I don't consider Brunner a bust. Not a whole lot was expected of him and he was decently effective in his short stint with us. For a very short time, the line of Nyquist-Andersson-Brunner was kinda sorta awesome.
If AA and Mantha can't outplay Vanek then they need more time in the minors.
A catch-22 is a paradoxical situation from which an individual cannot escape because of contradictory rules. An example would be: To apply for a job, you need to have a few years of experience. But in order to gain experience, you need to get a job first.
I get the frustration, but I personally think the Nielsen signing was needed. We couldn't go into the season with Zetterberg / Sheahan / Larkin as our top 3 centers. Zetterberg needs his minutes cut, Larkin isn't ready for number one center duty, and while Sheahan can play 2nd line center in a pinch, I think he's better suited in the bottom 6. I'm one of the few that wanted Helm back, and while it may be half a mil too high and a couple years too long, I think it was a good signing. Vanek is a low risk, high reward signing, but I would have preferred to see a kid get that spot. The Miller and Ott signings are a complete joke... Without the latter three signings we could have had a few more spots open for the kids, who are mostly deserving of spots anyway... Of the players that you mentioned though, I only think Athanasiou and Mantha are ready to be full time NHLers. I'm completely fine with Bertuzzi spending another season in Grand Rapids, and honestly, I don't see Nosek as a high quality NHL player anyway. He might be a decent 3rd line center, but I'd much rather have Helm or Sheahan fill that spot...
The Nielsen signing was absolutely necessary. I'm just painting an overall picture. We signed three past-their-prime veterans (at least one of which we absolutely, positively do not need in any way, shape or form) and re-signed two past-their-prime veterans (at least one of which we absolutely, positively do not need in any way, shape or form). I see a lot of people looking at these signings and saying a trade must be coming. I look at these signings and ask, "How is this any different from last year, or the year before that, or the year before that, or the year before that?"
If it's anyone, it's going to be Fowler. It is well known that Holland wants him. More than one hockey insider has said that's his target. Things could change of course...
I still think it'll cost us a fwd, D and prospect. It'd be nice if we could get away with a fwd and prospect D. Of course that would make Smith #7 again.
It'll be Fowler, Edler, Quincey, or Tyutin. Because Red Wings.
The thing that continues to piss me off: I know there are deals out there, ready to be made. We all know it, whether we want to admit it or not. This whole "trades are impossible" situation isn't about other GMs asking for far too much, it's about Holland being completely and utterly unwilling to part with a single significant asset. (Unless we're getting an over-the-hill rental at the trade deadline, in which case Holland will give away young assets like they're going out of style. Because Red Wings.) I mean, sure, things would be easier -- on multiple fronts -- if we had more pieces that other GMs find decidedly super-attractive, but you know what those pieces tend to be? Young, hugely talented high-end players. The kind Holland actively hates, because "They don't know how to play without the puck" and because "Kids aren't the answer" and blah blah f****** blah. Because Red Wings.
A catch-22 is a paradoxical situation from which an individual cannot escape because of contradictory rules. An example would be:
To apply for a job, you need to have a few years of experience. But in order to gain experience, you need to get a job first.
Catch-22s often result from rules, regulations, or procedures that an individual is subject to but has no control over because to fight the rule is to accept it. Another example is a situation in which someone is in need of something that can only be had by not being in need of it. One connotation of the term is that the creators of the "catch-22" have created arbitrary rules in order to justify and conceal their own abuse of power.
[ . . . . ]
Joseph Heller coined the term in his 1961 novel Catch-22, which describes absurd bureaucratic constraints on soldiers in World War II. The term is introduced by the character Doc Daneeka, an army psychiatrist who invokes "Catch 22" to explain why any pilot requesting mental evaluation for insanity—hoping to be found not sane enough to fly and thereby escape dangerous missions—demonstrates his own sanity in making the request and thus cannot be declared insane. This phrase also means a dilemma or difficult circumstance from which there is no escape because of mutually conflicting or dependent conditions.
"You mean there's a catch?"
"Sure there's a catch," Doc Daneeka replied. "Catch-22. Anyone who wants to get out of combat duty isn't really crazy."
There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he was sane, he had to fly them. If he flew them, he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to, he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.
(Catch-22 is one of the greatest novels ever written, IMHO.)
They can't become good nhl players if Holland blocks them from playing because of Helm and Glendening
Exactly. I hate the Helm extension and the Glendening extension, largely for this very reason.
After the Streak ends or the record is broken, change will happen.
I doubt it.
"Y'know, we only missed the playoffs by a couple points. If we win one more shootout, we're probably in. And once you're in, you've got as good a chance as any other playoff team. At the end of the day, we're a team in transition. We like our team. I know there are people who want us to tank, but I've never bought into that kind of thinking. We're gonna keep doing what we've been doing. We're not going to blow everything up because we missed the playoffs by a couple points."
We'd have to miss the playoffs by a country mile. (And even then, I dunno.) If it's close, we stick with the status quo. Because Red Wings.
Our best/only hope: kids. More specifically, we need a new prime-years Datsyuk and a new prime-years Zetterberg. I think Larkin is (going to be) that good. I think Athanasiou has that kind of top-end potential. I think Mantha can grow into a new prime-years Franzen. I've always felt Mrazek has Vezina potential. I think Saarijarvi is an elite talent. But it's probably going to be several years before Holland and Blashill are willing to truly hand the keys over to the next generation. Because kids have to "earn it," or some such bulls***.
Holland doesn't believe that young kids are the answer. I'm not going to say if he's right or wrong
It's not a black-or-white, all-or-nothing issue. Holland's making it one, but it's not one (or, it shouldn't be one).
The team needs more youth. It doesn't need all youth. It needs more youth. And more skill, more talent, more high-end ability. Greater possession prowess. Goal scoring. Being able to play without the puck. Young legs. Size. These are things we're lacking. These are things that an Athanasiou or a Mantha can provide, and for a dirt-cheap cap hit--and neither of these players has even come close to hitting his respective ceiling yet.
We're looking more and more like the Canadiens, and that's not a good thing. It's a bad thing. All this garbage about Grit and Character and Experience and Playing Without the Puck and Veteran Leadership and Knowing Your Place and Earning Your [insert whatever the hell it is you're supposed to be "earning"] -- it's all bulls***. And, accordingly, we'll be lucky to make the playoffs this season, just like 2015-16, 2014-15, 2013-14, 2012-13.
I cant wait for other GM's to lowball KH on every trade offer this offseason as they know he HAS to make a trade.
He's going to re-sign Quincey. That'll be his excuse for not making a trade.
"Well, we feel Kyle Quincey is a real good player in this league. Real good defensively. Heavy on the puck. Big body. Plays with a bit of an edge. He can play on any pairing. He's versatile like that. We feel he's a real important part of our team and he's going to continue to be one as we move forward and compete for a Cup."
Wow quite a lot of money. He has to be one of the most enigmatic players for LGW. On one hand he's a fourth liner. Period. On the other, Babcock and now Blashill are more than comfortable giving him extended minutes in all situations atypical for a fourth liner. One coach doing it is maybe poor judgement, but two? I'm happy he will remain with Detroit but this seems like overpayment.
The Red Wings fetishize stupid things that don't -- or barely -- contribute to winning.