I really hope that Mule's reaction was born from his frustration with his own play this season and that the hit was just the catalyst that set him off. Maybe it will kick him in gear. History says no, but I can hope.
Why would he be frustrated? He's played fine this year...
This year about everyone in the Minors is better than Cleary, and Quincey. Why are we wasting roster spots for players like them, when you have kids that can play equal and provide energy while gaining experience at the same time. The problem is Detroit is going to have to start calling up the kids because this team isn't deep anymore, now they have reasons to call them up but they are still not doing it. I know they just called up Tatar but I believe it won't be long until he is sent back down even if he plays better than Cleary.
Who in the minors is better than Quincey? As for Cleary, you only assume Tatar or Nyquist would be any better. You can only assume they will be successful at all, especially if they're put in Cleary's role.
If Tatar comes in and makes a real impact, I think we'll find a way to keep him up. If not, it's better to leave him in GR, at least until the trade deadline. You don't dump assets to make lateral moves.
"Every other Holland critic"? Really, Buppy? I expect better from you.
Look, we're all making this way more complicated than it needs to be, than it is.
I'll say it again: you lose Rafalski, Stuart, Lidstrom, you, at the very least, bring in a heavy. No way should Kronwall - Ericsson/Quincey/White/Smith/Huskins/Lashoff be our first pairing. Common sense, really. Why is it so hard to swallow/understand?
So many of us treat Holland as if he's utterly infallible, incapable of being in the wrong. "He mades a mistake? He dropped the ball? No, you're just a Holland critic. You're just spoiled." It's just as silly as The Holland Bashing.
Ken Holland is the best GM in the league. But the way he's handled our D corps (and, arguably, the team at large) lately borders, I think, on braindead. It's almost as if he really does want that first overall pick. I have no other explanation for the sheer lack of those trademark Ken Holland Smarts (see, e.g., "Lets save money and sit on it, and then do it again next season, and then do it again! OH NO, NOW WE'RE IN TROUBLE! SALO! CARLE! SUTER! HEY, Y'KNOW WHAT'S GREAT? BUILDING FROM WITHIN!)
It's weird. Really, really weird. (To which someone will say, "No, it's called parity/not having Nick Lidstrom/transition etc., and I need to adjust my expectations and reconcile them with Reality." To which I preemptively say: I know you, are but what am I?)
Yeah, I guess I forgot about that kid sitting outside the Joe with a box full of "heavies" and a sign saying, "Free to good home".
I'm not saying he's infallible. I'm not even saying he hasn't made mistakes. I'm saying you can't expect him to be perfect and solve every problem. No doubt you'll say you don't expect that, but in practical terms that's what all the bashing amounts to. Like it's OK for Kenny to make mistakes, so long as they don't have any negative impact on the team.
You say he's made mistakes. I say, so what, everyone does. Get over it.
The only trap is the "name me this" homework that people try to assign thoe who disagree with them, likely because it's easier to criticize someone else's point than make their own.
Maybe spend less time telling me what I expect and more time making an actual point regarding Holland and the state of the current Red Wings defense.
Kronwall is basically our number on guy, which is a role he's never fulfilled. Then look down the blueline. It's a bunch of spare parts. White is a good d-man, though it'll be interesting to see how he plays without Lids. Plus he's a UFA at the end of this season and currently makes less then Kronwall, Quincey and Ericsson.
If this collection of players were on another team, I don't think people would really be complimenting the GM on a job well done. Just because Holland wasn't willing to give up enough for a trade or signing doesn't mean they couldn't ever have happened.
Again, I never said there was nothing that could have been done. Just that it isn't rational to expect someone to make all the right moves all the time. So he missed out on a few opportunities, and now the team is worse than it might otherwise have been. Do we really need to spend the better part of a year and a half whining about it every time there's a signing or trade around the league, or injury, or someone has a bad game, or someone we didn't get has a good game...
I'm just dorky enough to love it. More importantly, I wonder what number he will wear, he wore 96 for EV Zug and the Swiss Olympic team, I dont see them giving him Homer's old number so soon after his retirement.
At least 666 is out of the question. But if he goes with 63 (or 36) I'm checking his mother's grave for jackal remains.
Most likely we will se B. Smith this year (this year could be 2013-2014s li) but no regulars like Nyquist,Tatar, Shaehan. Why are we different? Compared to, say, SJS who injected Couture in 2010 and who scored one of the most deciding goals that series....
In the last few seasons we have brought up Helm, Abby, Ericsson, Howard, Kindl, Emmerton, and Mursak. We'll add Smith whenever the next season starts, with Nyquist, Brunner, and Tatar all likely in the competition, though they may need to wait a year.
Maybe if we'd had the 9th overall pick in one of our recent drafts we'd have someone like Couture. Tougher to find those guys at 19 or later.
Yes, everyone makes mistakes (god knows I made PLENTY at Riley's age)... but the issue people forgiving Sheahan aren't grasping is that while plenty of people do stupid things while their young, Riley endangered not only himself, but the people around him. I've been on-my-butt drunk plenty of times, but not one of those times did I ever sit behind the wheel. It isn't hard for you (or the establishment you're drinking at... or the DD at a party) to call a cab (and if you say the cab is too expensive, you probably can't afford your alcohol tab you just racked up). Don't you guys have loved ones (or at least care about yourselves)? I mean, double the legal limit or more is BAD NEWS BEARS. If I lived in Grand Rapids, I wouldn't want him driving in that state with my wife on the road, too...
Now, am I saying damn him to hell? Not hardly. Do I want him out of the Red Wings organ-i-zation? No (assuming he turns his act around in short order). But don't make excuses for the kid, either. Second offense - he already got his warning. I hope he doesn't get coddled by the law 'cause he's a big-shot hockey player and gets the book thrown at him so he learns the hard way (like most of us had to do).
I don't think anyone is suggesting that drunk driving is in any way OK. But it is just a dumb mistake. Alcohol impairs your judgement, so drinking responsibly usually means planning ahead; something young people are notorious for not doing. It seems he enjoys a party, so a .17-ish BAC isn't necessarily fall-down drunk. It could have had tragic consequences; fortunately it didn't. Hopefully, the legal process will serve its purpose and he'll learn his lesson. Throwing the book at him would mean jail time. I don't think his history suggests that is warranted.
The issue I have with the PA proposals are two fold.
First, the NHLPA didn't negotiate in good faith by dragging their feet through this entire process. It took them until June to even come to the table, and then 3 weeks after the NHL proposal to actually propose something of their own. So Fehr dragging his feet is the first thing I blame the NHLPA for.
Secondly, the NHLPA and NHL are both being greedy and not willing to compromise anything. In addition, there is no willingness to work together. If you read the deals, there is a deal to be made. Could the NHL be less greedy and not ask for so much? Yes. Could the NHLPA give up a little bit to make a deal happen? Yes. So why aren't either side willing to budge? Even worse, why are both sides just playing the media? The NHL says that they are willing to meet, but that the NHLPA doesn't want to talk their language. The same goes for the NHLPA. Lastly, there are no hard negotiation sessions happening.
So its a little bit of everything. There is plenty of blame to go around on both sides in these negotiations. I believe that both sides should come to the middle a little bit in order to make that happen. I also believe that both sides are in the wrong by involving the media more and getting both sides to the table and negotiating less.
If anything, I am arguing that both leaders should be fired. Both sides have been a miserable failure to their sides and horrible to hockey fans. The respective leadership teams of both sides should also be fired. Its time to get a new group of leaders in these positions that are more willing to work together to achieve a goal.
Finally, I do have an issue with people taking sides on this issue. The NHL and NHLPA have both sinned in these negotiations. To claim that one side is more deserving than the other is a fallacy. Both sides together have failed the sport of hockey and the fans. Bettman is just as at fault for the lockout as Fehr. Its time to kick both these guys in the ass and out of their respective positions. ...
I was asking specifically about your objections to the players' proposals. I get the other stuff, even though I don't necessarily agree.
Though it's curious that the "dragging their feet" criticism is reserved solely for the PA. The league claims they were ready to start in January, but didn't make any proposals; didn't to anyone's knowledge try to schedule any meetings, or even express any particular concern over the timetable. It took them two weeks from the time of the first meeting to actually make an offer, and another two weeks after that to deliver the full details. It took them two weeks again to make a new proposal after the PA finally made their first. Neither side made a proposal for a month after the start of the lockout. Seems if you want to criticize for this, you'd criticize both sides.
Personally, I don't see the timeline as an issue at all. Nor pandering to the media (I don't really see any of that, to be honest), nor the lack or negotiating sessions. I see the cause-effect relationship the other way I guess. I believe the lack of negotiation is the result of the separation between the proposals, not the other way around. Likewise, I believe the time it has taken thus far is the result of the separation, rather than the continuing separation being due to the lack of time spent. The way I see it even if either side had waited until 11:59PM on 9/15, kicked down the other guy's door, spit in his eye, called his mother a *****, then laid a fair offer on the table...we should be watching hockey right now. I happen to think the PA offers have been fair.
As to the actual proposals, of course the PA could give up a little more, but should they? They have already made plenty of concessions. Their first offer was a concession. Their second offer went further, and the third set went further still. You can say the same for the owners, but you have to remember that their "compromises" are only relative to the arbitrary figure from their first proposal. Much easier to give up something you never had (and likely never had any expectation to get anywhere close to) than give up something you do. Also, there has been speculation that the 50/50 deal the owners offered was what they wanted all along, and the other offers were just to give the illusion of compromise without really compromising. You could speculate the same regarding the PA, but that seems far less plausible. In all their proposals, the first three years are very similar, with almost all the movement coming in the final two years. You might interpret that as stubbornness, but it seems more likely that they just started off as low as they think should be in those years. One might wonder where the negotiations would be now if the owners hadn't started off with such a hostile first offer.
Furthermore, the owners have yet to actually offer anything to the players, or even to maintain the status quo on anything. They are taking on every point. The only thing that sort of goes in the players' favor is the 2-year ELC, but that only affects a very small number of players, and has its own drawbacks as well. The players haven't asked to be given anything. They're offering to lower their share, and all they ask in return is to limit how much and what else is taken from them. Again, one might wonder where we'd be if the owners offered something other than imaginary concessions.
As to firing Fehr, I think you're doing him a disservice. When he came in the PA was in disarray. Many players were unhappy with how much the players gave up in 2004-05. They had one director spying on their emails, replaced him with a guy who many felt was too conciliatory toward the league, seemingly more interested in avoiding a work stoppage than acting in the players' best interests. A couple interim directors that no one seemed to have any faith in. No due diligence in auditing league HRR accounting. You may think a weak union or weak leadership is a positive, and maybe it would make a work stoppage less likely, but the players would never be happy with it. It's really best for all sides to have strong leadership on both sides, so long as they are reasonable. Both Fehr and Bettman are strong. How reasonable they are is up for debate. But looking at their records, it's clear that Fehr has the much better resume.
Bettman has now been party to three lockouts in three chances, resulting in two shortened seasons (presuming it's true we can no longer save a full season now) and one completely lost. His big victory last time really solved nothing, and we're locked out again. Fehr was party to a devastating strike, but his big victory in 94-95 helped broker a deal that left both sides healthy and happy enough that it hasn't been changed much in what has now been three straight CBA negotiations without a work stoppage. Baseball has flourished, and owners know they have to be accountable so spending on players is controlled without any need for a cap. Fehr helped accomplish that in an environment that was far more hostile, with a counterpart in Selig who was in part responsible for that hostility (Selig, as an owner, was one of those involved in the late-80's collusion). I think Fehr deserves a chance. Bettman has had his three strikes (or lockouts if you prefer), he should be out.