Jump to content

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Buppy's Photo


Member Since 14 Feb 2009
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 09:25 PM

#2572857 Nashville Predators to Host Alumni Game vs. Detroit Red Wings

Posted by Buppy on 21 February 2015 - 02:12 PM

I took a look at the contract agreement for playing a game with the alumni, and this is one of the stipulations  :D :


• The Opponent agrees to provide the DRWA with a post game meal immediately following the game (DRWA players not obligated to attend). In addition, pre-game and during game refreshments with ice shall be provided by supplying 2 cases of assorted soft drinks, 2 cases of water and 3 cases of beer.


#2572731 Nashville Predators to Host Alumni Game vs. Detroit Red Wings

Posted by Buppy on 21 February 2015 - 02:23 AM

Samsonov is a member of the Wings alumni association. Quite a few guys in there who never played for the Wings, most seem to have some kind of connection to the area or team. The alumni assoc. is a charity thing, they do a lot of events throughout the year. Not really alumni games in the WC sense, though I imagine the one against Nashville will be a bit closer than normal.

#2571498 Why are the Wings Afraid to Block Shots?

Posted by Buppy on 17 February 2015 - 12:49 PM

Bumping this thread

I was going to make a thread of a similar topic, but did a quick search first and found this one. Watching last nights game Montreal had 19 blocked shots and the wings had 8. Why is this a stat that the wings find themselves every year ranked in the bottom 5? Invidual stats wise Kronwall is ranked 94th this year, and that's leading the team.

Partly because of our strong possession stats, but mostly because we just don't have many defensemen who are very good at it. Most likely this is because, when drafting and developing players, we don't make it a big priority. Nor is there any real reason to do so. We have the best corsi, fenwick, and total shots against in the league (though 3rd in SA/60). We're clearly doing well enough without blocking shots. Nor is there any correlation between being a good shot-blocking team and being a good defensive team.

#2571416 Next Number to be retired

Posted by Buppy on 17 February 2015 - 05:08 AM


Get off your pony.  I didn't say he sucked.  I just don't think his number belongs up there with the other players the Wings have in the rafters.  Most posters here and most knowledgeable hockey people would agree with me that Osgood isn't a Sawchuk or a Lindsey or a Lidstrom.    


I also don't seem him being in the HHOF.  Osgood is a very good goalie that will never be considered an elite goalie.  He was never one of the two or three best goalies in the league.  He never won the Vezina.  Hell, I think he was only top 3 in Vezina voting once in his career.  He is above most of his peers, but below the top echelon of his peers like Hasek, Roy, Brodeur and Belfour.  Some would rank him below Cujo as well, despite the latter's lack of team accomplishments.    


His numbers are impressive and reflect a great career, but much in the same way that Dave Andreychuk's numbers or Dino Ciccarelli's numbers reflect a great career. Yet, those guys are unable to crack the HHOF or be considered among the greatest forwards in league history. It's not just about numbers.


But hey, those are all dumb arguments, because kipwinger doesn't like them.   :rolleyes:   Let's retire Ozzie number and proclaim him a top 10 all time goalie.  

Not to say that Osgood belongs in the rafters, but the argument that he shouldn't be because he wasn't better than Hasek, Roy, or Brodeur is a dumb one. All three of those guys could make a strong case for being the best goalie in NHL history. It's like saying Yzerman shouldn't be there because he wasn't better than Gretzky, Lemieux, or Messier.


He shouldn't be up there, imo, not because he wasn't great but because greatness alone isn't enough. The standard should be extraordinary greatness or at least greatness plus extraordinary contribution/significance to a team, though some of the names up there now are debatable by that standard.


Dino is in the HHoF, btw.

#2570975 Next Number to be retired

Posted by Buppy on 15 February 2015 - 03:04 PM

What's Detroit's criteria, that's the question.  BTW, NOT what we think it is but the actual criteria.

Doubt there really is any hard criteria. I think Devellano said Aurie isn't up there because he's not in the HoF, so maybe that. But most likely it's just having enough guys up top thinking someone's "special". Kelly could be there with the other greats from the 50's dynasty. Fedorov also has a strong case. Doubt either will happen.


Personally I don't think they should be. Not really sure Abel, Lindsay, and Delvecchio belong there either. Howe, Lidstrom and Sawchuk are all considered among the very best few to ever play at their positions. Yzerman was such a beloved icon for the franchise, and blasphemous as it may be to say I think he's borderline. It's that kind of stuff that should get you in the rafters, not just being a great player and winning some Cups.

#2570434 Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Posted by Buppy on 13 February 2015 - 08:02 PM


Right. I wish Capgeek was still available for scenarios like this, but my guess is it wouldn't leave us much room to retain key players.

Would put us around $62.5 with Nyquist, Jurco, Andersson, Smith, and Franson to re-sign. Depending where the cap winds up, we'd probably be 2-4 mil short.


Maybe if we could offload one (or more) of Quincey, Franzen, or Weiss.

#2568695 So, Evander Kane...

Posted by Buppy on 05 February 2015 - 09:44 PM

Oh Evander...




Looks so uninspired. Like he's waiting on hold for tech support. You'd think there'd be someone more exciting he could pretend to call.

#2568487 Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Posted by Buppy on 05 February 2015 - 12:27 PM

Getting Franson long-term really only makes sense if he's replacing Ericsson. We're not exactly overflowing with cap space or roster spots.

#2567329 Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Posted by Buppy on 31 January 2015 - 01:02 PM

Yeah, get a lot of people together, you get a lot of different opinions. You have people you wouldn't trade, other people have theirs. Not sure what's funny about that.

#2567183 Franzen on IR

Posted by Buppy on 30 January 2015 - 03:45 PM

Quincey was the last decent player lost to waivers. Also the only one I can think of off hand.


Knuble was traded for a 2nd rounder.

#2567136 Franzen on IR

Posted by Buppy on 30 January 2015 - 12:10 PM

Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Nyquist, Tatar, Abdelkader, Helm, Sheahan, Weiss, Franzen, Miller, Glendening, Andersson, Jurco, Pulkkinen

Kronwall, Ericsson, Dekeyser, Quincey, Smith, Kindl, Lashoff

Howard, Mrazek


It's not necessary to waive or trade anyone to make room for Pulkkinen.

#2565991 Greatest US-born NHLer of all time?

Posted by Buppy on 26 January 2015 - 03:41 AM


In this order:


Chelios, Modano, Hull, ...

I hope you demoted Hull here for being born in Canada.


Otherwise I have to assume you've committed some horrific crime and now you're trying to prepare your insanity defense...

#2565751 Time for Teemu?

Posted by Buppy on 23 January 2015 - 10:15 PM

When people are suggesting that Tatar and Nyquist are expendable because they have Pulkinnen, he's being over rated.

That isn't at all what I was suggesting. I suggest they are expendable because we have both Tatar AND Nyquist, as well as Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Weiss, Franzen, Sheahan, Jurco, Abdelkader, and Helm in addition to a high end prospect like Pulkkinen.


And sorry if I was unclear; I didn't mean they should be traded for a bag of air and an empty roster spot for Pulks. Obviously I would expect something of value in return. (Seems so obvious that I didn't think I would actually need to specify that.) In fact, I would expect much more in return than we could get for Pulks (or almost anyone else), which is another reason I think one of them could be a good trade asset.


Being unproven is not proof that he won't be able to produce. Making any kind of move requires some faith. Whether it be faith that a kid can produce if given the opportunity, or faith that a new guy will work with our team, or faith that someone will continue to produce.


You clearly have no faith in Pulkkinen, but that doesn't mean you're right or that those who do have enough faith in him to not want to trade him are over-rating him.

#2565719 Time for Teemu?

Posted by Buppy on 23 January 2015 - 03:51 PM

Making Mantha or Larkin off-limits is no different. Nyquist and Tatar would have much more value, possibly enough to justify the risk of not being able to replace their production. Jurco's value is probably about the same as Pulkkinen's or a bit higher. Sheahan is probably close to Nyquist/Tatar. Helm would certainly have some decent value, probably Abby as well at the moment. Weiss might even draw some interest.


Pulkkinen has a rather unique skillset in our system. One that could potentially make us a more well-rounded and dangerous team. While I don't think anyone should ever be completely off-limits, I think he is someone we should make an effort to hang on to.


Sure, if were getting a good, proven young player that can help now and in the future, and the other team demands either Mantha or Pulkkinen, maybe you do it. But he's not our only, or in my opinion, best, trade asset.

#2565644 Time for Teemu?

Posted by Buppy on 23 January 2015 - 12:10 AM

Because he has value

So do a lot of others guys, some with much more, and most with a far more redundant skill set.


I wouldn't be completely shocked if he were to get traded, since I think he's shown enough to be in demand, but I doubt we'll be dangling him out there as some seem to think we will or should.