Jump to content


mackel's Photo

mackel

Member Since 10 Feb 2004
Offline Last Active Mar 31 2014 12:07 PM
*----

#2450431 11/2 GDT: Red Wings 5 at Oilers 0

Posted by Ekmanc on 02 November 2013 - 11:22 PM

Goaltuzzi!




#2450371 11/2 GDT: Red Wings 5 at Oilers 0

Posted by datterberg1340 on 02 November 2013 - 10:35 PM

Smith just can't get his s*** together

I can't believe I used to think he'd be a top pairing guy some day

 

he's playing himself out of the lineup

 

if Big E were healthy, Smith should be the one scratched, not Lashoff




#2428054 Wings Attempting to Re-sign Cleary

Posted by Rivalred on 06 July 2013 - 03:03 PM

States they are going to re-sign him, but haven't yet as they have to clear roster space. So this is pending.

Anyways, looks like Brunner is donzo


#2134758 Ken Daniels on VS?

Posted by Wings_Toledo on 22 March 2011 - 09:09 PM

To me he is pretty much "the voice of the Red Wings," so it's weird hearing him call a game for other teams (I believe he did a Flyers vs. Rangers game a few weeks ago as well). Any time I don't have to listen to Doc Emerick on Versus is a win, in my book. :thumbup:


#2010088 Getflaf for Zetter

Posted by GMRwings1983 on 04 July 2010 - 07:02 PM

Getzlaf had a much better year than Hank and is a younger player with more potential.

Hank is 30 years old and it's doubtful that he hasn't hit his peak already. Hank is better defensively, but Getzlaf is more physical and will only improve defensively. Zetterberg has a tendency now to disappear for stretches at a time.

I know people here are biased, but Getzlaf was a better player last year than Zetterberg, and even though Hank has had great seasons in the past, we have to go by the most recent outing and also realize that Getzlaf hasn't hit his prime yet.

With that said, I'd keep Hank, because I don't like Getzlaf and wouldn't want to see us trade our future captain away. But as far as who the better player is right now, I say it's Getzlaf, and I don't care if every dumb slappy here negs me for actually being objective.