Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Babcock and Holland Talk About Stuff


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#21 Buppy

Buppy

    1st Line All-Star

  • Silver Booster
  • 1,980 posts

Posted 12 April 2014 - 09:58 PM

Since both Bert and Cleary got multiple chances on the top 6 before the rash of injuries Id say yes. Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

No, not really. Bert for a little bit in Abby's spot. But why let reality get in the way of a good *****-fest, amirite?

 

This one time, I heard Babs and Kenny talking about playing Bert-Cleary-Sammy for 60 minutes a game. Decided it wouldn't be fair to the rest of the league though. Dumb ol' Babs and Kenny.



#22 DickieDunn

DickieDunn

    http://redwingsandotherthings.wordpress.com/

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Location:Belding

Posted 13 April 2014 - 08:39 AM

Bertuzzi and Cleary would have spent time in that 6th spot in the top six, but none of them would have been regulars there. Samuelsson was meant to be a 3rd or 4th line winger and point man for the PP. Samuelsson was a disaster from the get go thanks to injuries, Bertuzzi had stretches where he was useful. I understand the reasoning for both deals. I don't get the Cleary signing though. I know they think he's a great guy and everything but they already had too many forwards and were over the cap. The reason they played Samuelsson early is simple. They had him, they needed to see if he could help at all and hope he showed something so another team would take him. He was banished fairly early on when he didn't do anything.

Oh this young man has had a very trying rookie season, with the litigation, the notoriety, his subsequent deportation to Canada and that country's refusal to accept him, well, I guess that's more than most 21-year-olds can handle... Ogie Ogilthorpe!


#23 Playmaker

Playmaker

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,181 posts

Posted 13 April 2014 - 11:18 AM

No, not really. Bert for a little bit in Abby's spot. But why let reality get in the way of a good *****-fest, amirite?

 

This one time, I heard Babs and Kenny talking about playing Bert-Cleary-Sammy for 60 minutes a game. Decided it wouldn't be fair to the rest of the league though. Dumb ol' Babs and Kenny.

No, you really aren't right.  I don't think anyone was going out of their way to gripe.  I just felt like it was amusing to hear Babcock declare that the kids now have won jobs and the 3 guys on expiring contracts won't get their jobs back.  I think Holland had more of a mea culpa attitude than Babcock.  He didn't really admit to being wrong, but sheepishly had to admit that the "kids" were better than he thought.

 

One needs only to look to last year.  Cleary was absolutely awful.  Yet not only was he not ever benched, he was continually rewarded with top line minutes and PP time. It was supposedly due to all the injuries. Tatar was brought up and seemed to be NHL ready.  His reward was a ticket back to GR.  Cleary was brought back despite having no cap room, no roster space and without a doubt at the expense of a young player.

 

Babcock and Holland have always favored veteran players over youth.  They also have gone out of their way not to "offend" an older player by having them be a healthy scratch, up until recently.  Well, I think their line is all three of them are "injured".  But there's oddly very little talk about it.  



#24 Playmaker

Playmaker

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,181 posts

Posted 13 April 2014 - 11:26 AM

I see Doug Brown's son..who played at Boston College...signed with Carolina...also I see Nashville is on NBCSN tonight...possibly see Jarnkrok

Great news.  Good kid, great family.  I think he made the All Academic team also.  Turned into more of a grinder in college, but I think he can carve out a similar role that his dad did in the NHL.  



#25 Buppy

Buppy

    1st Line All-Star

  • Silver Booster
  • 1,980 posts

Posted 13 April 2014 - 07:11 PM

No, you really aren't right.  I don't think anyone was going out of their way to gripe.  I just felt like it was amusing to hear Babcock declare that the kids now have won jobs and the 3 guys on expiring contracts won't get their jobs back.  I think Holland had more of a mea culpa attitude than Babcock.  He didn't really admit to being wrong, but sheepishly had to admit that the "kids" were better than he thought.

 

One needs only to look to last year.  Cleary was absolutely awful.  Yet not only was he not ever benched, he was continually rewarded with top line minutes and PP time. It was supposedly due to all the injuries. Tatar was brought up and seemed to be NHL ready.  His reward was a ticket back to GR.  Cleary was brought back despite having no cap room, no roster space and without a doubt at the expense of a young player.

 

Babcock and Holland have always favored veteran players over youth.  They also have gone out of their way not to "offend" an older player by having them be a healthy scratch, up until recently.  Well, I think their line is all three of them are "injured".  But there's oddly very little talk about it.  

What I mean is you act like Babs and Kenny were trying to tout their own genius. Like they were saying, "Look how awesome we were to play the kids". Like you're searching for some negative connotation to read into what was said. 

 

Also, I think many fans interpret a kid being sent to the minors as a statement that the kid isn't ready, or isn't good enough. I don't think that's true at all. I think our management just knows that having good players in the minors is a good thing. An insurance policy. Someone gets hurt, or the team is struggling, it gives you options. 

 

While there's no doubt the Wings do like to rely on vets, like I've said before they are not nearly as opposed to youth as most seem to think. And the vets, as much as people like to call them absolutely awful, have typically been much better than they get credit for. Familiarity breeds contempt. Last year Cleary scored at a rate similar to Nyquist and Tatar, was also one of our top Pkers, and 2nd on the team in playoff scoring.

 

Which is not to say that he should have been brought back, or that Sammy should have been signed. Just saying that it's a rare situation that a kid that really deserves to be on the team is left off. It's not the pattern you all suggest it is. Nor are kids the answer to every problem. They're just new, which makes them exciting. Drop the double standards and judge everyone objectively.



#26 Dabura

Dabura

    Everydayer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,006 posts
  • Location:In an octopus's garden

Posted 14 April 2014 - 03:45 AM

Playmaker, I think you're making something out of nothing here.

 

What was confusing to me about your initial post is that your version of events doesn't clash with what Babcock and Holland are saying. Here's what you said:

 

He was basically given no choice but to play the Griffins. They excelled because they weren't brought up and put on a 4th line and given 5 minutes a game.  They had to log a lot of minutes and each and every one of them took the opportunity and ran with it.

 

This might as well be a Babcock quote, or a Holland quote. All three of you feel 1) Babs leaned on the kids out of necessity and 2) they flourished. Babcock and Holland are pretty much telling it like it is; I think you're seeing spin where there really isn't any. Holland has admitted he messed up. Babs is saying the kids are the s*** and they saved the season. Everybody's on the same page about what went down this season.


Don't Toews me, bro!


#27 Playmaker

Playmaker

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,181 posts

Posted 14 April 2014 - 08:32 AM

Maybe so, I don't see it that way.  Simple difference of opinion and interpretation.  I don't think at all that either one of the would have said that about the playing time, because that goes against what they've always done.  Young players aren't typically brought up and given top 6 time and PP time.  What I'm saying, maybe not well, is that if they were brought up in a typical way, for a few games, on the fourth line, a few minutes a game, we wouldn't have been able to see what they could do, and the staff and management would have fallen back to the old standbys. 

 

I'm not typically a Holland or Babcock basher.  I didn't mean to imply that they were boastfully bragging about how smart they were to do it.  I just think it was kind of a no brainer to say they have won jobs with how they have played, not some risk taking move. 







Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users