Jump to content

Lonewuhf's Photo


Member Since 10 Dec 2009
Offline Last Active Oct 06 2014 10:57 AM

#2223620 Coaching part of the problem?

Posted by Lonewuhf on 08 November 2011 - 05:07 AM

Six years of big success under Babcock and you're calling for his head after a five-game losing streak. 14 years of GMing from Holland that has EVERYONE--columnists, fans of other teams, etc.--calling him the best overall GM during that period, especially in the salary-cap world, and you're saying he's the wrong guy for the job because of a short spell of losses. Give me a break. This is typical spoiled, ridiculous, grass-is-greener thinking. It comes from a line of success so long that many of you can't remember how it is to be on the other side. Go ask fans of most other teams, and they'll tell you they'd kill for their team to have the same level of success the Wings have had in the recent and distant (~20 years) past. Yet you want to axe a hugely successful coach and a tremendously successful GM over two weeks of unsuccessful hockey that still sees the team over .500. And I'm sure you're certain that their theoretical replacements would be better. That's a hoot. The idea that any replacement of any personnel anywhere will bring about positive change is always uncertain. The idea that you'll be able to easily find better personnel than Holland and Babcock is asinine. They each have their faults, but they're nevertheless amongst the best in the world at their respective positions. All the success the Wings have had has simply bred in many fans a mentality of "More, more, MORE!" It's runaway perfectionism that often does not even remotely meet with reality.

I'm sure I'll get responses along the lines of, "just because things are good doesn't mean that they can't be better." Well, sure, that's true--but there's a line beyond which desire for improvement becomes ludicrous perfectionism born of a complete lack of perspective.

I clearly said I haven't been happy with some of the things he's done for the past few years, not just the previous 5 games. I still stand by everything I said in the first post. Babs rewards players who don't deserve it, and punishes those who don't deserve it. If you somehow can disagree with me, fine, that's your opinion, but I guarantee most of the posters here don't disagree.

#2222756 Something Funny

Posted by Lonewuhf on 04 November 2011 - 01:45 PM

You people need to hug each other and be friends.

NO, Crymson smells bad and isn't funny and I hate him!

#2222620 Something Funny

Posted by Lonewuhf on 04 November 2011 - 03:11 AM


Yes, it was a deliberate move. This guy is known for being a massive troll. Funny stuff.

This was already posted bro, you of all people should have known this.

#2222617 F*** YOU Player X

Posted by Lonewuhf on 04 November 2011 - 03:06 AM

F*** YOU Filppula: seriously, how many times does the coaching staff have to tell you to shoot before you actually start shooting? you may be the most frustrating player on this team because of your reluctance to use your talent. (1 shot against Calgary)

Fil was either on the 3rd line, or him and Dats had to make up for Clearing giving the puck away every damn time he has it. I cringe every time Cleary, Bert, Franzen, or Hudler touches the damn puck. That said, yes, Fil still needs to shoot more, but at least he's useful when he's not shooting, unlike those 4 shmucks.




In all seriousness, why the f*** are we rewarding these four players after they've played like s*** this entire fricken year? It's now too far into the season to be pulling the "it's only X games into the season" bulls***.

This team has a problem, people who REALLY don't deserve it keep getting way too much fricken ice time, and people who are playing well are shafted. How many damn times do we have to give Cleary, Bert, Franzen, and Hudler chances just to see em failing miserably? I don't care how much they get paid, they're failing hardcore and until they're demoted to 3rd and 4th line, or sat entirely, they're going to continue failing because they have no sense of urgency whatsoever.

#2221606 Datsyuk & Zetterberg have been split up

Posted by Lonewuhf on 02 November 2011 - 12:47 PM





Patrick Eaves did not practice. Babcock said he had a "maintenance day'' and his status in uncertain for Thursday's game against Calgary (7:30 p.m., Fox Sports Net Detroit).

On defense, nothing changed:








Seriously? These lines are going in the wrong direction.

#2220374 Coaching part of the problem?

Posted by Lonewuhf on 30 October 2011 - 10:53 PM

Our second tier players just have this nasty habbit of going cold all at the same time for a lengthy stretch. Also Z needs to get going.

Inconsistency is what makes second tier players second tier, though I wish they wouldn't be so inconsiderate and do it all at the same time :flamingmad:

#2220300 Coaching part of the problem?

Posted by Lonewuhf on 30 October 2011 - 07:24 PM

Then go ahead and change it.

I guess we may as well just change the website name to "Lets go Crymson" since you're obviously the only one that matters.

#2220108 Coaching part of the problem?

Posted by Lonewuhf on 29 October 2011 - 11:34 PM

So after the last game vs the Wild, I've come to the decision that coaching is still a problem. I'm not nearly as confident in Babcock anymore. He's consistently giving players chances that have proven time and time again that they don't deserve them (Cleary, Holmstrom), he refuses to put players together that have worked incredibly well in the past (Dats and Fil), and in the last 5 minutes of the game, he played the same line for seemingly 80% of the time. I don't care how good a line is, those players are going to be too tired to be effective.

We need better decisions behind the bench. We need players who are consistently playing badly to be pushed down to lower lines, so at least they get hungry for top line minutes again. Currently we're just handing players playtime who don't deserve it.

Players like Helm and Fil, who are working their asses off every game aren't getting chances they deserve either. They've been two of the best players this year, and two of the players that are giving more effort than pretty much anyone else on the team.

Dats, Z, and whoever isn't working. They played great for one game, but just plain haven't worked for a long time now. Z still has 3 points and a -4 and yet was given nearly 24 minutes. I don't understand how it works if players who are working hard are still not given opportunities when other players are playing like this. What kind of motivation is it to work hard if someone who's not producing is still given nearly 10 minutes more per game than you and much more PP time than you?

Edit: I'm not bashing Z, I'm just saying he hasn't deserved the play time he's gotten recently. Other players who are playing badly are getting time taken away, but Z is just handed more play time every game no matter how he plays. Same thing goes for a few other players too.

#2217629 Hudler?

Posted by Lonewuhf on 23 October 2011 - 02:10 AM

He's a top-six forward in the KHL.

I c wut u did thar.

#2213933 Good ol' Pierre Mcguire

Posted by Lonewuhf on 10 October 2011 - 01:48 PM

Blaming Claude Giroux for this hit? These announcers are such tools...

#2213595 Messing with the lines already?

Posted by Lonewuhf on 08 October 2011 - 10:15 PM

I understand why he did it, but he did the same thing throughout the entire season last season and none of the players looked like they could trust the other players. I also think one bad period is absolutely no reason to break up lines. Lines are going to have bad nights, and to me breaking up a line for having a bad night shows no trust in your lines.

Haha, you haven't watched the Babcock coached Wings very much I take it.

Actually I do, the above reason is why it's irritating to me.

#2213571 Messing with the lines already?

Posted by Lonewuhf on 08 October 2011 - 09:43 PM

So not even 2 periods into the second game of the season and Babcock is already changing up the lines. I realize that the lines didn't look too good in the first period, but how the hell does he expect any chemistry to be built up between players when he doesn't even keep them together for two games?

#2198415 Still some noise about Wings picking up a top 4 Dman

Posted by Lonewuhf on 13 July 2011 - 11:00 PM

I dunno why Fil keeps getting thrown in the 'potential trade bait' pile... Holland and Babcock have never once even remotely implied that Fil could be traded. According to pretty much every account, they're happy with him.

#2179655 Post-Rafalski summer deals

Posted by Lonewuhf on 25 May 2011 - 03:42 PM

Rafalski retiring makes this summer much different than we all expected. A trade or two is likely to be made, and that could change the team drastically depending on who's traded. My question is, who REALISTICALLY could be traded? Is anyone outside of Dats and Z safe? I know some players have no trade clauses so they're not going anywhere, but after the playoffs I think it'd be hard for them to trade a player like Fil or Bert (think Bert has a NTC anyway). So who's safe and who should be worried?

#2174395 WCSF Game 7 GDT: Red Wings 2 at Sharks 3

Posted by Lonewuhf on 12 May 2011 - 11:03 PM

Haha, f*** this. I really hope that half of thesef****** terrible players on Detroit aren't on the roster next year. f*** the Sharks. GO EAST!

Go find a different team, you seem like the type of "fan" jumps to whichever bandwagon is doing the best.