Official 2016 Detroit Red Wings Offseason Thread

[DickieDunn 2,571]

Because anyone who plays with Miller and Glendening will be forced to play like a plug because that's all they are.

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

I don't think there's much of a chance we'll see Frk unless its on a later call up. When's the last time a player made the team without earlier call ups? (Larkin's situation doesn't count) I think if he had a future he would have been chosen instead of AA or Mantha for earlier call ups.

I still think Ott won't play much and will be sent down to make room when come upon roster problems.

The D situation will be very interesting to see play out. I do think the # of NHL games shows what the organization thinks. XO's 25 games says to me that the 7th spot is his. Jensen's never even had 1 NHL game so I think he's definitely sent down. I've really wanted the 6'4" righty, Sproul, to get more of a chance than his 1 game. I hope we keep him up as a group of 8.

[Detroit # 1 Fan 2,204]

I love how people actually think Holland/Blashill would play skilled guys over garbage 4th liners. The 4th line will be Miller-Glendening-Ott/Jurco, they will be caved in every shift and generate no offense, but they will contribute on the PK and play hard and that's all that matters to this management group.

[LeftWinger 4,961]

Agreed. Both with the roster as it is I think it's the most likely scenario.

There is no way Sproul or Ouellet would get waived before Frk.

Frk will be th he 14th fwd before Sproul/Jensen will be #8...

[Jacksoni 418]

Henrik Zetterberg was named as a top 10 coach in the NHL in a locally well-known Swedish podcast named svenskafans (swedish fans). Any thoughts?

Here's the URL if you are fluent in that language.

http://www.svenskafans.com/nhl/nhl-podcast-en-sa-underlig-off-season--555368.aspx

[kickazz 5,459]

top 10 coach???

[Mckinley25 677]

top 10 coach???[/quote

Is this a Swedish Mafia joke?

[kickazz 5,459]

Well in that case he's da number 1!

If it was player I would have said top 10 maybe a few years ago but now nahhh.

Coach? He's so good he shouldn't even be listed as top 10. Should have his own damn title as a legend.

[Jacksoni 418]

Yep they joke with the Swedish mafia connection that detroitsportsrag.net disclosed a few months ago.

Still, that Andersson call-up in the playoffs has made me wonder if there is something to this. Who in his right mind calls up Joakim Andersson in that situation...

Edited July 14, 2016 by Jacksoni

[kickazz 5,459]

To be honest, I thought Andersson was actually pretty decent in the playoffs. He made the sick play for AA's goal in game 3.

Call-ups are dependent on the GM. Looking at this off season thus far, with the contracts of Miller, Glendening, Helm and signing of Ott, you shouldn't be surprised why Andersson was called up for playoffs. If anything, this offseason is making me understand why Andersson was called up.

Holland doesn't believe that young kids are the answer. I'm not going to say if he's right or wrong - that's another topic but the man favors veterans more than youth (extremely favors them).

Andersson is simply one piece of the puzzle of the Red Wings way of doing things.

Edited July 14, 2016 by kickazz

[Jacksoni 418]

I agree Andersson did play well in the playoffs, especially when he initially got called up. But still a weird call-up as he hardly played in the regular season.

I think that both Holland and Blashill doesn't believe the kids are the answer. Which is serious because they (must) have a keen eye. In their mind they simply don't think they are good enough. Larkin being the big exception and a stuttering AA (as in moving up&down). Troubled times ahead.

Edited July 14, 2016 by Jacksoni

[kickazz 5,459]

So essentially even if Z wanted Andersson and went to Blashill and told him. Ultimately it's upto Ken Holland. In that regard I debunk the theory. Unless Z is more convincing than Vito Corleone there is no way in hell one man can convince an entire coaching staff and the management staff to bring up a bad player.

It starts with management. Blashill's job is to use the line up given to him. Holland's job is to send players up and down.

Still was a good read though. The detroitsportsrag one I mean. Seemed like the Swedes were the Avengers working behind the backs of the American Gov for the greater good or somes***. Zetterberg as Captain America, Kronwall as Thor, Ericsson as Antman. Jeff Blashill as Nick Fury

Edited July 14, 2016 by kickazz

[MrazekFanBoy 223]

So essentially even if Z wanted Andersson and went to Blashill and told him. Ultimately it's upto Ken Holland. In that regard I debunk the theory. Unless Z is more convincing than Vito Corleone there is no way in hell one man can convince an entire coaching staff and the management staff to bring up a bad player.

It starts with management. Blashill's job is to use the line up given to him. Holland's job is to send players up and down.

Still was a good read though. The detroitsportsrag one I mean. Seemed like the Swedes were the Avengers working behind the backs of the American Gov for the greater good or somes***. Zetterberg as Captain America, Kronwall as Thor, Ericsson as Antman. Jeff Blashill as Nick Fury

******* hilarious Kronwall is definitely Thor, I'd say Z is from Asgard too

[kickazz 5,459]

f****** hilarious Kronwall is definitely Thor, I'd say Z is from Asgard too

Zetterberg is Loki then. Super manipulative.

Edited July 14, 2016 by kickazz

[Jacksoni 418]

So essentially even if Z wanted Andersson and went to Blashill and told him. Ultimately it's upto Ken Holland. In that regard I debunk the theory. Unless Z is more convincing than Vito Corleone there is no way in hell one man can convince an entire coaching staff and the management staff to bring up a bad player.

It starts with management. Blashill's job is to use the line up given to him. Holland's job is to send players up and down.

Still was a good read though. The detroitsportsdrag one I mean.

First, I don't subscribe to the Swedish mafia theory. It is ridiculous. I loved seing Zetterbergs face when he was mentioned that rumor in an interview though, it was hilarious.

However, Ken Holland has said in multiple interviews lately that the coach has the say on who gets called up/down. He'll just have a short chitchat about calls if they stand out. So I would assume that theoretically there might be a glitch for that to somehow happen. Still as I said I don't buy it.

[kickazz 5,459]

Right I agree with you. Holland is still the governing body if you know what I mean. If something seems off he can step in if needed. He said it in an interview last year that ultimately Babcock was allowed to make those decisions but he does talk to him about it.

Edited July 14, 2016 by kickazz

[krsmith17 7,191]

Holland gives Blashill 14 forwards and 7 defenseman, it's up to Blash which 12 and 6 he uses. I think the only situation in which Holland would step in, is when it comes to waiver eligibility. Since that doesn't apply in the playoffs, it was most definitely Blashill's (terrible) decision to call up and play Andersson in the playoffs...

[Dabura 12,207]

Holland doesn't believe that young kids are the answer. I'm not going to say if he's right or wrong

It's not a black-or-white, all-or-nothing issue. Holland's making it one, but it's not one (or, it shouldn't be one).

The team needs more youth. It doesn't need all youth. It needs more youth. And more skill, more talent, more high-end ability. Greater possession prowess. Goal scoring. Being able to play without the puck. Young legs. Size. These are things we're lacking. These are things that an Athanasiou or a Mantha can provide, and for a dirt-cheap cap hit--and neither of these players has even come close to hitting his respective ceiling yet.

We're looking more and more like the Canadiens, and that's not a good thing. It's a bad thing. All this garbage about Grit and Character and Experience and Playing Without the Puck and Veteran Leadership and Knowing Your Place and Earning Your [insert whatever the hell it is you're supposed to be "earning"] -- it's all bulls***. And, accordingly, we'll be lucky to make the playoffs this season, just like 2015-16, 2014-15, 2013-14, 2012-13.

[Internet.Unknown 422]

After the Streak ends or the record is broken, change will happen. Until then, we're going to be watching a veteran team with supposed grit as Dabura pointed out.

[Dabura 12,207]

After the Streak ends or the record is broken, change will happen.

I doubt it.

"Y'know, we only missed the playoffs by a couple points. If we win one more shootout, we're probably in. And once you're in, you've got as good a chance as any other playoff team. At the end of the day, we're a team in transition. We like our team. I know there are people who want us to tank, but I've never bought into that kind of thinking. We're gonna keep doing what we've been doing. We're not going to blow everything up because we missed the playoffs by a couple points."

We'd have to miss the playoffs by a country mile. (And even then, I dunno.) If it's close, we stick with the status quo. Because Red Wings.

Our best/only hope: kids. More specifically, we need a new prime-years Datsyuk and a new prime-years Zetterberg. I think Larkin is (going to be) that good. I think Athanasiou has that kind of top-end potential. I think Mantha can grow into a new prime-years Franzen. I've always felt Mrazek has Vezina potential. I think Saarijarvi is an elite talent. But it's probably going to be several years before Holland and Blashill are willing to truly hand the keys over to the next generation. Because kids have to "earn it," or some such bulls***.

[kickazz 5,459]

I certainly think players need to earn their ice time. That theory is not incorrect. The issue I have is some of them already have earned it but didn't get it last year.

If AA doesn't make the squad I'll be pretty pissed. The guy definitely deserves to be in the line up by all eye ball tests and math freak metrics.

Mantha imo has earned a shot too. I don't know about full time but he definitely should be spending the time up with the big club than down in GR. It should be a major transition year for him this upcoming season like it was for AA last season. If he ends up spending a bulk of the time down in GR that's pretty sad.

Edited July 15, 2016 by kickazz

[sjr2012 439]

I doubt it.

"Y'know, we only missed the playoffs by a couple points. If we win one more shootout, we're probably in. And once you're in, you've got as good a chance as any other playoff team. At the end of the day, we're a team in transition. We like our team. I know there are people who want us to tank, but I've never bought into that kind of thinking. We're gonna keep doing what we've been doing. We're not going to blow everything up because we missed the playoffs by a couple points."

We'd have to miss the playoffs by a country mile. (And even then, I dunno.) If it's close, we stick with the status quo. Because Red Wings.

Our best/only hope: kids. More specifically, we need a new prime-years Datsyuk and a new prime-years Zetterberg. I think Larkin is (going to be) that good. I think Athanasiou has that kind of top-end potential. I think Mantha can grow into a new prime-years Franzen. I've always felt Mrazek has Vezina potential. I think Saarijarvi is an elite talent. But it's probably going to be several years before Holland and Blashill are willing to truly hand the keys over to the next generation. Because kids have to "earn it," or some such bulls***.

i dont mind keeping the kids into the minors until they are well done but there is such thing as overcooking and i think Wings are good for wasting some years off these guys

[DickieDunn 2,571]

I doubt it.

"Y'know, we only missed the playoffs by a couple points. If we win one more shootout, we're probably in. And once you're in, you've got as good a chance as any other playoff team. At the end of the day, we're a team in transition. We like our team. I know there are people who want us to tank, but I've never bought into that kind of thinking. We're gonna keep doing what we've been doing. We're not going to blow everything up because we missed the playoffs by a couple points."

We'd have to miss the playoffs by a country mile. (And even then, I dunno.) If it's close, we stick with the status quo. Because Red Wings.

Our best/only hope: kids. More specifically, we need a new prime-years Datsyuk and a new prime-years Zetterberg. I think Larkin is (going to be) that good. I think Athanasiou has that kind of top-end potential. I think Mantha can grow into a new prime-years Franzen. I've always felt Mrazek has Vezina potential. I think Saarijarvi is an elite talent. But it's probably going to be several years before Holland and Blashill are willing to truly hand the keys over to the next generation. Because kids have to "earn it," or some such bulls***.

They can't become good nhl players if Holland blocks them from playing because of Helm and Glendening

[Dabura 12,207]

I certainly think players need to earn their ice time. That theory is not incorrect. The issue I have is some of them already have earned it but didn't get it last year.

Same here. I'm ok with kids having to earn their ice time. I'm not ok with how the Wings go about enforcing this policy. It's like something out of a Joseph Heller novel...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_(logic)

A catch-22 is a paradoxical situation from which an individual cannot escape because of contradictory rules.^[1][2] An example would be:

To apply for a job, you need to have a few years of experience. But in order to gain experience, you need to get a job first.

Catch-22s often result from rules, regulations, or procedures that an individual is subject to but has no control over because to fight the rule is to accept it. Another example is a situation in which someone is in need of something that can only be had by not being in need of it. One connotation of the term is that the creators of the "catch-22" have created arbitrary rules in order to justify and conceal their own abuse of power.

[ . . . . ]

Joseph Heller coined the term in his 1961 novel Catch-22, which describes absurd bureaucratic constraints on soldiers in World War II. The term is introduced by the character Doc Daneeka, an army psychiatrist who invokes "Catch 22" to explain why any pilot requesting mental evaluation for insanity—hoping to be found not sane enough to fly and thereby escape dangerous missions—demonstrates his own sanity in making the request and thus cannot be declared insane. This phrase also means a dilemma or difficult circumstance from which there is no escape because of mutually conflicting or dependent conditions.^[3]

"You mean there's a catch?"

"Sure there's a catch," Doc Daneeka replied. "Catch-22. Anyone who wants to get out of combat duty isn't really crazy."

There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he was sane, he had to fly them. If he flew them, he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to, he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.

(Catch-22 is one of the greatest novels ever written, IMHO.)

They can't become good nhl players if Holland blocks them from playing because of Helm and Glendening

Exactly. I hate the Helm extension and the Glendening extension, largely for this very reason.

[LeftWinger 4,961]

Glendening isn't keeping kids in GR. The kids ready to come up are top 9. Helm is keeping kids in GR. They are going to be up here to play 4th line minutes so they may as well be in GR. That's why Helm was a waste of a roster spot.