That's like saying, minus that Superbowl half time show, he's really kept a low profile. TSN is the biggest media source for hockey, and hockey related information. And Darren Dreger (and perhaps McKenzie) is it's most high profile contributor.
Mike Babcock is notorious for shutting down reporters and/or interviews the second he doesn't like something they asked. Watch any of his post game comments (particularly after loss) and he couldn't be more combative. Yet suddenly he's doing sit down interviews, and discussing his through process, etc. and I'm NOT supposed to believe he wants it that way?
One sentence, exactly one, would have put an end to this crap a year ago.
"I don't discuss contract negotiations publicly, you'll know about it once I've signed the contract".
With Ken Holland by his side. But it's just Babcock wanting this? He could've done it because Holland asked him to. He could've done it as a favor to Dreger. He could've done it because he really loves all this attention. No one has any actual idea what his motivations are, so who cares?
And no, that one sentence would have done little to end this crap. There was tons of media coverage and speculation before that TSN interview. If he said he doesn't negotiate publicly, it would just be the same endless speculation we're having now.
Honestly I'm surprised at the amount of coverage this whole thing is getting but as an American not living in the Detroit area, I didn't realize how big Canada's fixation on him would be after the Gold medal wins.
This is like an episode of The Bachelor". Everybody is waiting to see if Mike will give Ken Holland the rose.
Not at all. It's insane. There is literally up to the minute articles, tweets, interviews, etc. with every commentator under the sun, all speculating on where he'll end up. #Babswatch is trending on Twitter as we speak.
If the whole process disgusts you so much, why follow it so closely? It's like repeatedly drinking spoiled milk.
I don't blame him for not showing all of his cards when it comes to what he wants or is looking for...
I'm sure in talking to other teams, he's gotten a lot of different offers with a lot of different levels of opportunity.
I certainly don't blame Babcock for not saying that part of the decision is the money... he's already got people that think it's all about the money anyway.
...but as far as winning goes. Yes, Detroit has the better chance of winning a Cup sooner than Buffalo does.
HOWEVER, if we continue in the same trajectory with players, types of off-season/in-season/trade-deadline moves, coaching, etc. are we any closer to doing anything more than what we've been doing for the past few seasons.
I'm torn about whether I want him to stay or go and I really don't care how much he gets paid.
I'm just glad this should all be over by tomorrow and we can end "Babwatch"
Agreed about not showing his cards. Imagine interviewing for jobs and talking publicly about every aspect of your thought process, especially when you may stay and still respect your current employer.
What's he supposed to say?
"It's not entirely about the money, but frankly Kenny's offer was so low it ticked me off a bit and I think maybe they undervalue me here."
"I feel like my message may have gotten stale in the locker room and I'd do better with a new team that has some top end prospects."
"I don't have faith that Holland will be able to do much more than make small tweaks to this team in the next few years, and that's not going to get us a Cup."
"I'd really like a change but my family really wants to stay here. So I have to sell them on the idea of moving and really have to be sure about where I'm going."
People seem to latch on to a few things Babcock has said publicly but have to remember this is a job interview process and he can't or shouldn't talk about 90% of what's going on.
So Babcock didn't have any say in Samuelsson and Bertuzzi taking icetime away from Nyquist and Tatar for several years? How about Cleary's return? All Holland's fault? Babcock is partly responsible for this "overripe" crap.
Playing your 4th line 15+ minutes in big games is also Babcock's fault. He gives the wrong people more icetime and has the worst line combos of any coach I've ever seen.
Defense wise, I agree he doesn't have much to choose from. There's no way to mix and match our defense pairings and not get an underwhelming lineup together there.
We've discussed this before. I feel Babcock is equally responsible for those decisions. I have a hard time believing that Holland made unilateral decisions on signings and trades without consulting Babcock at all. If so, then by all means, let's fire Kenny only. But I don't think so.
Right. Which makes little sense to me. You're blaming Babcock equally for what is 100% Holland's responsibility.
Of course the decisions aren't without input from others. Just like Babcock consults people in his decisions. But their disagreeing on rosters has been well documented over the years. And even if Babcock has Holland's ear and is lobbying for these things, it's still ultimately Holland's job to decide what's best for the team in those situations. If giving too much weight to his coach's opinions is causing him to make bad decisions, it's still absolutely Holland's fault.
And frankly if that's the case, that's even worse and Holland should probably go. He's there to run the team, not be a patsy for his coach.
Here's a fun fact, Babs' last contract extension was in October, 2010. By that time he'd already won an Olympic gold and gone to the finals twice. And all those accomplishments could/should have been used in the negotiations for that contract.
What's he done since 2010 that would nearly double his last contract? Win one Olympic gold and two playoff series?
Earned Holland a 5-year contract extension by getting Kenny's mediocre rosters into the playoffs year after year?
I'd certainly agree that throwing money around can (initally) legitimize a franchise. It's worked pretty well in Minnesota up to this point. But eventually you're going to have to deliver on those expectations. Suter and Parise flat out legitimized Minnesota's organization. Buying those guys instantly made them a credible player in the league's "power structure" (my term). But if that's all the signings ever accomplish, I think you'll have a hard time arguing that it was a success.
Toronto is already as high profile as it can possibly get. Everybody already knows they're willing to spend more money than anybody else to get what they want. The only thing keeping Toronto from credibility is the fact that they can't seem to win when it matters. If they give Babs 5+ million, they'll be expecting him to do exactly that. If he doesn't, I don't see how they can consider the deal a good one.
I don't disagree. I wasn't so much arguing that teams throwing money around was a sound strategy from a hockey perspective, but that it can still be from an ownership perspective. And they definitely have limited shelf life if the team still isn't winning, though that shelf life can still last several seasons. I think the Suter and Parise signing has handicapped the Wild, but it's also gotten then them into the playoffs three years in a row, twice into the second round. From an owner's perspective I'm guessing that's paying off financially.
Basically I'm just saying "win when it matters" doesn't necessarily mean you have to win the Stanley Cup for it to be a financial success.
As for Toronto, who the hell knows how that will go. I'm still surprised they fired Carlyle. I'm sure Babcock would be paid extremely well to go there, and I can kinda understand the dream of turning that franchise around, but you have to believe you'll have the support you need and will be put in a position to succeed. I don't think you can say that about the Leafs organization, unless Shanny has some master plan he's not revealed yet.
I think there is a very high chance that Babcock stays in Detroit. I think the Wings are his best option (best chance to win now and in the future) of the teams on the board, and his family want to stay in Michigan. In saying that, I've had mixed feelings throughout this entire process and I still remain up in the air in what I would like to see happen. Part of me wants to keep Babcock and another part thinks it's time for both he and the team to move on, and promote Blashill as the new head coach. I don't see it being at all likely that we keep both, so if we do keep Babcock then we will most definitely lose Blashill. What if Babcock does decide to re-up for just one season at a time? We lose Blashill this year and Babcock next year? I think Kenny is smarter than to allow that to happen.
I do think Babcock is very over rated and I get sick of some of his strategies and line mash ups, so I am leaning toward wanting Blash to take over. He's a great coach, and I believe he will likely win another Calder Cup with the kids this season. That will be 2 Championships in 3 years. I know the American League isn't anything close to the same as the National League but I do believe he can translate that same success to the NHL. He knows all the kids just as well or better than anyone in the system and I think he would continue doing a great job developing these guys with the big club.
I understand he's "Canada's coach" or whatever but it's definitely been a bizarre process, particularly him and Kenny sitting side by side for the TSN interview (Though the tracking of the Sabre's owners plane is pretty insane too). If he does stay in Detroit, I'm trying to figure out what piece of information Babcock needed to finalize this decision that he didn't already have, unless this really was about using other offers as leverage to get his offer to market value and the money being there from Holland was polite talk.
It just puts an odd tone to things if he stays. I guess the positive outlook is that he saw what was out there and decided the Red Wings were still the best, but the flipside is, why didn't you believe that all along?
If it were about how the kids played this season, he already has that info. And Holland can't make any promises about landing free agents. Or if he does they don't really mean much because it's something that isn't under his total control, and he hasn't had a great track record lately anyway.
I guess there's the possibility Babcock wonders if he's losing the room, which he seemed to mention in the interview. But again, going to other teams doesn't answer that.
I don't really follow the Griffins but for those who want Blashill, isn't there a great chance it's very much the same style? I thought part of the reasons the kids could come up to the Wings so seamlessly (other than over-ripeness) is the similarity of the systems.
Babcock calls guys out all the time. He's done so with Kindl and Weiss recently. And justifiably do. He's done so with White, Commodore, Smith, and even Hudler in the past. Why is it no problem when Babs calls out a pro, but Jimmy D does so with a prospect?
Again, I see no reason to poo poo the kid. The league, and/or the world, don't give a s*** how sensitive this kid is treated. You either get over the hump or you don't. That's on him. But I don't think the organization deserves praise and/or criticism for how delicately they treat an adult man.
I turned 21 in Baghdad, Iraq. Nobody worried about my feelings, or all the intangibles, when I got performance feedback. If you sucked, they said you sucked, and you fixed it. I don't know why this kid deserves more. Because pro hockey is so hard? Maybe, but I'm not buying it.
For me it's not that it might have hurt Mantha's feelings. When the coach does it, it's one thing. It's usually a calculated move. This just seems so random. Especially because he makes it sound like the Wings have already given up on the kid.
I don't really follow the prospects that closely but has Mantha been benched, or even criticized publicly by anyone before this? For the Senior VP of the NHL club to call out a minor league player is pretty much going nuclear. And isn't something I can ever remember the Wings doing ever before. It's just odd, which makes me think it was Devellano running his mouth more than a plan to light a fire under the kid.
It's it's true it's very unprofessional, and if it's true it doesn't surprise me.
Prust is an idiot so it's not exactly coming from the best source. But there are certain refs who seem to get amped up during a game and forget they're not one of the players. McGeough was a prime example.