If you need me to point out to you why in 2009 Crosby (who had 103 points in the regular season and 31 in the playoffs) and Malkin (113 points regular season, 36 points playoffs) were as good as Dats and Z were in 2008, there's really no point in continuing.
Did they also play superstar defense and kill penalties? Then they weren't as good.
Edit: None of the players you mentioned have been the best offensive AND defensive players at the same time. None. Only Lidstrom, Dats and Z. Babs surely realizes this, and isn't hedging his bets on trying to find that type of situation again.
You know who will be better next year as well? Detroit. We have two young point producers, a fast, aggressive, shutdown fourth line, a power forward who just had a monster year, and a goalie who won't totally suck in overtimes/ shootouts.
Back end I think a trade would be in our best interest considering the defensemen available are mostly 3rd pairing guys which I'm sure could help but we need a top 4
I think you should stop coming up with excuses for weiss ... Let it go
He's a bust
Had like one 60 pt yr ... He was never gonna be a 60-70pt 2nd line guy here ... Took a chance and didn't work
I agree he is a bust. But neither you, nor Ken Holland, knew that at the time of the trade. People act like Holland traded for a player who was already a bust. Which isn't true. His sports hernia, failure to do anything about it, subsequent surgery, and improper rehab were the death knell of Stephen Weiss' career. All of which happened after the trade.
Nashville was doing great before Cody Franson joined the lineup,after the trade is when Nashville started to fall off of the wagon.
That's fairly spurious. Detroit was doing great before they got Cole and Zidlicky, after which they struggled. But it would be wrong to insinuate that Cole and Zidlicky were the cause of the drop off.
I'd rather have Holland try to find an upgrade on the trade front as opposed to the free agent market. Just not a lot of interesting names, add in the high salaries and you might end up with another Weiss.
A 60 point player who gets injured after the trade and then fails to regain is pre-injury form?
If his wife is rational like he is, she probably wants him to further his career and go for expanded responsibility or a GM spot. I think he likes what he's doing and doesn't much care about career implications.
Or maybe she has ambitions of her own? That would be rational I think.
Or hell, maybe she just wants to stay in the place that's been her home for a decade. Where her kids grew up, and her friends live, and she feels comfortable?
I don't think there's a ton of use speculating about the desires of Mike Babcock's wife. Especially since, unlike her husband, we know jack squat about her as a person.
It's hard to bring up Tatar and Nyquist in a positive light after these last few playoffs. They're old enough now where I wanted to see them take the bull by the horns. Instead, all I saw is that we're in trouble when Datsyuk and Zetterberg retire. Of course, I may be wrong, but you're not right either. We haven't yet seen that these two players are top tier players that can carry us in big moments. They need a star player around them, like a Datsyuk, Giroux, Crosby type for them to excel. Even then they haven't done so in the last two playoffs with Datsyuk and Zetterberg. To me, they look like followers and not leaders.
Dekeyser is a defensive defenseman that can be a top 4 guy. He's not a GR player that people have raved about, because his background had nothing to do with GR. I was talking about Smith and not Dekeyser.
While I don't disagree with your logic, I will say this. Tatar and Nyquist have outperformed Datsyuk and Zetterberg (both regular season and playoffs) at similar points in their careers. Dats and Z weren't very good in the playoffs at all during their first few years. And they were about the same ages when they came into the league (arguably both with MORE experience than Nyquist or Tats).
I agree, there's nothing to guarantee that either of these guys will be stars. But based on the information we have, and observation and comparison to our last two stars, I don't think it's out of the question either. At the very least it's premature to think these two guys are don't improving given their respective ages and experience levels. Consistent 65-70 point seasons is not out of the question for either of them. Which isn't super star talent, but isn't anything to scoff at either.
Well, you eventually need scoring threats...Pulkinnen is a scoring threat and I think he should have been in there somewhere. Ferraro played the last game of the season and then all of a sudden he is a fixture. Not really sure why. I would have scratched him rather than pulks. I like Jurco's "battle" and Andersson...well he was there all year. He did get that fluky goal...
Right, but you're creating one hole to fill another. The Miller-Glendenig-Ferraro line was absolutely steller defensively all series long. They, more than anything else (except maybe Mrazek) kept us in the series. But it's a catch-22. In order to keep Tampa's offense at bay, you had to play our fourth line 18 minutes a night. And if you do that, you won't score much. So you've got to take advantage of the chances you get. We didn't.
Plus don't forget that Pulkkinen wasn't exactly scoring like gangbusters before he was sent down. He's not that much of a scoring threat at this point in his NHL tenure. He's also slow as hell, and Babcock stated he wanted a fast roster to keep up with Tampa.
I think the right decision was made. We played as well as we could have without winning, but in the end we lost to a team that was simply much deeper and more talented than we were. Just like Chicago two years ago.
True. I wasn't so much refuting what he said as just commenting on what has been a common theme about Babcock's potential new teams. There's been a lot of speculation about him going somewhere that he could act as GM as well but I'm not sure what it's based on anything other than the natural assumption that most coaches want more control over their roster.
I'm just not sure that's his style.
I mean, he hired an assistant coach who a few years prior basically wanted to climb onto his bench and kick his ass. The guy apparently thrives on conflict
I knew there was a reason I liked Tony Granato lol.
I'd be really careful about fully trusting Mrazek with the starting job right now. Not because he hasn't been excellent. But because our system limits shots to such a degree that it's a little easier for a young guy to come in and play well. Certainly he had huge games, where he faced a lot of shots and did well, but he also had a lot of games where he didn't face many at all.
If Babs leaves, and the system becomes less (excruciatingly) defensive, Mrazek will face more shots on average. And I'd feel more comfortable if we had a veteran like Howard there for insurance. If the kid plays well, then no sweat. And if he struggles at first, you're safe.
Jurco, yeah, I get that. Smith too. But Pulk hasn't had much of a chance here yet. And you could say the same even for Jurco on some level. Don't get me wrong, I think we overvalue a lot of guys too, but I think there's a chance some of these guys stand to come out looking better than they do right now over the next couple years.
That said, I do think there's something to be said for moving prospects for NHL-ready talent if you can. I'm not one of those whining about all the guys we gave up, and if it meant adding significant pieces to round out this team, I could stand to lose some of our better talent coming up. It's part of the game. You hang onto everybody, you're bound to get burnt, and vice versa. Holland could stand to find more of a middle ground than he has and we might have a more well-rounded defensive group.
I agree. I said as much above. "In all cases I think it's too early to tell just how good they'll be".
As far as moving prospects, I'm not opposed to it. But I'm not in favor of moving prospects for marginally better talent, on much worse contracts. The good thing about hanging onto homegrown players is that you can manage the evolution of their salaries a little bit easier because of restricted free agency, bridge contracts, and (hopefully) hometown discounts. Which is good for the team's cap situation. So unless it's a slam dunk, and the guy you're trading for is WAY better, it's usually best to just keep your guys.
Honestly, I'd rather see Holland overpay in free agency than overpay at the trade deadline.
We scored a whole 2 goals in the last 2 games. I wonder if Pulkinnen was a better option in this series than Ferraro.
As a fourth line winger? I'm not really sure if Ferraro was being counted on to score. The more relevant question would be "I wonder if Pulkkinen was a better option in this series than Jurco or Andersson"?
I still don't think so, but that seems a little more of a fair comparison.