The difference now is the Caps hired a world class coach, someone who will teach and expect defensive responsibilities from everyone. Add to that that Niskanen signing and although overpaid Orpik is a hitting machine so their defense is extremely improved. Caps are going to make the playoffs. The Wings barely made the playoffs last season so with the caps in I think the chances of the same roster making it this year are...very slim. Yeah Boston lost their best scorer but they are still a top team. Isles did nothing to improve their defense they will be a better team but I don't think they are playoff bound. Toronto, Carolina, New York, Ottawa and Detroit have to hope that some of the 8 better teams will have a subpar season.
I'm sorry but I think it's completely ridiculous that you're grouping us in with those teams.
I agree. But in addition to the whole dad dying thing, he also was a real good sport about starting the season on the bench after he had clearly played his way onto the team, as well as being a good sport about spending probably a year longer in the AHL than he needed to.
Tatar, despite what some folks think, has had a really good attitude the entire time he's been in Detroit. I think fans just get worried because he'd the kind of guy who says he's disappointed when he is, or pissed off, or whatever. So they always think he's got an attitude. He doesn't. He's just up front about how he's feeling, which is unique for a Red Wing.
I totally understand why he's gotten frustrated in relation to starting on the bench and spending a while in the AHL.
In fact I think that's a positive thing. It shows he has drive and wants to prove himself and keep getting better.
That's not what rubs me the wrong way.... It's the fact that he vents his frustrations to the press.
If you don't like the way you're being handled as an hockey player/employee/human being then express that to your agent/boss/GM, not The Detroit news and various Czech newspapers.
How many other Red Wings do you see doing that?
So to clarify... I think he has the right attitude. He's just immature in how he deals with it.
Yea they won't let a former first round pick just go away for nothing. Especially not after the Quincey debacle. I could see them trading him away for maybe like a 5th or 6th rounder, but they wouldn't just let him go like that.
Why would any GM give up anything for Kindl and his contract when a guy like Del Zotto is available for free and on a lesser contract.
Me too... I think Tatar is a guy who we and management severely under rate. And since many of our younger players are held down in the minors I don't have a problem with them wanting to get paid once they finally get promoted. For many of them their NHL careers are 1-2 seasons shorter than they would be with any other organization.
I very much disagree with that. I think because they develop longer they end up better players because of it and thus make more money.
I still remember when Tatar was venting to the media a while back about how tough it was to watch Cory Conacher playing in the NHL when he knew he was just as good.
Well....look at how that worked out for each of them....
The concern shouldn't be: do we re-sign them? The concern should be: will we destroy our relationship with them trying to lowball them. Quite frankly I bet Tatar looks at the Cleary deal and says "I'm worth double that.". And frankly, its silly for Holland to get stingy with the good players and throw wallets at the bad ones. Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk 2
You don't compare UFAs with RFAs. Cleary to Tatar and earlier mentioned was Dekeyser to Quincey. It doesn't work like that...
On a side note....I can see the Tatar negotiations taking a while. Tatar expects to be PAID....
Well for starters, identifying the actual truth about a subject informs the public. And since the Red Wings, like all other businesses, are dependent on the public for revenue they are generally are very amenable to public opinion.
Those types of questions also help inform management too. One of the biggest mistakes any decision maker can make is thinking that their way is the best way, or their thought process cannot be criticized. The press acts as a sounding board for decision makers all the time. Ken Holland is not different.
Finally, asking relevant questions and ensuring that the answers provided are accurate and reliable is also the whole point of having journalism in the first place. If you'd rather they didn't ask questions, then why do you bother reading news? Just have the Red Wings twitter and facebook posts sent to your smart phone and move on if you don't care if the news is accurate or not. However I suspect, since you do go out of your way to consume news (by your own admission), that you'd likely prefer that the news you get is being collected and distributed in accordance with best possible industry standards and not just phoned in.
But you're acting as if, if the right questions were asked, Holland would be all forth-coming with "the truth".
He has his famous sayings.. "I like our team" etc. for a reason. They don't have to answer to us whether we like that or not.
Success has granted them some leniency in that department. If that continues downward I don't expect them to turn to their fan-base for direction.
Again, I read the Wings media reports to get updates on players (reports, stats, facts) and read opinion pieces to better reflect on my own. Not to read Holland Q&As.
I didn't say a word about Toronto and you're misrepresenting my point to the extreme in order to validate your own. Surely you'd agree that there's a happy middle ground between "not questioning the organization at all" and "being endlessly combative for the sake of validating oneself".
I don't think anybody should second guess each and every single little roster decision the coach or GM make. But I also don't it would be asking too much if the next time Ken Holland said "We don't want to overpay for free agents", a member of the media would respond "didn't you just overpay for Cleary and Quincey? Why is it ok in those instances?"
I said "more like" which is true and *not extreme at all. Besides I think that's a slippery slope and hard to find a middle-ground.
Bottom-line I rely on the beat writers for daily factual updates and the columnists for opinion pieces.
I could care less if Holland is posed with those questions. What does that accomplish?
*Ok maybe it was a little extreme after re-reading my comment.