• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
trule23

Babcock "I don't think it will be my final year here"

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Helene St. James tweets,



Mike Babcock on his future with #RedWings: "I don't think it's going to be my final year here. If it is, it is."

Mike Babcock on his future with #RedWings: "My relationship with my general manager is such that the grass isn't greener on the other side."

What do you guys think, Do you wants babs to stay, or do you guys think we need a change and should make Blashill head coach next year?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather he not sign until we see how the season turns out. Coaches have a shelf life and while I don't know if Babcock has reached his...it's certainly possible. Why not wait to see what happens? We've got a team that should be pretty competitive. Lots of good veterans and young up and comers. If the team stays relatively healthy and still underwhelms, I'd take that as a sign that Babs' has taken the team as far as he can and I'd hand the reigns over to Blashill. If they play above their heads, or are Cup competitive, re-sign him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather he not sign until we see how the season turns out. Coaches have a shelf life and while I don't know if Babcock has reached his...it's certainly possible. Why not wait to see what happens? We've got a team that should be pretty competitive. Lots of good veterans and young up and comers. If the team stays relatively healthy and still underwhelms, I'd take that as a sign that Babs' has taken the team as far as he can and I'd hand the reigns over to Blashill. If they play above their heads, or are Cup competitive, re-sign him.

Agreed. Plus, you know Blashill is already on a lot of team's radars. If we resign Babs, Blashill is pretty much as good as gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. Plus, you know Blashill is already on a lot of team's radars. If we resign Babs, Blashill is pretty much as good as gone.

I agree, and I'd be really reluctant to see him go. I like his system. He believes in team defense, but he seems more amenable to offense than Babs does. Babs seems to want to win every game the way the Canadian Olympic Team did. Which would be fine if you were winning those close games, but we don't. With guys like Dats, Z, Franzen, Nyquist, Tatar, Weiss, and hopefully Mantha and Jurco (by the end of the season) there's no reason not to have a pretty good offense. So hopefully we won't be hearing "we don't have the skill to play like we used to", because this team has a good bit more skill (on the front end) than the 2008 team did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one of these ridiculous threads.... everytime Babcock farts there seems to be more speculation that he is not happy (even though he says he is) and he is going somewhere (probably Toronto because they are already planning their Stanley Cup Parade).

The other hilarious thing is that folks believe that replacing a battle tested and proven winner/veteran/warrior/genius (Mr. B-cock) with a green eared but eager rookie (Blashill) is somehow going to ward off massive debilitating injuries to key players, improve goalie consistency, prevent hall of fame legends from ever retiring, strengthen backup goalie's groinal area, add testoterone back into the balls of mules AND be that which attracts every key free agent to want to sign up for all of this (deep breath) will undoubtedly improve things.

Babcock + Holland + Health + Experience = Success wait and see

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one of these ridiculous threads.... everytime Babcock farts there seems to be more speculation that he is not happy (even though he says he is) and he is going somewhere (probably Toronto because they are already planning their Stanley Cup Parade).

The other hilarious thing is that folks believe that replacing a battle tested and proven winner/veteran/warrior/genius (Mr. B-cock) with a green eared but eager rookie (Blashill) is somehow going to ward off massive debilitating injuries to key players, improve goalie consistency, prevent hall of fame legends from ever retiring, strengthen backup goalie's groinal area, add testoterone back into the balls of mules AND be that which attracts every key free agent to want to sign up for all of this (deep breath) will undoubtedly improve things.

Babcock + Holland + Health + Experience = Success wait and see

Oh yes, cause that combo has done wonders for us since 09.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one of these ridiculous threads.... everytime Babcock farts there seems to be more speculation that he is not happy (even though he says he is) and he is going somewhere (probably Toronto because they are already planning their Stanley Cup Parade).

The other hilarious thing is that folks believe that replacing a battle tested and proven winner/veteran/warrior/genius (Mr. B-cock) with a green eared but eager rookie (Blashill) is somehow going to ward off massive debilitating injuries to key players, improve goalie consistency, prevent hall of fame legends from ever retiring, strengthen backup goalie's groinal area, add testoterone back into the balls of mules AND be that which attracts every key free agent to want to sign up for all of this (deep breath) will undoubtedly improve things.

Babcock + Holland + Health + Experience = Success wait and see

I agree with you on the Blashill versus Babcock point. Blashill may very well succeed in the NHL but it's a grass is always greener situation .

As for Babcock's true feelings about the team and his job, who knows. I don't expect him to comment publicly if he were unhappy or considering other opportunities. There is the chance he may want to challenge himself with a new team. And something like Toronto would definitely be a challenge but also an opportunity for greatness on his part if he turns that team around.

Personnel changes rarely happens in this order but I think Holland is the one running out of ideas, not Babcock. Plus there isn't really a coach I'd pick over him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one of these ridiculous threads.... everytime Babcock farts there seems to be more speculation that he is not happy (even though he says he is) and he is going somewhere (probably Toronto because they are already planning their Stanley Cup Parade).

The other hilarious thing is that folks believe that replacing a battle tested and proven winner/veteran/warrior/genius (Mr. B-cock) with a green eared but eager rookie (Blashill) is somehow going to ward off massive debilitating injuries to key players, improve goalie consistency, prevent hall of fame legends from ever retiring, strengthen backup goalie's groinal area, add testoterone back into the balls of mules AND be that which attracts every key free agent to want to sign up for all of this (deep breath) will undoubtedly improve things.

Babcock + Holland + Health + Experience = Success wait and see

Is this post meant to be tongue in cheek? I just want to know whether you're being sarcastic before I respond.

I agree with you on the Blashill versus Babcock point. Blashill may very well succeed in the NHL but it's a grass is always greener situation .

As for Babcock's true feelings about the team and his job, who knows. I don't expect him to comment publicly if he were unhappy or considering other opportunities. There is the chance he may want to challenge himself with a new team. And something like Toronto would definitely be a challenge but also an opportunity for greatness on his part if he turns that team around.

Personnel changes rarely happens in this order but I think Holland is the one running out of ideas, not Babcock. Plus there isn't really a coach I'd pick over him.

Right, but we know Holland isn't going anywhere, and Babs has got some pretty good talent to work with this year. So if the outcome is yet again underwhelming, would it be the worst thing in the world to let him go and try a different direction?

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have alway been pro Babs re-signing, but a part of me thinks that if him re-signing means we lose the Blashill option I'd almost like to see Babs walk and bring Blashill up. I agree that all coaches, even the best, have a shelf life. Part of me wants to throw caution to the wind and see what we can do with mini Babs...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the shelf life argument is true to an extent but I don't know if it's really applicable for the Wings, at least right now. Many of the players on the Wings squad are fairy new to working with Babcock, so I don't see how his message would go stale on them. Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Kronwall, Franzen, Cleary I could see the argument being more valid because they've been around for a while, but the above players seem to buy into the system pretty well (maybe not Franzen but who knows what's going on on his head half the time), so I don't think Babcock has lost his swagger in the lockerroom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this post meant to be tongue in cheek? I just want to know whether you're being sarcastic before I respond.

Right, but we know Holland isn't going anywhere, and Babs has got some pretty good talent to work with this year. So if the outcome is yet again underwhelming, would it be the worst thing in the world to let him go and try a different direction?

Babcock has some young talent to work with on offense, but the blueline basically has three consistent NHL defenseman and a potluck for the other half. Then there's also the question of which Jimmy Howard will show up.

It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world , but in terms of changes that could bring the Wings more success, I would put letting Babcock go at or near the bottom of that list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Babcock has some young talent to work with on offense, but the blueline basically has three consistent NHL defenseman and a potluck for the other half. Then there's also the question of which Jimmy Howard will show up.

It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world , but in terms of changes that could bring the Wings more success, I would put letting Babcock at or near the bottom of that list.

Agreed, which is why I said wait and see how the season turns out.

But I disagree with your second point. Babs has got plenty of good young talent on defense too. But we'll never know how much better we'd be if he doesn't play them. Hence his perplexing "Kindl and Lashoff's jobs are safe" interview. We've got to remember that until injuries forced his hand a year ago he wasn't aware of what he had on offense either. When it comes to playing young guys, Babs is risk averse. Which I'd understand if our team was really good. But it isn't. So I don't see the problem in tinkering with the defense given the dirth of talent we've got sitting in GR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this post meant to be tongue in cheek? I just want to know whether you're being sarcastic before I respond.

Right, but we know Holland isn't going anywhere, and Babs has got some pretty good talent to work with this year. So if the outcome is yet again underwhelming, would it be the worst thing in the world to let him go and try a different direction?

No I am serious. I've been Wings fan for a very long time... through the Dead Wings era, to the Glory days to now. I've seen the massive difference a good coach makes when Bowman came in. I also saw what happened when Bowman's green eared understudy was handed the same exact team pretty much and rode it into the ground. Then Babcock coming in and doing what he has always done and that is squeeze the very best out of what he has and find ways to win. I believe without Babcock we are not still running this playoff streak. Think about the massive changes this team has undergone in the last 3 years due to retirements and a plague of injuries and inconsistent play. Babcock is not the reason for anything that seems to have been "underwhelming". What is underwhelming to us spoiled rotten Red Wing fans is a dream for many other teams. How many of the current top teams have spent their time not long ago in sucksville to pile up top drafts to then bubble to the top? We will not spend any time in the cellar like many teams do (these past fews season is the Hockeytown equivalent really... and we still made the playoffs). I truly believe this doesn't happen if it not for the world class leadership of Babs... You don't ever let a talent like him get away! He is happy here... the best owner, the best GM (not to say he doesnt make mistakes but he is the best), best treated employee's in ALL THE NHL!!!! That alone is worth staying, so will his new contract (I hope Babs is made the highest paid ever) he deserves it ansd so do we!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want him to stay, but I'm not nearly as opposed to a change as I was 2-3 seasons ago. I think there's something to the shelf life argument, and it's something Babs has mentioned himself. Not just players tuning him out (younger, new faces on the team combat that), but the idea that staying in one place too long can make a guy stagnant.

In no way am I saying I want Babcock gone - I just don't think I'd be as torn up about it as I would have been a few seasons back. Change isn't the worst thing, sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, which is why I said wait and see how the season turns out.

But I disagree with your second point. Babs has got plenty of good young talent on defense too. But we'll never know how much better we'd be if he doesn't play them. Hence his perplexing "Kindl and Lashoff's jobs are safe" interview. We've got to remember that until injuries forced his hand a year ago he wasn't aware of what he had on offense either. When it comes to playing young guys, Babs is risk averse. Which I'd understand if our team was really good. But it isn't. So I don't see the problem in tinkering with the defense given the dirth of talent we've got sitting in GR.

Babcock knows what healthy competition does... not only for the current roster players but for the young challengers! You can't dump a stay at home safe guy like Lash in hopes one of the young guns does a better job... that kid has to fight to take it and that vet has to fight to keep it. We will never have the dominance of days past, I believe our new championships will be the direct result of these competitions and will provide a balance of strength throughout the lineup...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, which is why I said wait and see how the season turns out.

But I disagree with your second point. Babs has got plenty of good young talent on defense too. But we'll never know how much better we'd be if he doesn't play them. Hence his perplexing "Kindl and Lashoff's jobs are safe" interview. We've got to remember that until injuries forced his hand a year ago he wasn't aware of what he had on offense either. When it comes to playing young guys, Babs is risk averse. Which I'd understand if our team was really good. But it isn't. So I don't see the problem in tinkering with the defense given the dirth of talent we've got sitting in GR.

There's good prospects on defense but I think like most prospects they're somewhat overrated in terms of NHL potential. Hopefully one or two will shake out to be an NHL defenseman, but even then they're unlikely to become reliable D-men at this level for at least a couple seasons. There's not many 21 year olds who can step right into the league.

I never read too much into what Babcock says in interviews but Lashoff I'm pretty fine with. Last season was his first full year. If he can play more physical and be a good bottom pairing stay at home guy, great. In no way should Kindl's job be safe. He's lucky he wasn't shipped out in the offseason as part of a package. I'm guessing his contract is part of that problem. But he absolutely should have to prove he deserves his ice time. He's been given tons of time and opportunities.

Though honestly, no one's job should be safe on defense other than Kronwall, Ericsson and Dekeyser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's good prospects on defense but I think like most prospects they're somewhat overrated in terms of NHL potential. Hopefully one or two will shake out to be an NHL defenseman, but even then they're unlikely to become reliable D-men at this level for at least a couple seasons. There's not many 21 year olds who can step right into the league.

I never read too much into what Babcock says in interviews but Lashoff I'm pretty fine with. Last season was his first full year. If he can play more physical and be a good bottom pairing stay at home guy, great. In no way should Kindl's job be safe. He's lucky he wasn't shipped out in the offseason in part of a package. I'm guessing his contract is part of that problem. But he absolutely should have to prove he deserves his ice time. He's been given tons of time and opportunities.

Though honestly, no one's job should be safe on defense other than Kronwall, Ericsson and Dekeyser.

Well, I think there are a couple of defense prospects that its reasonable to assume will be good NHL players based on their skill sets and body of work so far (Sproul, Marchenko, and Ouellet). Backman and Jenson I'm less convinced of. I consider the first three a lot like Tatar, Nyquist, Jurco on offense. It was pretty clear from their AHL play that they'd be quality NHLers. How good is anybody's guess, but it wasn't a stretch to assume they'd have an impact. The other two (Backman and Jenson) are less sure, but certainly COULD surprise in the same way that Sheahan, Glendening, or Andersson did. While none of them are great (Sheahan's clearly the best) it's worth noting that NOBODY thought they'd be as good as they've been.

I 100% agree with your last statement though. If you aren't Kronwall, Ericsson, or Dekeyser you should have a VERY short leash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think there are a couple of defense prospects that its reasonable to assume will be good NHL players based on their skill sets and body of work so far (Sproul, Marchenko, and Ouellet). Backman and Jenson I'm less convinced of. I consider the first three a lot like Tatar, Nyquist, Jurco on offense. It was pretty clear from their AHL play that they'd be quality NHLers. How good is anybody's guess, but it wasn't a stretch to assume they'd have an impact. The other two (Backman and Jenson) are less sure, but certainly COULD surprise in the same way that Sheahan, Glendening, or Andersson did. While none of them are great (Sheahan's clearly the best) it's worth noting that NOBODY thought they'd be as good as they've been.

I 100% agree with your last statement though. If you aren't Kronwall, Ericsson, or Dekeyser you should have a VERY short leash.

I agree with Ouellet and Sproul - especially Ouellet. I think he looks like an NHL player already. He's noticeable in that "I'm not going to notice you, because you're making smart, subtle plays" kind of way. I think he'll make a perfect anchor somewhere in a top 4. I liken him to Vlasic - not sure he'll ever put up numbers, but he's a damn steady guy. While I'm less convinced about Sproul, I think his offensive contributions will be more than enough to merit becoming a #4 guy. He's got some work to do with his decision making in the defensive zone, but man... he just gives the PP a whole new look, IMO.

Backman and Marchenko I'm slightly less convinced about, but only for the moment. I think once Backman transitions to the NA game, he's going to be great, and turn out similar to Ouellet. I'm a little worried about Marchenko's ankle, but if he can bounce back from that, I think he'll work out nicely. Worst case scenario with Marchenko as a member of the Wings, I think you get a solid bottom pairing guy who makes good decisions with the puck.

I wish Jensen the best, but I think he's stuck behind Sproul in terms of being the offensive defender Detroit needs. Missing half the season really hurt him. He's 24, and as of right now he's starting the season in Toledo behind 6-7 other guys. Going the college route was beneficial, though, as I think he'll get another contract for next season and maybe step into a bigger role with GR. This year's going to be big for him, obviously.

Edited by Jesusberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Ouellet and Sproul - especially Ouellet. I think he looks like an NHL player already. He's noticeable in that "I'm not going to notice you, because you're making smart, subtle plays" kind of way. I think he'll make a perfect anchor somewhere in a top 4. I liken him to Vlasic - not sure he'll ever put up numbers, but he's a damn steady guy. While I'm less convinced about Sproul, I think his offensive contributions will be more than enough to merit becoming a #4 guy. He's got some work to do with his decision making in the defensive zone, but man... he just gives the PP a whole new look, IMO.

Backman and Marchenko I'm slightly less convinced about, but only for the moment. I think once Backman transitions to the NA game, he's going to be great, and turn out similar to Ouellet. I'm a little worried about Marchenko's ankle, but if he can bounce back from that, I think he'll work out nicely. Worst case scenario with Marchenko as a member of the Wings, I think you get a solid bottom pairing guy who makes good decisions with the puck.

I wish Jensen the best, but I think he's stuck behind Sproul in terms of being the offensive defender Detroit needs. Missing half the season really hurt him. He's 24, and as of right now he's starting the season in Toledo behind 6-7 other guys. Going the college route was beneficial, though, as I think he'll get another contract for next season and maybe step into a bigger role with GR. This year's going to be big for him, obviously.

I agree with a lot of what you said, and I'm not going to go through it point by point. But I would address two things. First, the reason I think that Marchenko will be quality in the NHL is because he's already played a lot of years at a professional level and seems to be able to keep pace pretty well. He was good in the KHL, he was good in the AHL, and I think he'll be good in the NHL. Provided his ankle heals, he'll be a very good defensive d-man with the ability to pass the puck forward. I'd actually compare him favorably to Vlasic as well (although I'm probably not the only one who's noticed that Quellet and Marchenko play a very similar style of game).

Secondly, I think that Sproul will be the best of the bunch because he's got all the things you can't teach. Size, speed, and that shot. For a defenseman to score in today's NHL they need a good point shot. The NHL game is too structure for defensemen to wheel and deal like they can at lower levels. Those that rely on that type of scoring (guys like Smith) find it hard to transition their offensive game to the NHL. Look at all your top scoring d-men in the NHL. What do they have in common? An awesome point shot. Sproul has it. He'll be fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think there are a couple of defense prospects that its reasonable to assume will be good NHL players based on their skill sets and body of work so far (Sproul, Marchenko, and Ouellet). Backman and Jenson I'm less convinced of. I consider the first three a lot like Tatar, Nyquist, Jurco on offense. It was pretty clear from their AHL play that they'd be quality NHLers. How good is anybody's guess, but it wasn't a stretch to assume they'd have an impact. The other two (Backman and Jenson) are less sure, but certainly COULD surprise in the same way that Sheahan, Glendening, or Andersson did. While none of them are great (Sheahan's clearly the best) it's worth noting that NOBODY thought they'd be as good as they've been.

I 100% agree with your last statement though. If you aren't Kronwall, Ericsson, or Dekeyser you should have a VERY short leash.

Admittedly I don't know a ton about our prospects. I guess after seeing so many promising prospects wash out over the years, I have a fairly conservative view on how many will actually turn into full time NHL defensemen. People here were saying the Wings had the deepest defensive prospects in the league in 2007.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Admittedly I don't know a ton about our prospects. I guess after seeing so many promising prospects wash out over the years, I have a fairly conservative view on how many will actually turn into full time NHL defensemen. People here were saying the Wings had the deepest defensive prospects in the league in 2007.

People here say a lot of things.

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
Sign in to follow this