Friedman 30 thoughts - some tidbits on Detroit

[DanZ]

I know! Its crazy how changed conditions create changed opinions!!

What has changed?

 

[Frk It]

Just because he wants to come back doesn't mean he's going to be offered the position Its not like Mike Illitch didn't already approach Holland about moving up to President (or whatever it was) to allow Yzerman to stay on as manager.

As long as Chris Illitch and co. have a GM target or two in mind to replace him, there's no guarantee he's re-signed as GM. And Jimmy D is 74. Maybe he retires, Holland is offered Jimmy D's position, and the Wings move on.

Holland didn't exactly do anything to benefit the team last year. This off-season and the next year could easily be his undoing.

I really, REALLY would like this to be the case. But I think Holland is sitting on top of a mountain of job security, and I think he goes out on his own terms. Unless he has multiple seasons where the team is bottom 5 or bottom 10 in a row.

I'd like for the front office to make the decision for him, but I don't think we are there yet.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

But if he wants to stay past next season - and, far worse, if Chris Ilitch is actually on board with Holland's approach - then there's nothing preventing him from spending the next 3-5 years replacing contracts like Franzen, Ericsson, and Abdelkader with...more contacts like Franzen, Ericsson, and Abdelkader. All while doing anything in his power to avoid a top 3-5 pick.

I know that EVENTUALLY the declining fan support would help force some action, but wasting another who knows how many more years between now and then is just sad.

We don't have the cap space to sign such players or contracts

And no way we can find one let alone several takers for our current bad ones

We don't have the assets to make trades

Vegas won't touch abdlekader when they can have sheahan

Vegas won't touch Ericsson when they can have ouellet or Jensen

 

[Reddwit]

What has changed?

See below:

So we're keeping Blashill...I guess Holland has chosen the actively tank route.

Something this forum has wanted for year, but now everyone's angry?

I know! Its crazy how changed conditions create changed opinions!!

What changed conditions? Our best player retiring and our other best player growing old and declining? There's never been a better time to tank than now. Limping into the playoffs with mediocre players isn't going to do anything for us.

Oops, sorry. Thought you meant having Blashill stay on as coach - not the tanking thing. My bad!

 

[HockeyinHD]

News Flash: EVERY player and coach that makes it to the NHL has been successful at previous levels of competition, or they wouldn't get a shot to begin with.

Depends on how binary your definition of 'successful' is. Blashill won a belt in year 1 of being a USHL head coach. In year 1 he took an 8-20-8 WMU team to 19-13-10 and won coach of the year from 3 places. In year 1 he took over a Griffins team that missed the playoffs 4 of the past 5 and won the Calder.

I mean, I get it. Just because somebody was good at an earlier level doesn't make them a shoe-in for success at the next level... but trying to compare what Blashill did in an absurdly short period of time as 'success' in general is being a bit disingenuous with the term.

He put together an absolutely ridiculous resume in pretty much 7 years. At his least successful head coaching stop before he got here he won coach of the year... so, you know, that's not bad.

Does or should any of that buy him much at the NHL level? Not really. It's a bit unfair to brush aside his resume as 'lots of other people have success before they get to the NHL too!' Not as much as he did in as short a time as he did, no.

 

[Reddwit]

I really, REALLY would like this to be the case. But I think Holland is sitting on top of a mountain of job security, and I think he goes out on his own terms. Unless he has multiple seasons where the team is bottom 5 or bottom 10 in a row.

I'd like for the front office to make the decision for him, but I don't think we are there yet.

I guess I can't fathom a situation where that doesn't happen.

I do agree that he has a ton of job security, I just don't think that means he'll get to basically write up his own contracts for GM after this one. At most, I'd expect any new contract to clear the way for the team to "promote" Holland to team President without repercussion. That would allow them to deal with Holland respectfully in the event that they find a GM they really like but would also allow them to keep Holland around as GM if the replacements are lean.

Like I said, this off-season through next could be his undoing. But I suppose, if we're being as objective as possible, we should be open to the possibility that, now that the streak is over, Holland has it in him to adopt a new approach.

 

[jkutswings]

We don't have the cap space to sign such players or contracts

And no way we can find one let alone several takers for our current bad ones

We don't have the assets to make trades

Vegas won't touch abdlekader when they can have sheahan

Vegas won't touch Ericsson when they can have ouellet or Jensen

That's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying that if ownership is giving Holland the green light to maintain status quo, then what's stopping him from riding out the current salary cap situation, doing nothing to rock the boat, and then, 5 years from now...

...Once Detroit starts finally having some bad deals come off the books naturally, to spend right back to the cap on more bad deals, and perpetuate yet another 5-10 years of this mess?

I hate the way Holland is operating. But if Chris Ilitch takes no issue with it, the scenario gets even more depressing.

 

[Red Stanley]

What legacy? the one that is in his head? He was handed a team that was built for years and slowly drove it into the ground. Because of the legacy in his own mind he is blind to as what he has done and refuses to admit it and retire. And here in is the problem it's all about him and not the team.

You should contact the HoF committee with this before they vote him in.

 

[ElysiumAB]

Depends on how binary your definition of 'successful' is. Blashill won a belt in year 1 of being a USHL head coach. In year 1 he took an 8-20-8 WMU team to 19-13-10 and won coach of the year from 3 places. In year 1 he took over a Griffins team that missed the playoffs 4 of the past 5 and won the Calder.

I mean, I get it. Just because somebody was good at an earlier level doesn't make them a shoe-in for success at the next level... but trying to compare what Blashill did in an absurdly short period of time as 'success' in general is being a bit disingenuous with the term.

He put together an absolutely ridiculous resume in pretty much 7 years. At his least successful head coaching stop before he got here he won coach of the year... so, you know, that's not bad.

Does or should any of that buy him much at the NHL level? Not really. It's a bit unfair to brush aside his resume as 'lots of other people have success before they get to the NHL too!' Not as much as he did in as short a time as he did, no.

Maybe this is just as deep as his voice can go?

 

[jkutswings]

Depends on how binary your definition of 'successful' is. Blashill won a belt in year 1 of being a USHL head coach. In year 1 he took an 8-20-8 WMU team to 19-13-10 and won coach of the year from 3 places. In year 1 he took over a Griffins team that missed the playoffs 4 of the past 5 and won the Calder.

I mean, I get it. Just because somebody was good at an earlier level doesn't make them a shoe-in for success at the next level... but trying to compare what Blashill did in an absurdly short period of time as 'success' in general is being a bit disingenuous with the term.

He put together an absolutely ridiculous resume in pretty much 7 years. At his least successful head coaching stop before he got here he won coach of the year... so, you know, that's not bad.

Does or should any of that buy him much at the NHL level? Not really. It's a bit unfair to brush aside his resume as 'lots of other people have success before they get to the NHL too!' Not as much as he did in as short a time as he did, no.

All true, but if we're taking results from small sample sizes, he also had a fairly underwhelming stint with the Wings as an assistant coach.

Overall, I was just speaking in generalities, where every player and coach has had SOME degree of success as a prerequisite for advancing in the first place. I'm fine with using it as one criteria of many, but not thrilled when it sounds like it's the sole criteria, both for players and coaches alike.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

That's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying that if ownership is giving Holland the green light to maintain status quo, then what's stopping him from riding out the current salary cap situation, doing nothing to rock the boat, and then, 5 years from now...

...Once Detroit starts finally having some bad deals come off the books naturally, to spend right back to the cap on more bad deals, and perpetuate yet another 5-10 years of this mess?

I hate the way Holland is operating. But if Chris Ilitch takes no issue with it, the scenario gets even more depressing.

Right but what i am saying is, status quo is a non playoff bottom 8 team despite a a heroic year by our aging captain.

So if rhe message is do nothing different that's fantastic because the team as is gives us a top pick and their is nothing, nothing Holland can do this summer to change that.

 

[TatarTangle]

The only way Holland is done is if ownership stops him.

Yep. Nothing else really needs to be said. Hope for the best and expect the worst at this point.

 

[Ezekial]

Maybe this is just as deep as his voice can go?

Seems like his old voice worked better.

 

[ricky0034]

the more I think about it the more funny I find the whole idea that it's possible that Holland actually thinks that Blashill will suddenly become a good NHL coach at some point(I suppose it's also possible he's just saying that to the media and doesn't really believe it)

I mean this guy has had 2 full seasons now and if anything has only gotten worse,what's next an extension after he bombs out again next year? when that cocoon opens and he becomes a beautiful butterfly it's gonna be as a Red Wing goddammit!

 

[Ezekial]

the more I think about it the more funny I find the whole idea that it's possible that Holland actually thinks that Blashill will suddenly become a good NHL coach at some point(I suppose it's also possible he's just saying that to the media and doesn't really believe it)

I mean this guy has had 2 full seasons now and if anything has only gotten worse,what's next an extension after he bombs out again next year? when that cocoon opens and he becomes a beautiful butterfly it's gonna be as a Red Wing goddammit!

Because successful coaches have never failed in their lives.


Teams should've known after the Browns that Bill Belichick was never going to amount to anything. I mean he cut Kosar boys!

 

[HockeyinHD]

All true, but if we're taking results from small sample sizes, he also had a fairly underwhelming stint with the Wings as an assistant coach.

Which is literally impossible to determine. I know people love thinking they can untangle what one coach does within the skein of thread weaved by a staff in any given year, but it's really tough to be any kind of accurate.

Overall, I was just speaking in generalities, where every player and coach has had SOME degree of success as a prerequisite for advancing in the first place. I'm fine with using it as one criteria of many, but not thrilled when it sounds like it's the sole criteria, both for players and coaches alike.

I get it, but Blashill had a crazy, silly, stupid nuts amount of pre-Wings success. If Detroit had a forward prospect who pretty much led his league in scoring for three straight years, there wouldn't be a lot of people anxious about his NHL career.

Now, that prospect could turn out to suck... but that's just how it goes. I think people would want to see that prospect given their best chance to be successful, and I'm not sure we can say that's happened with Blashill, at least to the degree people would expect with regards to a talented prospect, anyway.

 

[HockeyinHD]

Because successful coaches have never failed in their lives.


Teams should've known after the Browns that Bill Belichick was never going to amount to anything. I mean he cut Kosar boys!

Exactly.

Look, if the team waived a top prospect after 2 or 3 years people here would be livid with how the team failed to properly develop him. All we would hear is that the team never 'put them in a position to succeed.'

Well, do people think Blashill has been put in a position to succeed?

This isn't me defending him because I honestly don't know if he's a good NHL coach or not. I do know that it's not like he took a powerhouse roster and drove it into the ground, though. If Babcock was here, is this a playoff team?

Enh. I think the team underperformed pretty much across the board this year, I just don't think we can blame Blashill for that.

 

[jkutswings]

Exactly.

Look, if the team waived a top prospect after 2 or 3 years people here would be livid with how the team failed to properly develop him. All we would hear is that the team never 'put them in a position to succeed.'

Well, do people think Blashill has been put in a position to succeed?

This isn't me defending him because I honestly don't know if he's a good NHL coach or not. I do know that it's not like he took a powerhouse roster and drove it into the ground, though. If Babcock was here, is this a playoff team?

Enh. I think the team underperformed pretty much across the board this year, I just don't think we can blame Blashill for that.

I think that on the one hand, Blashill was handed a mediocre roster that is continuing to age like milk (Zetterberg notwithstanding). So from that angle, it's not fair to already write him off as being a perpetually awful coach.

But on the other hand, there have been certain decisions he's made that are objectively questionable moves, independent of talent level. So at a minimum, I'm not putting him in the same boat as Holland is, being all but certain that he'll right the ship sooner or later. Whether it's personnel moves, or strategy...I just can't remember another coach where I've ever so frequently shaken my head at his approach.

He very well could be somewhere in the middle. But as a personal preference, I'd rather he didn't stick around, because I think he will do more harm than good to the players I most want to see stay on this roster.

 

[Frk It]

Exactly.

Look, if the team waived a top prospect after 2 or 3 years people here would be livid with how the team failed to properly develop him. All we would hear is that the team never 'put them in a position to succeed.'

Well, do people think Blashill has been put in a position to succeed?

This isn't me defending him because I honestly don't know if he's a good NHL coach or not. I do know that it's not like he took a powerhouse roster and drove it into the ground, though. If Babcock was here, is this a playoff team?

Enh. I think the team underperformed pretty much across the board this year, I just don't think we can blame Blashill for that.

Why do you think he wasn't put in a position to succeed? Quality of the roster?

 

[Goalie guy]

You should contact the HoF committee with this before they vote him in.

Oh sadly he will get in, on other peoples merit and a good owners willing to spend.

 

[ricky0034]

Exactly.

Look, if the team waived a top prospect after 2 or 3 years people here would be livid with how the team failed to properly develop him. All we would hear is that the team never 'put them in a position to succeed.'

Well, do people think Blashill has been put in a position to succeed?

This isn't me defending him because I honestly don't know if he's a good NHL coach or not. I do know that it's not like he took a powerhouse roster and drove it into the ground, though. If Babcock was here, is this a playoff team?

Enh. I think the team underperformed pretty much across the board this year, I just don't think we can blame Blashill for that.

why not exactly? when something bad happens across pretty much all the players the coach would seem the most likely suspect no?

what do you think the cause is if not Blashill?

something something Occam's razor

 

[HockeyinHD]

Why do you think he wasn't put in a position to succeed? Quality of the roster?

I think the same argument which is constantly applied to young players exists for Blashill.

I think the 'quality' of the roster is decent, but the performance of the roster was bad. Mrazek was terrible pretty much all year. Howard was hurt. Ericsson was hurt. Kronwall is a shell of himself, etc.

I think what the coach does and what the GM does and what the players do all coexist, so blaming one for the other about the third, or any other sequence, usually just ends up being a goofy partisan snowball fight. "It's Hollands fault! He sucks! No, it's Blashill's fault! He sucks! No, all the players suck! It's their fault!" IMO Holland had a mediocre offseason, Blashill didn't maximize the roster, and a whole bunch of players had sub-par seasons due to injury and/or outright unexpected suckage, including absolutely critical ones like the goalies.

 

[HockeyinHD]

why not exactly? when something bad happens across pretty much all the players the coach would seem the most likely suspect no?

what do you think the cause is if not Blashill?

something something Occam's razor

Simple case here. If Mrazek is a .920 goalie (he was a .921 last year) instead of a .901 goalie he gives up ~28 fewer goals in his 49 games (43 starts). Is that Blashill's fault? Is Howard not being healthy Blashill's fault? Is Coreau being bad in replacing Howard and/or Mrazek Blashill's fault? Is Kronwall falling off the table his fault, or Ericsson getting hurt, or DK having a poor season?

It's safe to say Blashill was imperfect this year. It's also safe to say that some critical players really underwhelmed this year independent of anything Blashill could have possibly done to correct them. It's also safe to say a couple of the deals Holland signed look terrible so far.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

What legacy? the one that is in his head? He was handed a team that was built for years and slowly drove it into the ground. Because of the legacy in his own mind he is blind to as what he has done and refuses to admit it and retire. And here in is the problem it's all about him and not the team.

Slowly drove it to the ground since 1997? Winning 3 cups in the process?

What an awful take. Holland was a damn fine GM in the past.

 

[theD86]

All this before Holland has his exit meeting with ownership? Still holding onto a sliver of hope..........