Jump to content

haroldsnepsts's Photo


Member Since 11 Feb 2004
Offline Last Active Jan 29 2015 08:26 PM

#2325993 Player Haters (not so) Anonymous

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 19 August 2012 - 02:01 PM

What a great character Wendel Clark was? I'm pretty sure he's the one that got a match penalty for slashing one of the NHL's nicest and cleanest players(sarcasm don't kill me, I hate Bryan Marchment) in the throat.

I think Sports Illustrated compared Wendel Clark very well with Alex Burrows, very similar players.


That's got to be a joke. Burrows is a yapping, hair pulling, finger biting, d-bag. Clark was a tough player who backed up anything he did on the ice.

I didn't like Clark on the Wings but only because I hated him so much when he was on the Leafs.

#2325990 Should Kronwall have to answer the bell for his hits?

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 19 August 2012 - 01:56 PM

Back in the 80's, and even up to the late 90's Kronwall would've been forced to stand up for himself - clean hit, or not...Intimidation had it's role back then.

With that being said - today's game is much different, and with the rules in place he doesn't have to worry as much about retaliation - although getting jumped can still happen.

Not really, unless he went after a star player.

Back in the 80s and into the 90s players actually accepted that a clean hard hit was part of the game. They'd take a number and get him back later.

Players jumping guys for throwing a clean hard hit is a relatively recent development.

#2325884 2012 Lockout Watch

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 18 August 2012 - 06:53 PM

From Hockey Memes twitter:


Attached File  Weasel.png   277.5KB   13 downloads

#2325882 Should Kronwall have to answer the bell for his hits?

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 18 August 2012 - 06:28 PM

Because beating up Kronwall's face might keep him from charging my guys. I like Krons, but your % is so far off. He leaves his feet 50% of the time. Watch old videos of Vlad if you want to see good hitting technique. Only red wing fans think Krons is clean.

His percentage may be off, but yours is even farther off.

I think Kronwall has left his feet too much in the past, though he was much better this last season. I'm guessing he took notice that the league had been cracking down. But even when he was leaving his feet, it wasn't anywhere near half the time.

He was credited with 113 hits in 2011. There's no way he left his feet 56 times. Raffi Headhunter Torres doesn't even reach those kind of numbers. Kronner would've been called for charging several times and likely been suspended.

#2325854 Should Kronwall have to answer the bell for his hits?

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 18 August 2012 - 03:44 PM

In a perfect world, Kronwall would crush someone with a clean hit, then when some idiot dropped the gloves and went after him, Kronner would start throwing haymakers and drop that guy too. But he's just not that player.

Would I love him to beat the crap out of someone who expects him to fight for a clean hit? Yes.
Should he HAVE to fight for a clean hit? No.

#2325817 Hockey News sees us finishing 7th

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 18 August 2012 - 10:48 AM

Why aren't the Wings considered serious contenders?

Look at the current defensive corps. Kronwall, White, Quincey, Ericsson, Smith and Kindl.

Anything can happen but making predictions based on the current roster I can understand why the Wings are a big question mark.

Hopefully players will step up, but even more importantly hopefully no one gets injured. Can you imagine if Kronwall went down with an injury?

#2325678 2012 Lockout Watch

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 17 August 2012 - 12:23 PM

And the players *don't* want more money? They're being just as greedy as the owners here. I wish everyone would quit acting like the players are being altruistic, and are totally "just out for the fans." If that was the case, why not accept the initial deal? That would get a new CBA in place, and allow the season to start on time. The reason is, the players are greedy too. They see all that pie, and they want more of it than the other guys.

Who has said anything like that?

The reality is the owners are the ones saying they're still losing tons of money so they need to reduce their primary costs, players salaries. This is in spite of making massive amounts more revenue than in 2004.

Judging by the players proposal, they would be more than happy to stick with the current CBA. Instead the owners want to greatly rollback players percentage of hockey related revenue while also reducing the amount of money that is considered hockey related revenue.

Players aren't "in it for the fans." But they want to play hockey and they want their fair share of the money for bringing in billions of dollars for the owners.

I know people make the argument that millions of dollars they currently make is enough, but that's not really a realistic assessment. They are elite level talent and have a job that takes a high physical toll and risk on the their health. Yes they make great money doing it, but because $1 million is great money compared to what most of us make here, that doesn't mean they should just let owners take the rest. If you had an extremely specialized skill that generated billions of dollars in revenue, would you be okay with the owner of the company getting most of the revenue for your skill? Especially if your job was high risk?

Sorry, this ones more on ownership.

#2325543 2012 Lockout Watch

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 16 August 2012 - 03:58 PM

What I want to know is, why aren't the sides getting together with their leadership? I know that Fehr is traveling, but by the time they meet next week, we are going to be 3 weeks away from camps opening. It just seems to me that both sides are just lollygagging around. Where is the sense of urgency? If I was in charge of either side, I would have my calendar clear and ready to negotiate.


Fehr is apparently traveling to several cities to meet with players and suggested that the union and league could meet without the two heads being there, but the reality is there's no way they'd be able to hammer out a deal without the him and Bettman in the room.

It's another game of chicken and it's the fans who lose.

#2325390 2012 Lockout Watch

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 15 August 2012 - 05:30 PM

I agree wholeheartedly that Bettman is a prick, but remember what i was saying about the NHLPA not adding a lot of different issues in their proposal.

From Gary Bettman's statement:

"There's still a wide gap between us with not much time to go," NHL commissioner Gary Bettman told reporters after Wednesday's session. "This is a process that we're going to continue to work hard on. I think there's still a number of issues where we're looking at the world differently."

Bettman says he understands what the NHLPA has put forth, but adds that it isn't a full proposal and he is "disappointed" that he's still waiting for one at this late stage.

I normally don't agree with the Anti-Christ, but I was sort of afraid of this being the answer back from the NHL. The players while being reasonable in their proposal, once again like i said earlier, left out the meat and potatoes of the new CBA. They added jack about contract length and front loading contracts and all that stuff. They want a quick fix and want to play when the scheduled games start, but they need to cover all aspects when they make their counter proposals.

Bettman is just pulling more political bs to try and make the union look bad. It doesn't sound like the players left out the meat and potatoes, they just didn't include everything Bettman would want in there. Which isn't really a surprise considering it's a negotiation.

I don't know that the players didn't cover all aspects. I don't agree with it but it sounds like they don't want contract length limited. So there's not going to be a provision offering that.

And what good is a "full proposal" from the NHL when most of what they proposed is insane?

Just listen to the tone that Fehr takes in his public comments about the CBA negotiations, then listen to Bettman. Bettman takes every opportunity to take shots at the union and threaten lockout. When the NHL took until mid July to give their first proposal to the players union, was he disappointed in the timeline then?

Seems like Bettman's got a case of short man syndrome and loves to wield his power whenever he's given the opportunity. That or he really wants to get the lockout hat trick.

#2325366 2012 Lockout Watch

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 15 August 2012 - 02:07 PM

Bettman's response, from THN's "The Stats Guy"...

He's such a prick.

The NHLPA's response might have been more timely had they known the league's offer would be insane and not worth waiting to see before responding.

#2325190 What do you consider a fair CBA?

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 14 August 2012 - 02:04 PM

3 LOCKOUTS! unacceptable!

This, we already lost a season of a still prime 35 year old Lidstrom. Are we potentially about to lose a season where Dats is 34 and Z is 31?

They're going to have to put an asterisk by total stats for players whose career fell under Bettman's reign because they lost a season and a half (and counting) of hockey and had to suffer through a decade of clutch and grab before the league did anything about it.

#2324662 2012 Lockout Watch

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 10 August 2012 - 02:49 PM

Getting ahead of ourselves aren't we fellas? Just because Bettman says they will lock out doesn't mean there will be one. That crazy bastard in Iran keeps saying he's going to wipe Israel off the map but we haven't see any of that either. So far, it's all theater and should be treated as such.

Bettman has never renegotiated a CBA without a lockout so when he threatens to lock players out again, it's hard not to fear the worst.

#2324492 Top 20 Worst Corsi - 3 Red Wings

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 09 August 2012 - 04:45 PM

I don't put much stock in Corsi stats. I can understand the desire for statistical analysis, but there's just so many variables changing second to second.

Hockey's not baseball (thank god).

#2324491 2012 Lockout Watch

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 09 August 2012 - 04:41 PM

IMHO, there is blame on both sides.

The players and agents are using loopholes in the current CBA to force teams to sign these players to long term deals. The owners are equally at fault for signing those deals. The Red Wings have already been forced to sign Franzen to a long term deal that he could have gotten somewhere else. The owners and GMs want to field great teams, and its hard to do when a couple players are handcuffing the team for 10-15 years in some cases.

As evidenced in any professional sport, if there is a loophole like this and it is exploited by the players, there will be a couple dumbass owners who will sign them. Hell, just a couple months ago, the Red Wings nation was dying to get Suter for 12 years and $80 million, and if Holland couldn't get it done then its his fault. Thats just evidence of a damaged system.

That being said, I am disappointed with Bettman's stance on this. I would hope they would have continued negotiating without a lockout. Now, he wants a lockout if its not done in 5 weeks. Good luck I suppose. I hope there are plenty of late night bargaining sessions scheduled for 5 weeks.

The thing is, in spite of the league making record revenues the owners want a huge reduction in salary by the players. Their biggest requests have little to do with remedying these massive contract lengths and cap hits. Most of their demands are just a money grab. They don't address any of the loopholes.

If there's a third lockout, Bettman should absolutely 100% lose his job. Yes it takes two to tango, but all three stoppages have been lockouts by management, not strikes. And this should be the easiest one to settle of all of them. Bettman has zero diplomacy skills and sets a hostile tone from the get go.

#2323569 Ryan trade is a must!

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 02 August 2012 - 01:26 PM

Are you kidding? Franzen is easily the one of if not the best piece of trade bait the Wings have. The only drawback against him is the length of his contract, but considering his production vs his cap hit he's among the best valued players in the league.

Who cares if he needs a set-up man to produce, he's not paid to be a superstar, he's paid to do exactly what he does every season. Put up around 30 goals and produce around 50-60 pts.

What exactly do Franzens critics expect of him? 40-50 goals? If so he should be making a lot more than 3.95 million a season.

It's been stated several times what Franzen's critics would like from him. Sure 40-50 goals would be great, but I'd settle for a more consistent effort on the ice. When Zetterberg isn't scoring you can still see how hard he's working out there. Trying to get his shots, backchecking, carrying the puck in the high traffic areas.

At his worst Franzen is content to float around, not using his considerable size, and just wing the puck at the net from low-percentage areas.