Jump to content

heretic69's Photo


Member Since 21 Sep 2005
Offline Last Active Nov 01 2015 03:02 PM

#2460221 Shea Weber leaves game with Injury

Posted by BottleOfSmoke on 02 December 2013 - 06:57 PM


Seriously, I can't remember another incident in recent memory that has infuriated me the way that one did. Like Mike Tyson "I'm going to eat his kids" and not in the sexy way kind of infuriated. Like Mike Tyson "I want to bite off Weber's ear and spit it back in his face" kind of infuriated.


#2402233 WCQF Game 7 GDT - Red Wings 3 @ Ducks 2 - (DET wins series, 4-3)

Posted by McAwesome on 11 May 2013 - 08:50 PM

This may be the best one yet!   Thanks, G!!!   


Go, Wings!  May Lando Flip-rissian redeem himself tomorrow night!!


Yes please, GWG will do nicely (just not in OT, don't think my heart or my wife's eardrums could take that)

#2387217 4/20 GDT: Red Wings 1 @ Canucks 2 (SO)

Posted by sjr2012 on 20 April 2013 - 11:34 PM

f the damn so 

#2349855 2/1 GDT : Blues 3 at Red Wings 5 (Z with Hat Trick)

Posted by djv19 on 01 February 2013 - 08:07 PM

Same ol wings. Shut it down after a two goal lead.

#2330367 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by Pskov Wings Fan on 30 September 2012 - 04:28 PM

Jokes about the value of people with MBA's are not just jokes.

#2248847 1/23 GDT : Blues 1 at Red Wings 3

Posted by cprice12 on 24 January 2012 - 12:32 AM

<br /><br /><br />

You're on the wrong forum.

You've been here almost 2 months.

I've been here almost 10 years.

Good enough?


#2225990 11/15 GDT: Red Wings 1 at Blues 2

Posted by BlueMonk on 15 November 2011 - 10:15 PM

It would be nice if they could replace this guy wearing the #13 sweater with the actual Pavel Datsyuk.

#2222599 11/3 GDT: Flames 4 at Red Wings 1

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 04 November 2011 - 12:34 AM

YOU don't want Franzen.



Can we trade Crymson and a bag of pucks to get mindfly back? He at least talked hockey most of the time, even it was all negative.

#2222445 11/3 GDT: Flames 4 at Red Wings 1

Posted by Z and D for the C on 03 November 2011 - 09:10 PM

Big difference between showing some emotion and getting pissed off with the wings

No, there isn't. If you're not furious with this team right now, then I question whether or not you're a "real fan". Just because you think it's hip to call yourself a fan and watch wings games doesn't make you a fan. Saying "Bummer, oh well, on to the next one!" when they're 5-5-1 is the mark of someone who doesn't give a s***. Real fans give a s***.

#2204648 Crosby's 2012 Season now in Question

Posted by donfishmaster on 20 August 2011 - 10:02 PM

I know that there are many delicate sensibilities at the top of this board who are EASILY offended, and, oh dear, upsetting words makes the baby Jesus cry, but when it comes to the prospect of Cindy never playing again:
"sympathy" lies somewhere between "s***" and "syphillis" in the dictionary.

#2196847 Is there a problem with Babs?

Posted by ogreslayer on 06 July 2011 - 10:41 AM

I think these CBC player polls tell you all you need to know about Babcock:

Which coach would you most like to play for?

Which coach is the most demanding?

18% said they'd most like to play for Babcock. That was second to only Bylsma who had 21% of the votes.

In the next poll, 24% said Babcock demands the most from his players, second to Tortorella, who had 28% of the votes.

Yes, I would trust this much more than someone saying "a buddy of mine said" without having specifics on where it's coming from. Without sighting sources, that's as good as me saying that a buddy of mine told me that ex-players are bad mouthing Babs for his penchant for wearing a pink tutu & tiara in the locker room before games.

#2196567 Is there a problem with Babs?

Posted by Guest on 05 July 2011 - 03:39 PM

This thread should be moved to rumor mill. There is no credibility here what-so-ever....

#2196548 Is there a problem with Babs?

Posted by Jasper84 on 05 July 2011 - 03:17 PM

My first question would be what your friend's source is.

Not to be rude, but would giving you my friend's source really matter in this topic, when I am just asking a simple question out of curiosity?

Has anyone else heard anything about players not liking Babs?

#2196538 Is there a problem with Babs?

Posted by Jasper84 on 05 July 2011 - 03:07 PM

So I was talking with a buddy of mine today and he was telling me how the Wings contacted a few players and they refused to talk about coming to the Wings because of Babcock. Apparently, some ex-players of Babcock (including ex-Wings, not just his previous teams) have been bad mouthing him.

I've always liked Babs as a coach and have considered him one of the best. But now after hearing this, it makes me wonder if there is problems with Babs and players? We know that he and Commie don't get along, but now that I hear some other players refused to sign here because of him really makes me wonder.

Has anyone else heard anything about players not liking Babs?

#2193914 Wings re-sign Ericsson to 3-year, $9.75m contract

Posted by gcom007 on 01 July 2011 - 01:01 PM

So what you are saying is it's absurd for anyone to think Ericsson will ever become the caliber of player as a Datsyuk? Well...duh! Lol.

People were outraged at Datsyuk and Kronwall's contract at first, now they are playing above their potential, that's the point.

Ericsson will never be more than a #3 guy at best. But he will become a solid #4 and may even QB the 2nd unit on the PP in the near distant future. $3.25 is a bargain (in this current salary cap world) for a #4, potentially a future #3.

27 is young for a defenseman, people act like he's on the downside of his aging career. Lidstrom didn't even peak till age 30. Chara didn't even start putting it together til his 6th or 7th year in the NHL. Ericsson has played 2 seasons.

You act like everyone knew Kronwall was going to be a future 1-2 dman. It was projected, but nobody on LGWs believed it. NOBODY! - The forum was outraged.

Datsyuk and Kronwall both had done more to earn their pay day. They had leverage in their negotiations based on their performance AND their potential. Ericsson has surrendered leverage to Holland because of his poor performance and is getting a payday based solely on the hope that he might live up to some potential and maybe give them reason to think that he's not just a 5-6 defenseman. He will never be a #4 guy if he doesn't seriously improve his mental game and thus far, he has done nothing to suggest he'll magically get it together.

I don't know if you're just a big Ericsson fan, but you just seem incredibly biased here. You're bring all these other names into it but ignoring that while they were young, they actually were well on their way to performing at a level demonstrative of their potential. Ericsson hasn't come anywhere remotely close to doing that since joining this team as a regular. He's done nothing but struggle.

Now I full admit that I think he does have potential and I think he still has a chance to live up to it, but I think this signing is completely out of characteristic for the Wings and sets a terrible precedent. Better players have walked for less in years past. If E wasn't willing to take $1.8-2 million to be a Red Wing, Holland should have let him walk.

Holland should have made Howard the bar especially after his outstanding playoff performance. Howard's your starting goalie and he took a team-first contract, signing for less to stay and in return getting a chance to prove himself on an elite club. That's exactly what should have been put on the table for Ericsson. I would be 100% fine with a deal like that. And that's generous considering even with Howard's struggles, he's still had far more positive moments than negatives thus far in his career.

But a 3-year deal worth almost $10 million? That's just a stupid deal for the Detroit Red Wings. They never cared about the open market and it's served them well. If you're not willing to play ball within the system, go find a payday somewhere else. Better, more proven players have left for less than Ericsson signed for, even proportional to the changing cap. That's why this deal is a joke. It's less about Ericsson and more about setting terrible precedents.