Again, who cares about ratings and who cares about a sexy NY vs LA final. I think the key point made above that this series sets us up with two string teams playing EXCELLENT hockey and affords us the best series possible now. Let's face facts, the Rangers end the playoffs at 10-10, they weren't exactly worldbeaters.
I think two teams who forecheck HARD, two teams that are FAST and one young gun netminder vs the legend makes for great storylines. The glamour and gitz of LA vs the tough as nails Tony Soprano Jersey attitude.
It's more than the ratings that people are griping about. Rags and Kings would've been a very interesting series, the way they stack up against each other. Not that this one won't be interesting, but - and I guess this is the big thing, really - haven't we seen enough of the godforsaken New Jersey Devils in the Stanley Cup Finals for one lifetime? And about Brodeur - I'd rather see Lundqvist and Quick battle for his crown. Now THAT would be a great storyline, IMO.
Zack Parise and 30 goals aren't going to help you against Nashville or St.Louis
Do we need to get bigger and tougher? Yes. Do we need a legitimate goal-scoring threat? Yes. Do we [insert any one of our numerous other issues]? Yes.
So many people here seem to honestly believe it all boils down to one thing. "We lost to the Predators because [insert one thing]." I know we all have our axes to grind. I know we all have our pet gripes with the team (or else, with the people who have pet gripes with the team). But let's be fair and objective.
The thing is he will get offered insanely high contracts by teams that need to do so. And as you said yourself, we're not the only contenders. In 2-3 years we might not even be that if Holland can't flip the age factor while keeping the talent and production relatively linear. Which would be impressive and awe inspiring if you ask me. It also doesn't help that we haven't done much of anything in the playoffs recently despite getting there against beatable teams. I would have more confidence if I thought Detroit was still THE place to be when it came to FA's. I think they look now and see a team declining unfortunately.
Someone yesterday brought up that Detroit ought to keep there eye on Tomas Tatar.The response was that Detroit didn't need another 5'10" 180lb forward,well isn't that what Zack Parise is?
Semin 6'2" 209ibs
Not gonna comment on Tatar, as I haven't seen enough of the guy to have a truly informed take on him.
Parise is 5'11, 195. His game's not unlike Helm's - and he's good for ~30 goals a season and clutch posteason performance.
Semin's lazy, often half-interested (at best), not physical, not good for use on the PP or PK - it's a long list. We want to get less lazy, see less floating, be more engaged and aggressive on the forecheck & backcheck and in the corners and in front of the opposition's net, be more defensively responsible, be more committed to winning.
Agreed, and I'm not expecting to find anybody with Fedorov's skill set any time soon. But driving, even without having the ability to finish by one's self, increases the likelihood of rebounds, junk goals, etc. In a perfect world we'd have a power forward that could do it, but I'm more concerned with guys doing it either way. If Parise does it, that's super. I'd like to see Flip doing it more too. It's important to remember that while Fedorov was pretty tall, we wasn't all that heavy, and was by no means a power forward. I was able to drive like that because of his skating ability and puck handling skills. Flip has both as well. s*** even Helm has both (though obviously doesn't finish well). All in all, I agree with your assessment, but wonder if it's a coaching thing rather than the fact that we just don't have the guys who can do it?
Feds was a reasonably big 6'3, if memory serves. Like you said, not a true power-forward - but he was very strong, sturdy, solid on his feet, and very capable physically.
There are, I think, a number of reasons why we generally don't drive the net. A big one (IMO) is the puck-possession game we play. Driving the net means the guy who's on net duty is bringing the puck to the crease himself. The way we play, on the other hand, our net presence is typically for setting up screens and pursuing rebounds. In this context, driving the net is - sort of ridiculously - a somewhat rash, selfish, immature play, because we're all about establishing the cycle and being patient and poised while we try to find the right perimeter shot.
I have issues with this, but that's the system, and the system dictates the makeup of the roster, and when you've got a roster with all of four or five guys that are capable of driving the net, and only maybe two of them (at best) are doing it on a consistent basis, you're not going to change the system. (Hello self-reinforcing cycle thing.)
I don't think Gaustad's the second coming of Gretzky. No one does. I DO think he'd help.
"ZOMG he doesn't fight that much! (Only four fights last season! And he lost two of them!!!)"
"ZOMG 6'5 isn't big enough! (The Wings are already a very big and physically imposing team!!!)"
"ZOMG Nashville gave up a first-round pick for him and he was a pain in our collective ass and we gave up a first-rounder for Quincey and Quincey sucked so ZOMG they overpaid and we don't need to overpay for players!!!"
He's a free agent this summer. If he's asking for 4 million, then sure - pass on him. But if he can be had for less than 3? I'd say it's worth it.