Should any of #91, #13, #40, #30 be retired? Poll/Discussion

[LeftWinger 4,959]

As much as Fedorov's number should be up, I do understand the reason's it probably won't. Doesn't mean I won't argue all day to have it up, but meh!

40 is going up. 

I do think that 13 should as well. We know he left with a year to go, but like @Learn2LuvIt said above, he wanted to go home earlier.  He didn't want to sign a 3 year contract, he wanted to do one year at a time, but Holland convinced him to sign the 3 year. Each year, he wanted to retire, each year Holland convinced him to stay. The last year he decided it was enough, and it was for family issues as much as he wanted to go home and play. Holland had to be ok with it, he had to know that it was coming. He probably tried to convince him to stay, but it wasn't working, so he then probably asked him to waive his NMC so he could clear the cap.  I believe it was amicable. After a few seasons of thinking about it, I don't feel he left any bad feelings back here. It's not like he signed with his owners arch-rival (Karmanos) or bolted to another NHL team to be "The Man" like Fedorov did. He retired from the NHL and then went home. Sure he played in the KHL, but that is his business. He didn't claim injury or anything like that for his reason to retire and then play out there, he was up front and honest after each season of the contract. I think he deserves it and it will go up sometime after 40.

30....I think he deserves it, he has the numbers, he has to Cups. He did not CHOOSE to leave Detroit he was waived because he made more than Legace. (funny how back then they said they could not have a $3M backup and look what they had this year!) Anyhow, it was not Ozzie's choice to go. He got claimed. He don't choose to go to St. Louis, he was traded there and when his contract expired, he came right back here. He deserves to go up and maybe when he gets into the Hall, it will.

91....again, deserves it, I think it should go up, but I do understand. IF all four go up, 91 might be the last one...unless it goes up with the name Tavares on it!

 

[LeftWinger 4,959]

28 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Gretzky was, tho.  Without him, the NHL is a 16-20 team league right now.  He single handedly made hockey mainstream in 20 states that wanted nothing to do with it.  I was in California in 1988, so I know from personally experiencing the hockey tsunami that Gretzky brought on.  Jordan just amazed everyone with his skill.  Basketball didnt become twice as popular because of him.

This is why I believe the NHL had a hand in Gretzky going to LA instead of Detroit. All parties involved will never admit it, but Detroit and the Midwest was already a hot bed, Hockey in So.Cal was pretty much dead. 

...and before anyone tried to jump on me about how do I know it was Detroit, Gretzky said it himself on Letterman back in 1989ish. Right around the 3:40 mark of the video. I remember watching this live and me and my buddy looked at each other and was like "WHAAAAAT!?!?!?!" I'd like to know what they wanted from Detroit in return. Maybe at the time, Ilitch couldn't match the cash? Not sure and we'll probably never know.

 

Edited April 11, 2018 by LeftWinger

[Learn2LuvIt 245]

14 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Your arguing from emotion. I love Pav too. I appreciate everything he did for us and I'm thankful for the cups he brought us. But not every player I have fond memories of gets to go up. The vast majority don't.

The facts are he severed ties with the team while still under obligation to play. That's not an ok thing to do. Contracts are a two-way street and he knowingly agreed to the terms. Datsyuk made a lot of money playing for this team for 15 years and, despite having just one year left to go, he felt it more prudent to abandon his contract and his team.

He alluded to wanting to return home to Russia for a long time, and that's fine. But he should have done the respectable thing and negotiated for lesser term, or played out his final year. You don't get away with breach of contract just because you have dank dangles and a few cups.

I never stated he should go up in the rafters.  My initial point was that IF you don't believe he should go up in the rafters due to him leaving a year early to go be back to his home country to be with his family after he'd given 14 years of his life to this organization and fans, I just think that's weak reasoning. Life happens, he gave you 14 years of his life living in a strange place 5,200 miles away from his true home.  I look more arguments and reasoning based on stats and/or contribution.

BTW...there technically was no breach of contract on his behalf.  Every player has a right within their agreement to walk away with or without penalty (depending on the agreement).  I've seen a current day NHL contract.  If there wasn't these provisions, Dats could be sued with the demand that he pay back every dollar that was paid to him over the entire agreement. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

7 hours ago, Learn2LuvIt said:

I never stated he should go up in the rafters.  My initial point was that IF you don't believe he should go up in the rafters due to him leaving a year early to go be back to his home country to be with his family after he'd given 14 years of his life to this organization and fans, I just think that's weak reasoning. Life happens, he gave you 14 years of his life living in a strange place 5,200 miles away from his true home.  I look more arguments and reasoning based on stats and/or contribution.

BTW...there technically was no breach of contract on his behalf.  Every player has a right within their agreement to walk away with or without penalty (depending on the agreement).  I've seen a current day NHL contract.  If there wasn't these provisions, Dats could be sued with the demand that he pay back every dollar that was paid to him over the entire agreement. 

First bold: I'm not making an argument about his family in Russia or the amount of time he has contributed to the Red Wings organization. You are. I'm making an argument about his contract.

You're essentially saying: If you don't believe the argument I'm putting forth, I believe that's weak reasoning. Well you can believe that all you want I guess, but it doesn't change my argument about his contract. But I will say I certainly appreciate those things about Datsyuk, his time with this team is one of the reasons were talking about this at all.

I don't believe being Russian should get him any special treatment. Your home is faraway, so what, that's the way things are for most of the team. So you won't find me taking his nationality into consideration at all.

In terms of time he spent with the team, I definitely think that should be considered. He played his entire NHL career with the Red Wings. That's a big plus.

Basically I believe there's three basic criteria the Wings have for jersey retirement, that I've seen out of them so far:

1. On Ice Performance (Has to be a big impact player, most likely a HOFer)
2. Time with the team (Has to have spent the large majority of their career in Detroit, most likely all of it)
3. Character (Has be loyal to, and display a high level of conduct within the organization)

I think Datsyuk hit 1 & 2 but came up just short on 3. I think Fedorov hit 1, but not 2 or 3. Chelios got 1 and 3, but not 2. And Osgood I think got 2 and 3, but is coming up just short, like Datsyuk in a way, on 1.

I hope that clarifies my thinking.

Second Bold: Technically you are correct. The CBA dictates that if a player is signed to a contract/extension after said player turns 35, the contract stands even if the player retires. That's why his contract did not terminate and why we had to trade it to Arizona.

But in spirit he 100% broke off an agreement he had made with the team and 100% abandoned his contract. And even worse, because we couldn't just terminate the deal, as you suggest, we couldn't get that cap space back. That's the extra little sting to his retirement. It hurt the Wings on paper in a real way, enough that it forced us to make the Cholowski deal.

I think if Datsyuk had played out that final year, his jersey would already be up, and I think Datsyuk knows that and probably doesn't care. He's always been incredibly humble, and probably just decided that family and playing for his Russian fans suddenly and simply meant more to him than having his name immortalized in the great lakes region of North America for all time. That's not the way I or the Wings would like to have it, but fair enough, to each their own.

 

[kickazz 5,459]

10 hours ago, Learn2LuvIt said:

I never stated he should go up in the rafters.  My initial point was that IF you don't believe he should go up in the rafters due to him leaving a year early to go be back to his home country to be with his family after he'd given 14 years of his life to this organization and fans, I just think that's weak reasoning. Life happens, he gave you 14 years of his life living in a strange place 5,200 miles away from his true home.  I look more arguments and reasoning based on stats and/or contribution.

BTW...there technically was no breach of contract on his behalf.  Every player has a right within their agreement to walk away with or without penalty (depending on the agreement).  I've seen a current day NHL contract.  If there wasn't these provisions, Dats could be sued with the demand that he pay back every dollar that was paid to him over the entire agreement. 

He had a year left. Like you said he spent 14 years. All he had to do was spend one more year. He didn’t.

You can be in the lead in a race but if you don’t cross that finish line it’s over. Datsyuk did that. 

Pretty sure he left cause we sucked. Had we been a contender he would have had no issue finishing the contract. 

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

On 4/10/2018 at 5:23 PM, GMRwings1983 said:

I disagree.  Teams like the Heat, Magic, Timberwolves and Hornets all joined the league before Jordan even won a championship.  The only teams that joined the league in the 90's were the two Canadian teams.  The Hornets then moved to New Orleans and the Grizzlies moved to Memphis.  Jordan didn't have any effect on this.  Sure he made the game more popular, but the NBA's best ratings were in the 80's during the Lakers/Celtics/Pistons rivalries.  I can't say the league expanded in the US because of Jordan.  

Gretzky, on the other hand went to the Kings right before the NHL started expanding and moving into new markets in the South.  Whether that's all because of him is debatable, but there's certainly an argument to be made there.  

Jordan was a Sportscenter regular long before the Bulls were winning championships. If you don't think Jordan had anything to do with growing the NBA, particularly in the Southeast (where he played College ball): Miami, Charlotte, Orlando; and the Midwest (where he was drafted): Minnesota; than I don't know what to tell you. We'll have to agree to disagree. As I said before, it started with Bird and Magic in the early to mid 80's. They played in parts of the country with high populations, therefore an increase in ratings. Jordan carried the torch from the 80's into the 90's (expansion to Vancouver and Toronto) and beyond, and grew the sport between the coasts. He also had a little something to do with the Bobcats (Hornets now) as well. I'm not saying that Jordan = NBA Messiah, I am just saying that he was a contributing factor, and deserves some credit for growing the sport in both number of franchises and viewership,  although not to the extent of a 23 retirement across the league. I believe the same thing about Gretzky. He deserves credit for helping to grow the league, I am not denying that. He contributed for sure. Gretzky perhaps moreso than others. I just think that some give him way too much credit, and that retiring his number was way overboard. McDavid does not equal McJesus, and neither did Gretzky.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Neomaxizoomdweebie

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

16 hours ago, kickazz said:

He had a year left. Like you said he spent 14 years. All he had to do was spend one more year. He didn’t.

You can be in the lead in a race but if you don’t cross that finish line it’s over. Datsyuk did that. 

Pretty sure he left cause we sucked. Had we been a contender he would have had no issue finishing the contract. 

Yeah it's pretty coincidental that our big slide began and all of the sudden family became such an immediate need that he needed to bail.

Datsyuk absolutely deserves all the praise for all the great things he did, but he also should be held accountable for the negatives as well. The positives are not excuses.

[LeftWinger 4,959]

Here's the funny thing, if we were able to land Stamkos that summer, everyone would be singing Datsyuk praises for the huge favor he did for this team. But we didn't and now it's like he's being ostracized for not staying the one last season. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

2 minutes ago, LeftWinger said:

Here's the funny thing, if we were able to land Stamkos that summer, everyone would be singing Datsyuk praises for the huge favor he did for this team. But we didn't and now it's like he's being ostracized for not staying the one last season. 

Signing Stamkos ≠ Retiring #13

Edited April 12, 2018 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[kickazz 5,459]

4 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

Here's the funny thing, if we were able to land Stamkos that summer, everyone would be singing Datsyuk praises for the huge favor he did for this team. But we didn't and now it's like he's being ostracized for not staying the one last season. 

Fans wouldn't be as upset with him but if we were to objectively assess if his number would be retired, then him not fullfilling his contract would STILL be a topic of discussion. 

I mean look at Fedorov. I think most fans are over it. Lots of fans were excited to see him at the alumni game against Toronto and at the Hall of Fame induction visit but whenever we bring up number retirement, we STILL bring up his past issues with the team. 

You can't escape contract issues and talks. Not in sports or in general. It's always a red flag for anyone/anything. 

Ever watch the show Silicon Valley? You try to bail out on a contract in the tech industry, you're f***ed. 

I think what a lot of people still don't understand is that the Detroit Red Wings chose not to take Datsyuk to court. They could have made this a legal issue. But the franchise did him a favor and let him walk. 

If I remember correctly Datsyuk wanted to walk away from the contract in 2014 and Holland told him he would take him to court and prevent him to being able to play in the KHL if he did that. He then convinced Datsyuk to stay for 2 of the 3 years and if he honored that then he would let Datsyuk walk away with no legal battle. 

Trust me the Datsyuk issue on paper is far worse than what Fedorov ever did. Datsyuk is just more well liked and a timid dude so fans kinda forgave him. Fedorov always came off as a ****** bag so even something like signing a contract with Anaheim (which he was allowed to do) hurt everyones butt. 

Edited April 12, 2018 by kickazz

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

Yeah, this is like that time when Johnny Depp wanted out of his 21 Jumpstreet contract, but couldn't on account that he would have been taken to court for breach of contract. Finally, after season 4,  Stephen J. Cannell let him out of his final year of it. This is exactly like that. I  still hate Johnny Depp to this day for killing Tom Hanson.

[Buppy 1,720]

3 hours ago, kickazz said:

Fans wouldn't be as upset with him but if we were to objectively assess if his number would be retired, then him not fullfilling his contract would STILL be a topic of discussion. 

I mean look at Fedorov. I think most fans are over it. Lots of fans were excited to see him at the alumni game against Toronto and at the Hall of Fame induction visit but whenever we bring up number retirement, we STILL bring up his past issues with the team. 

You can't escape contract issues and talks. Not in sports or in general. It's always a red flag for anyone/anything. 

Ever watch the show Silicon Valley? You try to bail out on a contract in the tech industry, you're f***ed. 

I think what a lot of people still don't understand is that the Detroit Red Wings chose not to take Datsyuk to court. They could have made this a legal issue. But the franchise did him a favor and let him walk. 

If I remember correctly Datsyuk wanted to walk away from the contract in 2014 and Holland told him he would take him to court and prevent him to being able to play in the KHL if he did that. He then convinced Datsyuk to stay for 2 of the 3 years and if he honored that then he would let Datsyuk walk away with no legal battle. 

Trust me the Datsyuk issue on paper is far worse than what Fedorov ever did. Datsyuk is just more well liked and a timid dude so fans kinda forgave him. Fedorov always came off as a ****** bag so even something like signing a contract with Anaheim (which he was allowed to do) hurt everyones butt. 

I have to disagree here, and I think the complete lack of any animosity toward Brian Rafalski proves that fans are only bitter over the negative impact. The contract is just a convenient target. Had we signed Stamkos, or more specifically signed Stamkos and returned to contender status, no one would be debating anything. (Though if we signed Stamkos and still sucked, people would still likely be at least a little bitter.)

Secondly, you don't seem to understand the nature of a contract in this sense. An NHL contract is an employment contract. In the US, you absolutely have the right to just walk away from an employment contract, and there can be no consequences beyond forfeiting your right to whatever you would have been entitled had you not walked away, and not being allowed to play/work for a competitor. Despite your insinuations that he wasn't allowed to retire, the fact is he was no more in violation of his contract than a team is when they trade of buy-out a player. Quitting is an inherent right of the player. That the Wings/NHL could have asked the KHL to block him from playing there is a completely separate issue from his right to not play for the Wings.

I'm surprised that anyone can think that Datsyuk leaving to go play in Russia is worse than Fedorov leaving to go play for the team that had just swept us in the playoffs.

[kickazz 5,459]

1 hour ago, Buppy said:

I have to disagree here, and I think the complete lack of any animosity toward Brian Rafalski proves that fans are only bitter over the negative impact. The contract is just a convenient target. Had we signed Stamkos, or more specifically signed Stamkos and returned to contender status, no one would be debating anything. (Though if we signed Stamkos and still sucked, people would still likely be at least a little bitter.)

Secondly, you don't seem to understand the nature of a contract in this sense. An NHL contract is an employment contract. In the US, you absolutely have the right to just walk away from an employment contract, and there can be no consequences beyond forfeiting your right to whatever you would have been entitled had you not walked away, and not being allowed to play/work for a competitor. Despite your insinuations that he wasn't allowed to retire, the fact is he was no more in violation of his contract than a team is when they trade of buy-out a player. Quitting is an inherent right of the player. That the Wings/NHL could have asked the KHL to block him from playing there is a completely separate issue from his right to not play for the Wings.

I'm surprised that anyone can think that Datsyuk leaving to go play in Russia is worse than Fedorov leaving to go play for the team that had just swept us in the playoffs.

He can walk away sure, but I’m referring to the fact that Holland said he was going to stop him from playing in the KHL had he left in 2014

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

2 hours ago, Buppy said:

I have to disagree here, and I think the complete lack of any animosity toward Brian Rafalski proves that fans are only bitter over the negative impact. The contract is just a convenient target. Had we signed Stamkos, or more specifically signed Stamkos and returned to contender status, no one would be debating anything. (Though if we signed Stamkos and still sucked, people would still likely be at least a little bitter.)

Secondly, you don't seem to understand the nature of a contract in this sense. An NHL contract is an employment contract. In the US, you absolutely have the right to just walk away from an employment contract, and there can be no consequences beyond forfeiting your right to whatever you would have been entitled had you not walked away, and not being allowed to play/work for a competitor. Despite your insinuations that he wasn't allowed to retire, the fact is he was no more in violation of his contract than a team is when they trade of buy-out a player. Quitting is an inherent right of the player. That the Wings/NHL could have asked the KHL to block him from playing there is a completely separate issue from his right to not play for the Wings.

I'm surprised that anyone can think that Datsyuk leaving to go play in Russia is worse than Fedorov leaving to go play for the team that had just swept us in the playoffs.

Raffi didn't leave his cap hit behind. Datsyuk did.

[toby91_ca 620]

10 hours ago, Buppy said:

Secondly, you don't seem to understand the nature of a contract in this sense. An NHL contract is an employment contract. In the US, you absolutely have the right to just walk away from an employment contract, and there can be no consequences beyond forfeiting your right to whatever you would have been entitled had you not walked away, and not being allowed to play/work for a competitor. Despite your insinuations that he wasn't allowed to retire, the fact is he was no more in violation of his contract than a team is when they trade of buy-out a player. Quitting is an inherent right of the player. That the Wings/NHL could have asked the KHL to block him from playing there is a completely separate issue from his right to not play for the Wings.

I'm surprised that anyone can think that Datsyuk leaving to go play in Russia is worse than Fedorov leaving to go play for the team that had just swept us in the playoffs.

I have no issues with Datsyuk leaving before the end of his contract, that's fine, but only if he's retiring, not to go play hockey somewhere else.

Fedorov had his contract issues for sure, but he left the Wings after the end of the his contract.

[kickazz 5,459]

11 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Raffi didn't leave his cap hit behind. Datsyuk did.

And he did it to stop playing hockey, not to hamper us with a cap hit and go play somewhere else. Dats would have f***ed us with cap hit in 2014 technically if Holland didn’t tell him he would block him from playing in KHL. 

Like it or not, the Datsyuk drama was ongoing from 2014 onwards and I’m sure it left a bad taste in Holland and Illitches mouth having to deal with it on and off for 3 years. These same people happen to be the ones who decide if the number gets retired.

Edited April 13, 2018 by kickazz

[kickazz 5,459]

Having said all this, I still think Datsyuk has a good chance of getting his number retired 

17 hours ago, Buppy said:

I'm surprised that anyone can think that Datsyuk leaving to go play in Russia is worse than Fedorov leaving to go play for the team that had just swept us in the playoffs.

Objectively, Datsyuk’s situation is worse. But if you want touchy feely subjectivism then yeah, Fedorov hurt the butts more. 

[rwing 29]

27 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Having said all this, I still think Datsyuk has a good chance of getting his number retired 

Objectively, Datsyuk’s situation is worse. But if you want touchy feely subjectivism then yeah, Fedorov hurt the butts more. 

As a lad, my uncle Billy Bob used to tell me all sphincters heal in time.

I think the only one that will end up in the rafters is Hank. Dats will be in the HOF, but not the roof. Federov's number would be nice to retire, but I just don't see him or Dats meeting the standard that's established there now with Yzerman and Lidstrom - skills, achievements, and leadership. I do think had Dats stayed out his contract, we might have a joint ceremony some day with both his and Hank's numbers going up. It would have been the perfect end to the twins (had someone played them together a bit more), but maybe I watch too many Spielberg movies. 

[Buppy 1,720]

3 hours ago, kickazz said:

Having said all this, I still think Datsyuk has a good chance of getting his number retired 

Objectively, Datsyuk’s situation is worse. But if you want touchy feely subjectivism then yeah, Fedorov hurt the butts more. 

Both players acted in accordance with their legally protected rights, which is the closest thing we have to objectivity. So objectively, both situations are exactly equal. You are either considering some moral standard, or comparing the relative impact of the situations. Both of those are subjective.

I'm sure if I were to find an example of a player no one cared about going to play in the KHL, all it would do is get people looking for some other detail that makes Datsyuk different. Point is, all these arguments are bogus. Just attempts to do what you're doing here: trying to make a subjective situation objective. No one actually cares about the specifics, we care about the net result. The disappointment of losing followed by the perceived rejection in Fedorov's case. The perceived contribution to the decline of the team in Datsyuk's. Can't handle adversity without having a target to shake our fists at. Some villain to blame for all our woe. Can't be happy without something to hate. Can't even be happy just hating on our own; we have to convince everyone else to hate the same things. Sad.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

2 minutes ago, Buppy said:

Both players acted in accordance with their legally protected rights, which is the closest thing we have to objectivity. So objectively, both situations are exactly equal. You are either considering some moral standard, or comparing the relative impact of the situations. Both of those are subjective.

I'm sure if I were to find an example of a player no one cared about going to play in the KHL, all it would do is get people looking for some other detail that makes Datsyuk different. Point is, all these arguments are bogus. Just attempts to do what you're doing here: trying to make a subjective situation objective. No one actually cares about the specifics, we care about the net result. The disappointment of losing followed by the perceived rejection in Fedorov's case. The perceived contribution to the decline of the team in Datsyuk's. Can't handle adversity without having a target to shake our fists at. Some villain to blame for all our woe. Can't be happy without something to hate. Can't even be happy just hating on our own; we have to convince everyone else to hate the same things. Sad.

Both players obeyed the law......

 

 

...... Datsyuk is an outlet for LGWs hateful ways

You musta went to college

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

WARNING if you are viewing this at work this post may be inappropriate, and if you have children please cover their eyes.

Nobody with that disaster of a tape job belong in any rafters. Totally shameful/irresponsible.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

On 4/13/2018 at 6:25 PM, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Both players obeyed the law......

 

 

...... Datsyuk is an outlet for LGWs hateful ways

You musta went to college

 

[toby91_ca 620]

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't see how both obeyed the law or parameters of their contractual obligations with the Wings.  Fedorov was a free agent and left....there is no ambiguity there, bad blood, yes, but no contractual concerns.  Datsyuk left with term on his contract to play in a different league.  I'm guessing this is contrary to his contractual obligations.  I'm not sure what "law" would say, but I'm guessing the Wings could have blocked him from being able to play in the KHL if they chose to exercise that option.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

5 hours ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Fedorov was a pimp.  He needs to go up.

My guess is they were waiting for Tavares all along and didn't  want to retire it just in case.

[Buppy 1,720]

On 4/17/2018 at 10:10 AM, toby91_ca said:

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't see how both obeyed the law or parameters of their contractual obligations with the Wings.  Fedorov was a free agent and left....there is no ambiguity there, bad blood, yes, but no contractual concerns.  Datsyuk left with term on his contract to play in a different league.  I'm guessing this is contrary to his contractual obligations.  I'm not sure what "law" would say, but I'm guessing the Wings could have blocked him from being able to play in the KHL if they chose to exercise that option.

That could depend on whether you see it as a single act of "retiring to play in the KHL" or as two separate, tangentially-related acts of "retiring" and "playing in the KHL". Regardless, the Wings chose not to try to block him so what they arguably could have done isn't particularly relevant. Fact is, obtaining permission as he did means he did not violate the terms of his contract.

But to be strictly accurate, neither the Wings nor the NHL (nor, for that matter, any US court) could actually block a player from playing in the KHL, as none of them have any authority over the KHL. All they could do is request that the KHL itself block him, and/or ask that the IIHF threaten them with sanctions. Of course, they would most likely comply in order to maintain a good relationship, but that just puts us back at speculating on whether or not blocking him from the KHL prevents the retirement. Could very well be that the only reason he stayed for the 15-16 season is because the Wings agreed not to try to stop him the next year.