Zetts

Terrible trade idea.  They're both equally valuable, they just play different styles of games.  Getzlaf is more suited for the Ducks' style of play and Zetterberg is more suited to the Wings.

The trade would make both teams worse.

Yeah, I also lived in a craphole rental in New Port Richey, FL.  Should I go back because they won the Cup that year?  I know it's an extreme example, but people become almost religious about moves made during a Cup year.

Clearly comparable to the defenseman who played 24:53 a game when we won the Cup.

He was great for us.  He also put up 14 points in 22 games.  Not bad for a defenseman.  Oh, and that's also more than Lidstrom.

Wow, this line thread is really going to hell.  If only we had another 50 threads in which to discuss exactly the same thing.

Thanks blueadams.

this guys an idoit

So manny Stupid people... this thread makes no sence.

Not to be "that guy" who nitpicks...but does anyone else appreciate the humor of these two comments?

Did you watch the same season as we did?

The defense last season was in fact an pretty big upgrade from 2008/2009.  Although I think how poor the defense was in 08/09 was a bit overlooked because of how good the offense was.  

2006/2007 - 199 GA
2007/2008 - 184 GA
2008/2009 - 244 GA
2009/2010 - 216 GA

It's hard to jump back from 244 GA to 184 GA, but it looks like they're hopefully moving back towards better defense.  I guess we'll have to wait and see.

THREE Stanley Cups
FOUR Vezinas
FOUR Jennings
one Calder
TWO Olympic Gold Medals

Are you kidding me?

The important point of that poster was at this point in his career.  If you've watched the Devils recently in the playoffs, Brodeur has been quite bad.

This season is a make or break season for Cleary. And he knows it. And that's good.

I definitely disagree.  He has a NTC and 3 years left on his contract.  How often do teams ask players to waive those?  More to the point, how often do the Detroit Red Wings ask players to waive those?

More like "Chicago offered me a better long term deal!"

Get over it, guys.  Hossa didn't owe Detroit jack s***.

I don't think too many people are angry that he didn't re-sign.  In fact, I'm quite happy that he didn't.  We would have given up depth for a choker.

What a lot more people are angry about is that he came to a winning roster for a cup, took 7.4 million, top line minutes, and didn't play like he deserved either.

You mean your MSpaint skills?

But seriously, how can you hate this guy, he is a classiest guys out there.  Because he decided not to play for peanuts, which is what Wings could only afford?

He came to a winning roster in Detroit saying that he wanted to win a cup.  He took large amounts of money, and used top line minutes and couldn't produce.  Maybe he wanted us to carry him to a cup.  Or maybe he just sucks.  Either way, he's a leach.

Yes, he wasn't terrible.  But we had just won the cup and he wanted one.  Our roster was fine.  I don't hold him solely responsible.  But I sure as hell don't like him.  And for 7.4 million you'd damn well better do more than "look good".  For that sort of money and top line ice time you'd better be scoring.

And for anyone who says he was injured, he got 40 goals during the year with the same injury.  He had the injury all year.  Besides, this year's playoffs just confirm it.  He's sucking it up again.

I still don't get how Kenny can justify not bringing in more offense.  We never replaced the production we lost after 2008-2009, and Hudler will be rusty as s***, I don't expect SFA from him this season.

Drop Lebda, Williams, and maybe someone else (Lilja's name keeps coming up) and get a G.D. scoring RW to work the 1st/2nd line.

Beacuse you can't expect to stay at the level of firepower we had that season.  We had contracts with stars being undervalued.  Most notably, Zetterberg's contract was 2.8 or so I believe?  The salary cap doesn't allow you to keep it.  The best way to get back to that level is draft high end talent and win while they're still on entry-level contracts.  Unfortunately that's not particularly easy to do, especially with how late we draft.

He looked good for us last year too, but that didn't stop people from bitching just because he didn't score.

To be fair, when you're paid 7.4 million, you'd damn well better do more than "look good".

Don't forget the line about the Sharks' forwards being 6'6", 250 and hitting like mack trucks.  That was the line in 2007 right?

Heatley is injured.  Pretty badly from what I hear.  That should reduce his effectiveness.
There is absolutely no reason to think that Thornton will assert himself in the playoffs, now or ever.  That's just wishful thinking.

I'd say that the series would be pretty even.  But I give the Wings the edge because we don't shoot the puck into our own net in overtime.


And Marleau is not good looking.

And sometimes you could lose the SO because you didn't have your best player shooting third.  That's why situational coaching is important in the SO.

Tort's mind might have changed because it was score or go home.  It was round 3 and the Rangers' last chance.  That's why your mind would change.  

Logic is taking a serious beating here.

If you put your best shooter FIRST, you won't even get to that point.  Say Gaborik was, for the sake of argument, a 90% shooter.  Put him FIRST and you increase your chances of never getting to that point where it is do or die at all.

If the second best option isn't going to cut it in round-by-round sudden death, then why would you want him shooting in essentially the same situation in the third round?  I would want Gaborik in that spot any day of the week over Jokinen.

...exactly.  You never put out your second best option.

If he felt Gaborik was better he would have put him there over Jokinen.  See, best players first.  Because screw maybe making it to the fourth round with a killer shooter.  You have to make it there first (or win, if your BEST shooters are good enough to win it first).  Therefore, the better shooter of the two should be put third and the worse of the two fourth.

And sometimes you could lose the SO because you didn't have your best player shooting third. That's why situational coaching is important in the SO.

To clarify, I'll go over this point further:  
You're only changing the order of your goals (or the order of your best chance for a goal really).  You want to get as many of those goals as fast as you can.  That's how a shootout works.

Why bother posting then?

There is plenty of situational coaching involved in the SO.  First of all, not every coach is going to put their best SO player out first and that doesn't make them crazy.  What's crazy about putting your best SO player in the third spot?  When looking to score in the SO to win or tie you would want your best SO player in that spot.  Would Tortorella have still sent out Jokinen knowing that their playoff lives were on the line or would he have chosen to send out Gaborik if he had the choice?  That's situational coaching.  The only situational coaching that the list of three method allows for is who to leave off the list in case the SO goes to extra rounds.

Because you could have lost the shootout by the time you get to your best shooter if he's third?  Or failed to put it away earlier and give the other team a chance to get back in the shootout.  For example, say you put your second best shooter third.  Then you could lose a chance to win the shootout if, say, you're up 1-0 and the second shooting team in the second round.  It gives the other team a better chance to tie it up.

There is no possible reason to not go best to worst.  It can only hurt you.

And why should Tort's mind have changed between the start of the shootout and that point?  He knew when he named Jokinen that far into his list that it's round-by-round sudden death, and yet you think he would put out the second best option?  Right.