Jump to content

kipwinger's Photo


Member Since 31 May 2011
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 07:16 PM

#2607335 Babcock granted permission to talk to other teams

Posted by kipwinger on 12 May 2015 - 10:46 AM

Finally, someone who hasn't completely lost their mind regarding the Mike Babcock hype.  This is a good article by the way, totally worth a read.


Tom Renney on Mike Babcock:


“I think he’s in an envious position because he’s so successful. I think if he’s not the best coach in the world he’s in the top three or four guys for sure,” said Renney.


“The one thing is, the organization has to be ready for Mike and Mike has to be ready for it.


“Mike has been at one place a long time. And there’s a certain template there that has stood the test of time for a reason. Quite honestly, that’s with or without Mike. What Mike did was fit into it very, very well and place his own set of demands onto that whole program and make it as successful as it’s ever been.”



#2607333 Babcock granted permission to talk to other teams

Posted by kipwinger on 12 May 2015 - 10:35 AM


Except Toronto fans and some media hated the Clarkson and Phaneuf deals before they even happened. They were ostracized before they even signed the deals in Toronto.


How does that negate anything I said?  If anything, it's only more evidence that free spending, without any consideration of the opportunity cost of doing so, is absurd. 


Any teams that offers Babcock 5 million dollars will ultimately eat every cent of that money.  Not because he's a bad coach, but because he's not a perfect one either.  And even with a top flight GM, organization, players, and support staff, he's managed to win exactly one.  Why?  Because they're hard to win. 


Throwing 5 million dollars at a coach with the expectation that it will cover up for other organizational failures is short sighted and stupid.  And Babs should beware anybody who offers that kind of money, because it's probably indicative of other tendencies to think in the short term, throw money at problems, fail to plan strategically, or have a long term path to success.  In short, it's indicative of all the things that make the Toronto Maples Leafs a bunch of trashy losers. 


Think about every story, or news article, or anecdote you've ever heard where somebody fixed a problem by throwing money at it.  How does that work out for them?  Every rich kid that got out of trouble because his dad could afford a good lawyer.  How does that work out?  Does that person learn anything, get straight, turn their life around, and succeed?  No.  It just ensures that the problem will keep happening. 

#2607325 Babcock granted permission to talk to other teams

Posted by kipwinger on 12 May 2015 - 09:47 AM

How does a coach's salary affect a team with a ton of cash? The only reason Clarkson and Phaneuf are issues is the cap.


Because with that kind of salary comes a dramatic increase in expectations, accountability, scrutiny, and eventually criticism. 


One of the many reasons that the Toronto fans, media, and organization turned on both Phaneuf and Clarkson is because they threw HUGE money at both of those guys, and when they didn't live up to the expectations that came with that money, they were ostracized. 


Babcock would not be immune from the same treatment.  Whatever team pays him that kind of money, be it us or Toronto or anybody else, is going to want a Cup.  And if he can't deliver, there's going to be a problem. 

#2607211 Babcock granted permission to talk to other teams

Posted by kipwinger on 11 May 2015 - 03:35 PM

Paying him 5 million or more, is so dumb.  That's way too much for a coach.  Babs doesn't have a magic wand that delivers Stanley Cups. If you've got a s*** organization, one that's not built for his style of play, or a GM that can't deliver, or a destination that nobody want to go to, Mike Babcock isn't going to change that.  Mike Babcock (@ 5, 10, or 20 million a year) couldn't bring a Cup to Toronto.  It's starting to get to the point where the hype is so great that every outcome will be a let down. 


After tomorrow there will be four coaches vying for the 2015 Stanley Cup.  None of them are named Babcock.  This will be the sixth year in a row that this has been the case.  I know everybody will list 1,000,000,000 zillion reasons why it's not his fault.  But the truth is, Babs isn't a guarantee of ANYTHING.  They didn't hand him a Stanley Cup just for showing up here in Detroit, and they won't hand him one elsewhere.  And about 90% of the teams he could go to will be more incompetent, miserly,  and corrupt than the one everybody thinks he coaches for now.  So why would there be a better result elsewhere?  Because Connor McDavid, or Jack Eichel, or Phil Kessel or blah, blah, blah. 


He's a good coach, but is he so otherworldly good that he's worth that kind of money? Some argue that he's better than Quenneville.  Ok fine.  Is he twice as good as Quenneville? Because he's about to get paid like it.  And when he doesn't deliver, then what?

#2607209 ECSF: Tampa Bay Crying Coopers vs. Montreal Complaining Canadiens

Posted by kipwinger on 11 May 2015 - 03:15 PM

It's partly because our defense is terrible at offense. Every game I watched I was cringing at our transition attempts. Sustained pressure starts with defensemen who can move the puck forward and be relied upon to be part of the offensive cycle.

It felt like there were always 3 players trying to create instead of five, the forwards never even looked comfortable passing back to the defense, which results in poor angle shots and turnovers.

I'm certain there's more to it than that, but our best offensive defensemen are average at best.


I don't necessarily disagree with the general theme you're suggesting, but you're overstating it a bit.  After trading for Zidlicky, we were slightly above average (amongst playoff teams) in terms of defense scoring.  Our best offensive defensemen (Kronwall, Zidlicky, and Dekeyser) had 44, 34, and 31 pts. respectively.  For comparisons' sake, Duncan Keith, Seabrook, and Hjalmarsson (Chicago's top guys) had 45, 31, and 19 points.  I'd even argue that Ericsson, Quincey, and Kindl contributed MORE than you'd realistically expect them to considering two of them are stay at home guys, and one of them played 34 games.  Smith was underwhelming offensively, but that's relative to his talent and pedigree, and not relative to other third pair puck movers around the league.  


And all these guys did that while playing REALLY good defense.  Our shot suppression was impressive, and laudable. 


Again, I'm not trying to disagree too much.  I'd love to have a player or two on the back end who have a more dynamic ability to make plays in the offensive zone.  But our defense was actually MUCH better than advertised. How bad it was is drastically overstated around here (I imagine because in the post-Lidstrom era that's all part of the narrative).  Especially in the playoffs.  Our defense wasn't even bad the one game Kronwall and Zidlicky were out.  So I don't want to blame of lack of offense on that too much.  


Side note: I laughed when I saw the "Is Kronwall a #1 defenseman" thread the other day.  Kronners plays huge minutes, excellent defense, and scores 40+ points a season, but he's not a number 1.  Keith, Pietrangelo, Suter, Byfuglien, Doughty, OEL, all do the the same thing and they're obviously better for some reason. 

#2607184 Free agents this off season

Posted by kipwinger on 11 May 2015 - 01:34 PM

I had no idea patric hornqvist was an nhl star


It's easy to be confused.  Anybody who regularly plays with Crosby or Malkin can look like a superstar.  Just ask Chris Kunitz. 

#2607170 ECSF : (4) Washington Capitals vs. (1) New York Rangers

Posted by kipwinger on 11 May 2015 - 11:54 AM

You heard it here first folks.  Ovechkin with the first ever "Ovechtrick" in Game 7. 


He guaranteed a win, and he'll deliver. 

#2606933 WCSF : (8) Calgary Flames vs. (1) Anaheim Ducks

Posted by kipwinger on 09 May 2015 - 07:45 PM

My kind of penalty

You need your own blog. I'd read regularly.

#2606800 ECSF : (4) Washington Capitals vs. (1) New York Rangers

Posted by kipwinger on 08 May 2015 - 06:35 PM



You know they're both Red, White, and Blue right?



#2606776 Babcock granted permission to talk to other teams

Posted by kipwinger on 08 May 2015 - 03:12 PM


"Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Paul Heyman"


That would rule soooo much. 

#2606770 Babcock granted permission to talk to other teams

Posted by kipwinger on 08 May 2015 - 02:49 PM


How would Hitchcock fare in Detroit?  Or is Blashill definitely the coach if Babcock leaves?


I think Hitch would fare about as well as Babs has lately.  He's a very similar coach.  And yeah, my money would be on Blash.  He's our John Cooper.  He's had considerable success with the guys who will be the future of our organization, and he's been excellent at every level he's coached at.  I don't see why you'd pick anyone else, but that's just me. 


Edit:  If not Blash, I'd give Paul Heyman a shot.  He knows what it takes to manage a champion. 

#2606761 ECSF: Tampa Bay Crying Coopers vs. Montreal Complaining Canadiens

Posted by kipwinger on 08 May 2015 - 02:15 PM


You mean playing your 4th line over your top lines in key moments isn't a good idea?   :glare:


Well if you ask most everyone else, it's the smartest possible thing to do.  Because Mike Babcock did it. 


Another thing to do, and this is probably a long shot, is to play your scorers a lot.  Press offensively.  Control the puck.  And in doing so, make the other team use their 4th line 18 minutes a night and/or render their best player ineffective with defensive assignments.  Nah...what am I saying?  That would never work. 

#2606760 DRW Free Agents / Salary Thread

Posted by kipwinger on 08 May 2015 - 02:07 PM

Ribeiro never really dipped and you can't claim a resurgence under Laviolette. he had 49pts in 48 games in the lockout shortened 12-13. He had one down season in 13-14, but that could be explained by the fact that he was playing for the coyotes. That season is also complicated by the fact that he apparently had some issues with alcohal/partying which lead to him being bought out.


Forsberg just played his first full year so I would think it more plausible that he was getting used to the league in previous years. 


Fair points. If you're ready to attribute Nashville's increase in offense to predominantly those two guys, that's fine.  It doesn't negate the underlying point I was making, which is that coaching style/system can have a significant impact on the productivity of a team. 


Perhaps a better example is how Pittsburgh was significantly better (and won a Cup) after they fired Therrien and hired Bylsma mid season.  St. Louis improved dramatically after hiring Hitchcock mid-season.  Anaheim did the same when they hired Boudreau mid-season and got rid of Carlyle.  Los Angeles improved, AND won the Cup after firing Murray and replacing him with Sutter mid-season.  In each instance the roster was essentially the same.  In each instance the team was significantly better afterward. 


Having the right coach for the right roster is critical.  Babs is a really good coach.  With a different roster he'd have more success.  Hell, he had quite a lot of success with our previous roster.  But with our current group of guys, he hasn't shown that he can take them to the next level.  If we don't consider the possibility that maybe there's a better fit, then the only other option is to tear the team down and rebuild one that Babs can win with.  Which is totally unrealistic, and also totally unnecessary.  Particularly given the fact that we've already got a coach in the system who knows how to win with our current guys. 

#2606746 ECSF: Tampa Bay Crying Coopers vs. Montreal Complaining Canadiens

Posted by kipwinger on 08 May 2015 - 12:57 PM

Fair enough. I tend to agree with your sentiment. But it's still May and I'm still pissed about the outcome of our series. That's why I go with hate toward him right now. That and I think he's a punk. But yes, that grit or toughness or "compete level" (a term I think is such a lame cliche) that Johnson has is something I'd like to have seen from Gus or Tatar. Hell, if either of them had shown a little of that the Wings would've finished the series in game 5.


I don't think the difference between Johnson and Tatar/Nyquist was "toughness, grit, or compete level".  I think, to a large extent, it was because Tyler Johnson was on the ice a lot more than Nyquist and Tatar were.  He averaged 18:51 in ice time per game, while Tatar and Nyquist were 15:56 and 15:50 respectively. 


Also, our powerplay wasn't very good and that affected their production totals as well. 

#2606584 DRW Free Agents / Salary Thread

Posted by kipwinger on 07 May 2015 - 02:42 PM


I don't see what you see.  Anytime Helm and Abby are playing in the top 6 you can't call this a skill roster.


Tats showed up for 1-2 games in the playoffs playing against the other teams 3rd/4th line.  Nyquist mostly disappeared, Jurco had a horrible year, and Pulkkinen didn't really translate to the NHL even with all the power play time he was given.  Weiss is in the coaches dog house so I won't touch that one.  He made some mistakes and Babs never let him have a chance to recover.


I don't see how playing people who can't get it done against 3rd and 4th lines in the top 6 is going to make things better.


I know you don't.  My point, is that part of the problem is that the Red Wings are trying to make a team full of guys drafted on skill into a team full of blue collar "hard working types".  Rather than finding a coach, or playing a system, which compliments and develops their predominant skillset. 


This team has a much higher likelihood of success if Tatar, Nyquist, Pulkkinen, and Jurco reach their ceilings than if Glendening, Helm, Abby, Ferraro, or Miller do.  Why?  Because the ceiling is higher. Babs is excellent at developing grinders and physical guys.  He's not been as good at developing skill players.


The answer shouldn't be "change the whole roster to fit Mike Babcock's system", the answer should be "find a coach that can maximize the potential of this roster". 


You're putting the cart before the horse.  Babcock's system would be lethal in Winnepeg or Columbus but the roster on those teams is conducive to his style.  John Cooper, Alain Vigneault, or Peter Laviolette's systems would be better for the current Wings.  So, maybe we should find someone like that eh?