Confirmed with Link: Holland signed to 2-year extension

Winger98

Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
22,756
4,569
Cleveland
14/15 we finished 6th in our conference, 11th in the league, and got bounced in round one for the second straight year. On a team still leaning heavily on guys way on the wrong side of 30, I wouldn't hold it up as proof that the team still had any serious life in it. We can play the what-if game, but the fact that we're having to rely on so many things not going wrong speaks more to the weakness of the team than its strength.
 

Frk It

Mo Seider Less Problems
Jul 27, 2010
36,201
14,683
Well, the 2 best GM candidates in the business ended up being available this summer and will be taking jobs elsewhere in Fenton and Hunter. They picked quite the summer to extend Holland. He really needs to prove himself in this upcoming draft in a big way. Really wish we would have waited a bit and talked to Fenton, he drafts excpetionally well.
 
Last edited:

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,017
11,677
Everyone knew. Just like everyone knew Chicago would become crap, how we know Pittsburgh will become crap, Tampa will become crap (actually have been crap off and on)... everyone has their period of being crap. You're not nostradamus. If you know the right moves to keep a team from never being crap, you're wasting your time here. Go out there and become history's best GM.

Most good teams in the league will be "crap" 8 years from now. That's the natural cycle. All the bottom feeders pick up top prospects, who 8 years from now are in their prime at 23-28 year old. And 8 years later those players decline and those teams become crap again. That's extremely simplified but in broad strokes this is how the league functions. There's no arrogance to trying to win while you have the chance. All teams do it. Most just do it way, way worse than the Wings did (meaning a much shorter stay at the top and much faster drop to the bottom).
The reason the Red Wings stayed at the top for so long was because they drafted one of the greatest defensemen EVER in the 90s and were ahead of the curve drafting Zetterberg and Datsyuk. That isn't a testament to our management being "the bestest" as much as it was a testament to how fortunate we were to obtain a defender who held the blue-line as a #1 guy for almost 20 years and have a scouting staff that was able to take advantage of the rest of the league in the late 90s (something that won't be replicated).
 

Reddwit

Registered User
Feb 4, 2016
7,696
3,418
Will be really interesting to see what Fenton can do. We’ve seen AGMs falter fast once they’re at the helm of their own team. And Minny is a tough situation.
 

Pavels Dog

Registered User
Feb 18, 2013
19,739
14,705
Sweden
It's. Not. Hindsight.

Some of us have been saying it for over 5 years.

And this is exactly what I'm talking about.


We do know.

We'd still be a bubble team with no shot at the cup. You're clinging to this idea while simultaneously claiming we all knew we'd be crap. Obviously that's not true if you're saying stuff like that.
Nah you're getting mixed up. Knowing a team will become bad is easy. Like I said, I know that pretty much all the top teams of today will become bad within 5-10 years. I can say things like.. Nashville won't win a cup with this core, their run is over. I'm probably right. I could have said the same thing about Washington 5 years ago, maybe I did and maybe I was right. What does that mean though? Nothing, except this; winning the cup is extremely f*cking difficult. Making a deep run is extremely f*cking difficult. Predicting that a team won't have success will make you right more often than not, especially in a league where 3 teams have split the cups for 10 years.

Saying we were crap and had no chance is 100% hindsight. We got close enough that it's beyond obvious that the team COULD have put together a run or two. You sound just like people have all year with Vegas. "Nice fluke start. They'll slow down. Any day now. Definitely in the 2nd half. They'll be a 1st round exit. They won't win against the REALLY good teams. They can't beat Winnipeg. They won't win the cup." And then if they don't win- "I knew it all along, they had no shot at the cup.". Such hockey knowledge, such deep insight.

Just like I know it's going to be extremely difficult for Vegas to sustain this success, it was 100% possible to both think the team had a shot at making a playoff run and knowing that "crap years" were coming. I've just come to understand that we have irreconcilable difference of opinion about how you deal with a good (read:playoff) team that is heading towards a rebuild. I've also realized that our definition of "crap" is very different. Because I'd love to see "crap" teams like the 14-15 Wings again. I'd be ecstatic. I'd also love to see more "no shot at the cup" playoff runs like 2013. Maybe I'm just crazy, but I don't think the end result is always reflective of the maximum potential of a team. Were the 2013 Wings better than the 2003 Wings? Of course not. Did the 2003 Wings have no shot at the cup? Of course they did. Yet that was the only time we didn't win a playoff game. You simply don't f*cking know what will happen. All you can do is try to win as long as you think the team has at least a 1% chance. And you can be the best team in the league and be out 1st round. Or a bubble team that goes all the way.

The reason the Red Wings stayed at the top for so long was because they drafted one of the greatest defensemen EVER in the 90s and were ahead of the curve drafting Zetterberg and Datsyuk. That isn't a testament to our management being "the bestest" as much as it was a testament to how fortunate we were to obtain a defender who held the blue-line as a #1 guy for almost 20 years and have a scouting staff that was able to take advantage of the rest of the league in the late 90s (something that won't be replicated).
No team ever reaches the top without acquiring amazing players, not sure what you're trying to say. Building around those players is still pretty important. Call it luck or good fortune, I'm just explaining that becoming crap is the natural order of the NHL. Anything the best teams do will get copied, stolen, improved upon, countered, along with the bad teams getting the top prospects. Only here is having some bad years seen as the end times and foolproof evidence that everyone involved with the team is a total moron.
 
Last edited:

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,017
11,677
No team ever reaches the top without acquiring amazing players, not sure what you're trying to say. Building around those players is still pretty important. Call it luck or good fortune, I'm just explaining that becoming crap is the natural order of the NHL. Anything the best teams do will get copied, stolen, improved upon, countered, along with the bad teams getting the top prospects.
You aren't saying anything that I am objecting to, and I am pretty sure nobody else objects to that. But you brought up the Red Wings' recent run being much more successful than others out there.

Most just do it way, way worse than the Wings did (meaning a much shorter stay at the top and much faster drop to the bottom).

Were you not trying to use that as an argument for the current GM and management and that they do things better than the rest? I find it hard to believe you threw that out there for no reason other than repeating history to those who already are aware of it.

Only here is having some bad years seen as the end times and foolproof evidence that everyone involved with the team is a total moron.
Who says this?
 

Lil Sebastian Cossa

Opinions are share are my own personal opinions.
Jul 6, 2012
11,436
7,446
You aren't saying anything that I am objecting to, and I am pretty sure nobody else objects to that. But you brought up the Red Wings' recent run being much more successful than others out there.



Were you not trying to use that as an argument for the current GM and management and that they do things better than the rest? I find it hard to believe you threw that out there for no reason other than repeating history to those who already are aware of it.


Who says this?

The vast majority of people here say that. The vast majority of the fanbase want Ken Holland gone... for literally any other remotely qualified manager because "we'll never be good again with him there". The vast majority want Blash fired because everyone has seemingly declined under his coaching.

I mean, there is plenty of evidence around this board that people would put a vote of no confidence in the Wings executive leadership. To act like there is nothing to his admittedly overdramatic wording of it is being patently dishonest.
 

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,017
11,677
The vast majority of people here say that. The vast majority of the fanbase want Ken Holland gone... for literally any other remotely qualified manager because "we'll never be good again with him there". The vast majority want Blash fired because everyone has seemingly declined under his coaching.

I mean, there is plenty of evidence around this board that people would put a vote of no confidence in the Wings executive leadership. To act like there is nothing to his admittedly overdramatic wording of it is being patently dishonest.
People believing Holland and Blashill need to go (for different reasons) does not mean the general consensus is this is the end times and evidence everyone involved in the team is a total moron.
 

Pavels Dog

Registered User
Feb 18, 2013
19,739
14,705
Sweden
You aren't saying anything that I am objecting to, and I am pretty sure nobody else objects to that. But you brought up the Red Wings' recent run being much more successful than others out there.



Were you not trying to use that as an argument for the current GM and management and that they do things better than the rest? I find it hard to believe you threw that out there for no reason other than repeating history to those who already are aware of it.
Most teams do it worse, one way or another. I don't think there was one factor as to why we stayed good/great/competitive for so long. It's just a fact that somehow other teams can drop to the bottom with Erik Karlssons or Drew Doughtys and Kopitars and Toews and Kane and Hedmans and Stamkoses and Kucherovs and we made the playoffs with f*cking Kindl, Smith and Ericsson in our top 4 or rolling Joakim Andersson, Riley Sheahan and David Legwand as our top centers for half a season. I don't know who or what to credit for that.
Whatever the Wings lockerroom was smoking for 25 years to refuse to understand that you have to lose eventually, I think they ran out of that stash and it's probably not grown anymore. I'm just saying, lots of people here pretend as if playoffs are automatic as soon as you acquire a couple of great players. That's not how it works. 6 teams have made it more than 2 years in a row. Only Pittsburgh have an active playoff streak with a cup win (until the SCF is done that is). That is the reality that we're entering now. It's not a reality where saying "I predicted they would become crap!" is something special, because.. yeah, everyone becomes crap. It's how the league is designed. All that matters is how you behave when you get there and how long it takes you to get back up again.

Who says this?
Expect names and posts at a later date. But there's a pretty big list of posts on that theme. A general vibe of the only reason the Wings are experiencing a tough time is because our scouts are awful, our development is awful, our GM is awful, our brain trust is awful, our owner is awful, our coach is awful and there's a zero % chance this team plays any competitive hockey within the next 5-10 years (the exact timeframe varies a little, the really optimistic posters think we could win a few games 5 years from now).
 

jkutswings

hot piss hockey
Jul 10, 2014
10,851
8,576
The Washington Capitals, for example, might win 5 more playoff games, or they might lose Game 7 and never win a Cup with this core. But no matter what their fate, they do have the talent to win a championship; it's not a matter of a team hanging on in desperation, despite not posessing the horses to legitimately compete for a title.

Once Lidstrom retired, Detroit simply did not have the requisite talent to win 16 playoff games. The Chicago series was already an overachievement, catching lightning in a bottle, whatever metaphor you like. But the point is that the window for another Cup was closed.

Now maybe just making the playoffs, or sometimes winning a round, was part of the plan, and The Streak was acceptable in and of itself to management. And maybe some fans are also cool with that level of success, and didn't want to tear apart anything that hadn't hit bottom yet.

But for those who judge entertainment value on whether you're one of the best (or making the tough calls to once again become one)...the Wings absolutely were already in the coffin, and the next few seasons were mostly a waste of time.

I can accept that these years are gone now, and just move forward, hoping for an honest and effective rebuild. But I can't pretend they weren't predictable, based on the decisions being made, let alone that they didn't happen.
 

Red Stanley

Registered User
Apr 25, 2015
2,414
778
USA
I predict that a month from now the NHL will hold an entry draft in which the Wings will have another top 10 pick that's going to be awesome and amazing and super cool.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nut Upstrom

Pavels Dog

Registered User
Feb 18, 2013
19,739
14,705
Sweden
But for those who judge entertainment value on whether you're one of the best (or making the tough calls to once again become one)...the Wings absolutely were already in the coffin, and the next few seasons were mostly a waste of time.
By that metric, most of sports is a waste a time. Which is probably accurate. But sue me, I enjoy that waste of time. I'll enjoy watching Sweden in the World Cup even though I know their chances of winning is close to 0%. I rooted for the Swiss against Finland and Canada even knowing their chances of winning was close to 0%. I watch the Super Bowl each year and always root for the underdog (i.e. not the Patriots). I cheered like a madman when Zetterberg played out of his mind to get us into the playoffs on the last day of the season. I knew we were massive underdogs and maybe I was wasting my time, but I enjoyed it. Maybe the team was in the coffin but I didn't care a whole lot when Nyquist scored at a 40-goal pace and this board was full of Goose memes and Nyquist explosions and the team was, at least to my amateurish and non-scientific eye not based on our odds to win the cup, fun to watch. Don't know how much time I wasted with my jaw on the floor watching Datsyuk work his magic right up until he left the league, maybe my time would have been better served if the team hadn't tried to win but I found it fun to watch. I would spend a ton of time watching highlights over and over again and season-end compilation videos to see all the great stuff that had happened again. That ended the same season we missed the playoffs, which by your metric is probably when the waste of time ended. Different strokes I guess. I don't watch sports only when "my team" is the odds-on favorite to win it all. The journey is worth at least as much as the goal. I remember the 1-5 to 6-5 comeback against Finland in the quarterfinals just as much as any gold medal or cup win. Sweden's bronze at the 94 WC is essentially celebrated like a gold. Distilling sports down to "either you're the best or you're wasting your time" is something I will never agree with.
 

Dotter

THE ATHLETIC IS GARBAGE
Jul 2, 2014
8,439
2,880
Imprisonment, TN
goo.gl
Parity is real, folks. It doesn't take some genius hockey fan to figure that out. There's no crystal ball to know that top teams will eventually fall to the abyss. No matter how good their GM and brain trust is. It is inevitable like death and taxes.

Could the Red Wings have started the rebuild process 2 years sooner? Sure. But under the circumstances I totally get why they opted not to. And if I was in the same predicament I'd most certainly milk all I could out of it too, espesially considering our legendary owner was living on borrowed time and we weren't trading Zetterberg.

If Wings started rebuilding 2 years sooner they'd likely be the Colorado Avs or (at best) Buffalo Sabres right now. Whoopie!
 

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,017
11,677
Parity is real, folks. It doesn't take some genius hockey fan to figure that out. There's no crystal ball to know that top teams will eventually fall to the abyss. No matter how good their GM and brain trust is. It is inevitable like death and taxes.

Could the Red Wings have started the rebuild process 2 years sooner? Sure. But under the circumstances I totally get why they opted not to. And if I was in the same predicament I'd most certainly milk all I could out of it too, espesially considering our legendary owner was living on borrowed time and we weren't trading Zetterberg.

If Wings started rebuilding 2 years sooner they'd likely be the Colorado Avs or (at best) Buffalo Sabres right now. Whoopie!
Who knows, maybe we could have gotten Matthews or McDavid, or been bad enough this year that we get a better chance at Dahlin. Maybe we grab Laine.

As far as the playoff streak, time will tell if that was worth it from a business standpoint. In my opinion the streak was a small short term increase in revenue that will lead to long term problems with a team that will take longer to get back to being super profitable and actually make a deep playoff run. All for a few extra playoff games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkutswings

Dotter

THE ATHLETIC IS GARBAGE
Jul 2, 2014
8,439
2,880
Imprisonment, TN
goo.gl
Who knows, maybe we could have gotten Matthews or McDavid, or been bad enough this year that we get a better chance at Dahlin. Maybe we grab Laine.

As far as the playoff streak, time will tell if that was worth it from a business standpoint. In my opinion the streak was a small short term increase in revenue that will lead to long term problems with a team that will take longer to get back to being super profitable and actually make a deep playoff run. All for a few extra playoff games.

Or maybe Red Wings are healthy and win game #7 against Chicago and go on to win the Stanley Cup and maintain their "dynasty" tag even longer. Who knows.....

It is probably just as difficult to have a generational player land on your lap than it is to win a cup.
 

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,017
11,677
Or maybe Red Wings are healthy and win game #7 against Chicago and go on to win the Stanley Cup and maintain their "dynasty" tag even longer. Who knows.....
The Blackhawks came back for a reason. That Red Wings team surprised a lot of us and made up hopeful about the future (sad trombone), but even if they had won game seven how likely do you think it would have been for them to beat the Los Angeles Kings and then beat Lundqvist and the Rangers that year? Sure, it is possible, but the team makeup did not make that very likely and I would not have bet on that team to make it any further even if they had somehow survived against Chicago.

It is probably just as difficult to have a generational player land on your lap than it is to win a cup.
Probably even less likely generally. Much more difficult when you don't give yourself the opportunity to land one when the team's window has closed (I am thinking of 2014 and beyond, here). Of course thinking of it in terms of only probability and not prudence I think this is a poor argument to make against starting the rebuild earlier than we did. And considering a lot of the best talents are known well before they are drafted it isn't like the Red Wings had no knowledge a couple of potentially franchise-altering players may be available in the draft.
 

The Zetterberg Era

Ball Hockey Sucks
Nov 8, 2011
40,957
11,577
Ft. Myers, FL
The Blackhawks came back for a reason. That Red Wings team surprised a lot of us and made up hopeful about the future (sad trombone), but even if they had won game seven how likely do you think it would have been for them to beat the Los Angeles Kings and then beat Lundqvist and the Rangers that year? Sure, it is possible, but the team makeup did not make that very likely and I would not have bet on that team to make it any further even if they had somehow survived against Chicago.


Probably even less likely generally. Much more difficult when you don't give yourself the opportunity to land one when the team's window has closed (I am thinking of 2014 and beyond, here). Of course thinking of it in terms of only probability and not prudence I think this is a poor argument to make against starting the rebuild earlier than we did. And considering a lot of the best talents are known well before they are drafted it isn't like the Red Wings had no knowledge a couple of potentially franchise-altering players may be available in the draft.

LA was hurt, I give us a big chance at beating the Rangers back then. So yeah that was an unfortunate sequence. I will never understand why Babcock stopped chasing Toews with Zetterberg in game 6.
 

HIFE

Registered User
May 10, 2011
3,219
250
Detroit, MI
After a much needed break from the Wings I can look at things with an open mind and say it's kind of neat Holland gets this opportunity. He's helped the club achieve such massive success in the past- it's only fitting (by Red Wings standards) he's being allowed to leave the team with a load of high prospects for the future.

That is, IF he's leaving in 2 years...
 

TheOtherOne

Registered User
Jan 2, 2010
8,265
5,257
As far as the playoff streak, time will tell if that was worth it from a business standpoint.
But time WON'T tell actually. Because the goal wasn't to have the 3rd longest playoff streak of all time. It was to have the 1st. We fell short. We can only speculate what it would have meant to the business and sports history if we had managed to break the all time record.

You only get one chance every million years or so to break that record. In my opinion, when you're that close, you have to try.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->