I'm not so sure they're so comparable. Frk is bigger and can protect the puck better against bigger guys so his speed is less of an issue than Pulks. Plus I think he gets his shot off quicker, but that's just my assessment. Frk reminds me of a poor mans Vanek or Moulson. Both are slow, but big enough to play in high traffic areas.
Do we even have mods anymore or what? Frank makes homosexual slurs in another thread, with no discipline associated, and now this guy's comments? I thought the rules on offensive posts were pretty clear but apparently that doesn't matter if nobody does anything about it.
You're the only person I've ever heard call Radulov soft. Makes me think you're just throwing around pejoratives in an attempt to justify your dislike for him post hoc.
Radulov is a lot of things, but "soft" isn't one. He's very tenacious and aggressive for a goal scorer. He's not likely to punch anybody, sure, but the guys ain't "soft". Maybe an *******, but not soft.
I agree with this perspective to a point and John Oliver did a solid episode on publicly funded arenas. I've heard arguments on the other side that also sway. I've seen that the arena is estimated to cost $627M and could go higher. Even though Ilitch is personally worth 5 billion+, I doubt his company has that amount of free cash to spend at one time so I understand if a certain amount coming from government funding.
One thing to consider on the naming issue, is that the Ilitches have essentially turned away a huge amount of money by not selling the naming rights to another company. Maybe it's their interest to have the advertising (although I don't think it's that much extra exposure - we all knew the new arena would be lined with Little Ceasars venders, signage, and they would give free pizzas at the games just like they do at the Joe). But think of the alternative of them taking a huge amount of public money and then using the arena to bring in an extra money to cover part of their end (Blues got 70 million for 20 years naming rights for the Savvis center for a random example) Probably everyone would prefer Howe arena or honoring some local hero, but I think Little Ceasars is the best option for corporate naming.
I get WHY public funding is often necessary, I'm not even against public funding. I just think that if you're going to accept public funding for your teams new arena you should probably make an effort to represent and validate their contribution rather than be wholly greedy and promote your brand to their exclusion.
I know, how dumb we are for preferring the name reflect the culture, history, or people of our great city instead of acting as an advertisement for sub par pizza. Perhaps we should build an alter to Mike Illitch in Campus Martius Park and ritualistically bow each time we pass since idol worship is now something to be proud of.
The arena is partially financed with public funds, so its not asking too much to have the name reflect the public, and not corporate, interest.
But that's just me. I'm a dreamer...who also played attention in civics class. Now if you'll excuse me, Living Colour's "Cult of Personality" just came on the radio and I need to go practice being slavish.
Dombrowski finished last in the division with one of the leagues highest payrolls. Hardly comparable to a guy who made the playoffs while transitioning his team to a new generation for the second time.
Agreed (with some caveats). And he STILL made the playoffs, so what's the problem? Unless you're suggesting that he will never improve upon his mistakes this year? I believe he probably will as he gains more understanding and confidence at the NHL level. I don't expect a rookie coach with a mediocre team to have all the answers right away. I DO expect him to learn and improve as he gains experience. He made the playoffs as a rookie, as his power play and player usage improve (which they should after a full off season to analyze the team, and some new assistants), so will the teams success.
You're splitting hairs. He's won one more playoff game and had what 2 more regular season wins? If he's "better" the difference is negligible. Efforts to paint Blashill as some kind of failure are almost entirely attributable to a frustrated fan base which is unaccustomed to transitioning teams.
Not really. Holland was a key part of selecting Lindstrom, Ferdorov, Konstantinov, Kozlov, McCarty, Lapointe, and Osgood as director of scouting before he was GM. Then he was instrumental in drafting Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and Kronwall. Stevie gets credit for Johnson, Kucherov, Palat, and Sustr, but he had NOTHING to do with Stamkos and Hedman.
As far as player acquisition goes, Holland gets credit for Hasek, Hull, Robitaille, Rafalski, and Chelios. Stevie gets credit for Bishop, Garrison, Stralman, Filppula, and Callahan.
No matter how you cut it, Holland was instrumental in building a dynasty. Stevie, while not entirely bad, hasn't drafted or acquired nearly the talent Holland has. Trying to divorce Holland from the Wings success, past and present, requires such a stretch of imagination as to make such an argument absurd.