how biased I am.

Jonne Virtanen is still young and already the most feared fighter in FEL. He can play the game as well. Maybe we could sign him.

Just checked him out.

Looks like the only guy he fights is Sami Helenius. :hehe: I guess there isn't much of a market for fighters in the FEL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just checked him out.

Looks like the only guy he fights is Sami Helenius. :hehe: I guess there isn't much of a market for fighters in the FEL.

And that's because of the rules. You'll always get a game misconduct when you fight.

Sami is already retired and in politics now I think. Patrik Lostedt, Ilari Melart and Virtanen are pretty much the only fighters. Melart is still young and has become a more complete hockey player, he could still get an NHL contract some day.

Edited by Finnish Wing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with these threads that go all over the place is that the concept can be defined in so many different ways.

Are the Wings tough in the sense of bare knuckles or throwing fists on a consistent basis? No, always in the bottom rung of the league in fighting majors for better/worse. I always like a good scrap but I get up for that no more/less than a penalty shot goal like last night for instance, a great glove save, or other aspects of the sport.

Are the Wings tough in the sense of work ethic? I'd say more yes than no. In the course of an 80+ game season, you are going to be tired some games, you might not be able to bring it all. I'm not saying to not get upset at it and what not, but sometimes you will get outworked. This team hasn't significantly changed too much in terms of personnel the past few years, but I think they can and do outwork the opposition more often than not. I think they have the potential to make a deep run in the playoffs with this roster, much like the last two seasons. If you disagree with me, cool, I get that 2nd round exits don't fly but especially last year after rallying from 3 games down and nearly finishing it off, the team was that close to a deep run, a good bit of that to hard work ethic. If you think things need a good bit a change because of that, I completely understand. I don't think much needs to be changed in terms of the roster, and I hope I am correct. So, after that long winded blurbed, yes I think the Wings are tough in the sense of good work ethic, they just need to bring it more, and we've seen them do so in the past.

Are the Wings tough in standing up for others (i.e. Howard snow showers) or after scrums or whatever? They could be better, but I'm not losing sleep over that. I don't like getting into the whole manly or you are a wuss bit because you don't always take somebody's head off after questionable hits/scrums. They are big boys, they know in the grand scheme of things how to stand up for themselves.

And let me be clear that I am not against any type of player, I just want to see the team win. If that is more with guys that drop the mits more, great. If it is this roster made with some grit and a bit more skill, which I do think they are capable of being successful, great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't know what Babcock truly believes in regards to enforcers. He's said one thing and then another and so, I suppose, here's the latest:

Babcock: Fighter not a priority

Babcock, who in the past has liked having someone who can "keep the flies off," such as Aaron Downey, Darren McCarty and Brad May, isn’t advocating acquiring a one-dimensional player before the Feb. 27 trading deadline.

"Not someone that fights, because to me, that’s a waste of time," Babcock said. "But if we could get another heavy winger or heavy forward or a (defenseman), those would be all good things to help you."

Fighters have become obsolete in the playoffs.

"What are you going to do, fight at stoppages in the playoffs?" Babcock said. "You got to be able to play. Now, if you’re capable of playing and (fighting), then that’s great. But (an enforcer) wouldn’t be a priority."

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2012/01/red_wings_prove_more_than_capa.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see much contradiction there. He wants what most of us want - a McCarty/LaPointe/Drake type player who is good enough to hold down a roster spot even without fighting. Not a Downey/May/Norton who isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see much contradiction there. He wants what most of us want - a McCarty/LaPointe/Drake type player who is good enough to hold down a roster spot even without fighting. Not a Downey/May/Norton who isn't.

Apparently Babcock advocated getting May here when he was "trying out" for Detroit.

Honestly, I think Babcock has always looked to his self image in regards to interviews, and since Detroit had such a great response over a more physical team, he answered in kind. When May was in the discussion and there were doubts about Detroit's toughness, he advocated his signing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently Babcock advocated getting May here when he was "trying out" for Detroit.

Honestly, I think Babcock has always looked to his self image in regards to interviews, and since Detroit had such a great response over a more physical team, he answered in kind. When May was in the discussion and there were doubts about Detroit's toughness, he advocated his signing.

He wanted to sign May several years before we actually did, when he could still play a bit. Thats the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see much contradiction there. He wants what most of us want - a McCarty/LaPointe/Drake type player who is good enough to hold down a roster spot even without fighting. Not a Downey/May/Norton who isn't.

That's why I want Ruutu. He's physical, scores goals, and wouldn't cost an arm and a leg. Same goes for Bourque.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why I want Ruutu. He's physical, scores goals, and wouldn't cost an arm and a leg. Same goes for Bourque.

I'd like him too actually. Not as superbly ideal as the Clowe-Laich-Doan-Hartnell type that I'm hoping for but I believe that in a long playoff run (but not so much an 82 game regular season) that Ruutu can do some of the things that those guys can do for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's get this over with and yadda yadda yadda.

"I'm so sick and tired of hearing about Detroit," Cherry said Saturday, renewing the attack.

He mimicked those who believe in the Wings.

"'Detroit don't fight. Look how good they are. Kenny Holland and Babcock got another way.'

"Detroit doesn't fight at all!" he bellowed. "They're not tough!"

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120221/OPINION03/202210325/1128/rss16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's get this over with and yadda yadda yadda.

Why isn't he ripping the beloved Habs, who are tied with us for lowest in the NHL in the fighting category? Guys like this are what make guys like me look bad. Its not the amount of fighting majors that counts. More fights does not equal more Stanley Cups automatically. While I do think a minor move or two to get us a little grittier would help us in the long run, I don't think acquiring Steve MacIntyre is gonna do us much good in the postseason.

Personally, I think he is sick of hearing about 1)European players altogether and 2)American NHL teams. If Don Cherry was running the league, it would look like this:

Atlantic Division:

Halifax

Fredericton

Charlottetown

Prince Edward Island

Newfoundland

Southeast Division:

Toronto

Ottawa

Montreal

Mississauga

Quebec City

Northeast Division:

Iqaluit

Amherst

New Glasgow

Cambridge Bay

Rankin Inlet

Central Division:

Winnipeg

Thunder Bay

Regina

Saskatoon

Nanavut

Southwest Division:

Vancouver

Calgary

Edmonton

Victoria

Medicine Hat

Northwest Divsion:

Whitehorse

Northwest Territories

Yellowknife

Queen Elizabeth Islands

Banks Island

And no European or American players allowed. Because that is the spirit of hockey. Now, I don't like seeing NHL teams fail on Long Island either, but he acts as if Canada invented and trademarked hockey, and nobody else can even think about liking it, or its copyright infringement.

He makes decent points here and there, but then completely goes off road with some other close minded s***.

In conclusion, I think a little added grit will help us a lot in the playoffs, but not a goon.

End rant.

Edited by Bring Back The Bruise Bros

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now