Confirmed with Link: Clearly Cleary's Contract Continually Creates Creative Controversy

[InjuredChoker]

Our 2nd PP scored maybe total ~11 goals, so it wasn't like an earth-quakening difference for others who participated there.

going by even generous estimates, having cleary on the pp cost us 8-9 goals.

 

[Henkka]

going by even generous estimates, having cleary on the pp cost us 8-9 goals.

Based on what ?

 

[InjuredChoker]

Based on what ?

below average pp production vs. cleary's production in almost 80 pp mins.

first unit guys scored at 2+ goals per 20 mins. alfie, mue and euro twins at almost 3.

abby, nyquist and sheahan were at just under 1.7, 1,77 and 1.84 goals per 20. and they got a lot of time with cleary so they scored at much better rate when they were without him.

jurco and tatar were worst regulars (not counting sammy) at 1.46 goals/20 mins and just under 1.6 G/20, respectively on 5on4 pp. cleary, infamously, got outscored.

cleary played just under 80 mins and 1.8 goals/20 mins would amount to around 7 goals in those 80 mins. and that 1.8 goals per 20 number ignores that it's dragged down by the time they were with cleary on the pp.$

going by very generous estimates though, it's still around 5-6 goals, if that time was given to tatar/jurco who had fairly poor production on the pp. and even though cleary was terrible there, there was definitely some bad luck there.

funny thing that with our 'screen men', abby and cleary, on the pp, red wings shot the puck less. and with cleary they also had brutal oz. starts, only 67.5 %. on the pp. they should be close to or around 80%.

kind of makes sense as they were almost useless in zone entries and in cleary's case lost basically every puck battle. less oz time, less shots, less goals.

[NHL]2013020771-90-h[/NHL]


teh only pp goal red wings scored while cleary was on the ice. that was a nice screen and pushed the human wall down on the ice so zett could slam it home.

 

[Henkka]

b
going by very generous estimates though, it's still around 5-6 goals, if that time was given to tatar/jurco who had fairly poor production on the pp. and even though cleary was terrible there, there was definitely some bad luck there.

That's sounds more reasonable with my estimates. 2nd PP is very rarely effective in any team, like our 1st PP scored ~35 (71%) of our 49 PP goals.

funny thing that with our 'screen men', abby and cleary, on the pp, red wings shot the puck less.

Did you look shots on goal or all shot attempts? I prefer Fenwick.

 

[Crymson]

Our 2nd PP scored maybe total ~11 goals, so it wasn't like an earth-quakening difference for others who participated there.

Apologies; it appears I made a mistake on Cleary's figures; he was actually on the ice for ZERO power play goals for. As for your figure, it's off by about quite a bit (the true value is in the realm of 20), and it's statistically irrelevant in the context of this discussion anyway. Cleary had 78 minutes on the power play without a single goal scored by the team; no other forward who spent more than ten minutes on the ice during a 5v4 situation matched him in that area. Even Samuelsson managed to be on the ice for two goals and to log a single point. More, Cleary's Corsi score was positively brutal; at -20.5 relative to team average, it was vastly worse than that of any forward who spent a substantive amount of time on the man advantage.

So there you go. I'm not sure why you're attempting to dispute Cleary's very obvious and brutal ineffectiveness on the power play, as both the eyeball test and statistics simple and advanced prove it beyond any shadow of a doubt.

 

[Henkka]

Apologies; it appears I made a mistake on Cleary's figures; he was actually on the ice for ZERO power play goals for. As for your figure, it's off by about quite a bit (the true value is in the realm of 20), and it's statistically irrelevant in the context of this discussion anyway. Cleary had 78 minutes on the power play without a single goal scored by the team; no other forward who spent more than ten minutes on the ice during a 5v4 situation matched him in that area. Even Samuelsson managed to be on the ice for two goals and to log a single point. More, Cleary's Corsi score was positively brutal; at -20.5 relative to team average, it was vastly worse than that of any forward who spent a substantive amount of time on the man advantage.

So there you go. I'm not sure why you're attempting to dispute Cleary's very obvious and brutal ineffectiveness on the power play, as both the eyeball test and statistics simple and advanced prove it beyond any shadow of a doubt.

Well, when those goal amounts are differing between 0 and 2 goals I could think there could be some luck involved. Good luck and bad luck.

But yeah, we all know Cleary was bad. In the past. Fine. That's 100% correct, he sucked.

What will happen if he has healthy knees, will get his speed and balance back and is better again? Cleary is signed for the next season, not the past, and our management believes he has some hockey left if he is healty. They know his health better than us in here. If he isn't healty, Babcock said he is out of the lineup.

 

[InjuredChoker]

That's sounds more reasonable with my estimates. 2nd PP is very rarely effective in any team, like our 1st PP scored ~35 (71%) of our 49 PP goals

true but injuries influenced that as our #1 pp unit changed a lot throughout the season. it had legwand, alfie, euro twins, kronwall, bert, cleary, franzen and nyquist on it at some points during the season.

Did you look shots on goal or all shot attempts? I prefer Fenwick.

corsi tends to be more reliable in smaller samples.. just bc there is more of them. fenwick in larger samples.

i looked all of them though. both were at the bottom in every category (shots, fenwick, corsi) along with sammy. nyquist was slightly below cleary in fenwick for though (fenwick against was better with nyquist so he had better overall #s).

it is pretty small sample but for whatever reason, red wings shoot the puck less when nyquist is on the pp.


of note, red wings always had great fenwicks and corsis with homer on the pp. even on his final season where he clearly was losing it. he was smart, was actually good at screening so dman had to pay attention to him and he won lot of puck battles. red wings also had very high sh% when homer was on the pp.

 

[Henkka]

corsi tends to be more reliable in smaller samples.. just bc there is more of them. fenwick in larger samples.

i looked all of them though. both were at the bottom in every category (shots, fenwick, corsi) along with sammy. nyquist was slightly below cleary in fenwick for though (fenwick against was better with nyquist so he had better overall #s).

Ok. I've started using only Fenwick when noticed that best goal scorers shoot the puck also most wide. So shots on goal doesn't really measure are you good shooter or not (most effect in Corsi).

Like "wide-shooting" Sammy had a better percentage in shots on goal than Dats and Z... that was the final conclusion to prefer Fenwick...

Superstars know were the weak spots are. Top corners/roof of the goal. They try to aim mostly there and that leads more shots wide, but the overall percentage is better to go in (lessens the goalie effect).


Ps. Should we make an advanced stats thread? Like to discuss how our team should be built in theory based ONLY on advanced stats? Then compare it to reality, when the season will start...

 

[Crymson]

What will happen if he has healthy knees, will get his speed and balance back and is better again? Cleary is signed for the next season, not the past, and our management believes he has some hockey left if he is healty. They know his health better than us in here. If he isn't healty, Babcock said he is out of the lineup.

I find it hugely unlikely that he'll return to 2010-2011 form. If he does, great. The trouble? Very few of us expect that he'll get sent to the minors even if he plays like 2013-2014 Cleary in training camp and preseason, and even if he deserves a roster spot far less than other players. The oft-idiotic treatment given to veterans, particularly Cleary, by management and coaching over the past five seasons does not exactly inspire confidence that the decision will be approached with any significant degree of objectivity.

As for Babcock's comment, it's not particularly comforting; his words have referred to the lineup, not the roster. If taken literally, they indicate that he'll simply be a healthy scratch, and not that he'll actually need to make the team. There's no way to know if he does indeed mean this literally, but I'd feel better were he to say that Cleary actually needs to earn a place on the roster.

 

[Henkka]

I find it hugely unlikely that he'll return to 2010-2011 form. If he does, great. The trouble? Very few of us expect that he'll get sent to the minors even if he plays like 2013-2014 Cleary in training camp and preseason, and even if he deserves a roster spot far less than other players. The oft-idiotic treatment given to veterans, particularly Cleary, by management and coaching over the past five seasons does not exactly inspire confidence that the decision will be approached with any significant degree of objectivity.

Past five years they have preferred those veterans yes, because our drafting and prospect development did suck. But year by year, we are having less of them as fillups. The defence is already rebuilded. No fillout vets and only kids pushing in. We are entering on an era, were only kids also on forwards spots are competing for those spots. It's not this season, but it could be next season, when Cleary and Alfie are gone. Jurco and Pulkkinen are jumping in (and someohw they fit perfectly as same typed role players for both spots). Mantha could also be in the mix. Miller is gone year after and he's then "only" 33. Before that, his job is to mentor our next generation PK kids to be as solid as himself.

As for Babcock's comment, it's not particularly comforting; his words have referred to the lineup, not the roster. If taken literally, they indicate that he'll simply be a healthy scratch, and not that he'll actually need to make the team. There's no way to know if he does indeed mean this literally, but I'd feel better were he to say that Cleary actually needs to earn a place on the roster.

So, veteran is going to sit on the bench so a kid won't sit on the bench?

Sounds a win for me.

Imo, Cleary-bomb (adding him on the playing roster) will be dropped only if our screener-types will get injured. Let's hope all those type of guys (Mule, Sheahan, Abdelkader etc.) stay healthy and keep Cleary on the bench.

But yeah, guy as being a fillup 13th-14th forward as a starting point, should not get 1.5M-2.5M valued contract? Is that the big problem in here? 900k contract and no one would be so furious?

 

[Crymson]

Past five years they have preferred those veterans yes, because our drafting and prospect development did suck.

They have preferred those veterans because it is an easy way of doing things. Holland constantly used them as stopgaps without having any plan of how to fill the gaps they were supposedly filling, and he generally kept them around because they were familiar rather than because they were good. And they received preferential treatment at the same time. Do you forget that Nyquist started in the minors so that Samuelsson, Bertuzzi, and Cleary all could play, and that there was not whatsoever any necessity for them to earn a spot in training camp? Have you forgotten that Tatar spent eight of the first nine games in the press box so that those three could all play?

But year by year, we are having less of them as fillups. The defence is already rebuilded. No fillout vets and only kids pushing in. We are entering on an era, were only kids also on forwards spots are competing for those spots. It's not this season, but it could be next season, when Cleary and Alfie are gone. Jurco and Pulkkinen are jumping in (and someohw they fit perfectly as same typed role players for both spots). Mantha could also be in the mix. Miller is gone year after and he's then "only" 33. Before that, his job is to mentor our next generation PK kids to be as solid as himself.

As I've said, whether or not Cleary's fate depends on merit will demonstrate if this organization is actually changing, or if Holland is as foolish and reactionary as I believe he is. And it's just about undoubted that Holland will blindly continue with the way he handles prospects, and so we'll once again need to watch Kindl and Lashoff bumble about while more effective players labor in the minors simply because their GM is inflexible. That's not going to change. Prospects stay in the minors as long as possible, the team isn't as good as it could be, and our stars get older.

But yeah, guy as being a fillup 13th-14th forward as a starting point, should not get 1.5M-2.5M valued contract? Is that the big problem in here? 900k contract and no one would be so furious?

There are fourth facets to the outrage about this: first is the practical implications, namely the cap space he'll occupy and the possible cap hit his bonus could cause next season; second is the principle of the matter, namely that he was not only gifted an unearned contract after a season that should have seen him bade goodbye, but was also given one that was not league minimum and gave him the opportunity to earn more money than he did last season; third is that the above came of the GM being so unbelievably stupid as to promise an unconditional extension to a non-essential player already in severe decline; and fourth is that this signing was the capstone to an already brutal offseason.

The entire situation is ludicrous.

 

[Frk It]

Bringing Cleary back is indefensible. Just leave it at that.

 

[Henkka]

Bringing Cleary back is indefensible. Just leave it at that.

But he is back and we have to live with him in that reality. In my mind, I want to see if he can rebound his knees back. Not to whine whine and whine and throw him under the bus yapping all the time how horrible he has been. First I want to see the training camp, practise games and real games if he is still horrible. If he is, then It will be time to move on.

 

[Henkka]

They have preferred those veterans because it is an easy way of doing things. Holland constantly used them as stopgaps without having any plan of how to fill the gaps they were supposedly filling, and he generally kept them around because they were familiar rather than because they were good. And they received preferential treatment at the same time. Do you forget that Nyquist started in the minors so that Samuelsson, Bertuzzi, and Cleary all could play, and that there was not whatsoever any necessity for them to earn a spot in training camp? Have you forgotten that Tatar spent eight of the first nine games in the press box so that those three could all play?

Last season was last season. Samuelsson's injury fake forced Nyquist to minors, not Cleary. Sammy would have been easy buyout without that fake and roster moves would have been very easy without his contract on the books. Tatar sat because "the tie went to the veteran" by Babcock. Now the message has been different. From Babcock's mouth, It's Cleary who has to prove himself.

There are fourth facets to the outrage about this: first is the practical implications, namely the cap space he'll occupy and the possible cap hit his bonus could cause next season; second is the principle of the matter, namely that he was not only gifted an unearned contract after a season that should have seen him bade goodbye, but was also given one that was not league minimum and gave him the opportunity to earn more money than he did last season; third is that the above came of the GM being so unbelievably stupid as to promise an unconditional extension to a non-essential player already in severe decline; and fourth is that this signing was the capstone to an already brutal offseason.

The entire situation is ludicrous.

I've calculated our estimated cap spaces for the 2015-16 and 2016-17 seasons, and giving 3-4 million bonuses for Cleary and Alfredsson won't matter in the big picture. That's the main reason why Holland is throwing those to them. In other areas our cap is managed so well.

He did got an unearned contract and it looks like Holland gave him a missing million from last year. 2.75M caphit for last season and smaller caphit for this season would have seen more reasonable. But Holland made that promise "to play with the numbers" and of course it looks silly. I didn't like it when it happened, but when analyzing it later, still there's no effect in big picture to our future cap.

 

[Crymson]

Last season was last season. Samuelsson's injury fake forced Nyquist to minors, not Cleary. Sammy would have been easy buyout without that fake and roster moves would have been very easy without his contract on the books. Tatar sat because "the tie went to the veteran" by Babcock. Now the message has been different.

Nyquist was set to be on the roster until Cleary was re-signed. That idiotic decision put the Wings at 16 forwards and over the salary cap. At that point, it rather ludicrously became unclear that even Tatar would be on the team; Holland did not clarify his continued presence on the roster until weeks later. Yep, all so that Cleary could be on the team---Cleary, who was not compelled to win a roster spot but was simply awarded one instead despite has late entry. So yes, it was Cleary.

Holland did not even try to buy out Samuelsson. He demurred because of the mere concern that the latter would dispute it based on injury. He thereupon decided to waive neither Samuelsson nor Tootoo nor Emmerton, and, as mentioned, Cleary was given a spot by default. Bertuzzi and Samuelsson both received spots despite their absence the prior season. That was all on Holland, who also failed to waive Samuelsson for months afterward. Nyquist, the team's eventual MVP, would languish in the minors so that a bunch of washed out, ineffective veterans could play. Disgraceful.

In sum: Holland ****ed up. Unequivocally so. And then he ****ed up again this summer. We've got 16 forwards again, and this time there's no dead weight to move even if, by some miracle, Holland was willing to do anything. Cleary IS the dead weight.

From Babcock's mouth, It's Cleary who has to prove himself.

Source, please. All I've seen from Babcock on the issue amounts to "Tie goes to the veteran" perhaps still being the case, and Cleary not needing to earn a spot on the NHL roster. If I'm interpreting his words correctly, Cleary will make the roster by default and will need only earn a spot in the lineup.

 

[WingedWheel1987]

Gotta remember that Babcock and Holland say one thing during the offseason, and do the exact opposite when the regular season starts.

When Babcock says Cleary isn't going to get a free lunch, we all know that is a complete lie.

 

[Crymson]

Gotta remember that Babcock and Holland say one thing during the offseason, and do the exact opposite when the regular season starts.

When Babcock says Cleary isn't going to get a free lunch, we all know that is a complete lie.

Pretty much. They both still go on about his leadership in the locker room, as if that makes up for his physical inability to play hockey. Yzerman was one of the ablest leaders in hockey history, and the most famous Red Wing of the modern era, yet Babcock severely reduced his ice time and role in 2005-2006 because of his knee problems. Last season, Dan Cleary had knee issues that reduced his level of play to well below Yzerman's in his own final season, yet Babcock continued to play him 14 minutes per night and in all situations, all the time raving about his leadership abilities. For that matter, his injuries made his 2013 season inferior to Yzerman's final campaign as well. No problem, apparently; Holland and Babcock begged him back onto the team with the promise of an unconditional extension, and the ensuing campaign, by far the worst of his career and in no way worthy of an NHL player, got him a raise.

Let's go over the numbers. In 2005-2006, Yzerman got 12:46 of ice time per game, and scored at a 46-point pace. In 2013, Cleary got 16:26 of ice time per game, scoring at a 26-point pace; and in 2013-2014, the very worst season of his career, Cleary got 13:53 of ice time per game, scoring at a 13-point pace. It may NOT be said that his ice time was reduced as the season went along; of the final 12 games of his season, he played more than 15 minutes in all but one. His ice time was in the 16s in one of those games, in the 17s three others, and in the 18s in another. In one of those games, he led all Red Wings forwards in time on ice, and he played nearly 16 minutes in his final game of the season. This, while being perhaps the very worst player on the team. That ought to give everyone a good idea of Babcock's inability to be objective where Cleary is concerned; indeed, I'm unconvinced that Babcock would not have returned Cleary to the lineup had the latter's injuries healed in time, in the process benching a far worthier player. For the record, Yzerman played 13 minutes in the final game of his career; he ended that series with four points in four games against Edmonton, or half as many as Cleary had in 52 last season.

Needless to say, the fact that very similar situations saw Cleary treated better than Yzerman is a disgrace and indicative of an unfortunate double standard, and the thoroughly absurd preferential treatment bestowed upon Cleary by both the coach and the general manager gives me absolutely no confidence that they'll approach this next season any differently. I cannot properly get across just how exceedingly ludicrous I find this situation.

 

[Actual Thought*]

Pretty much. They both still go on about his leadership in the locker room, as if that makes up for his physical inability to play hockey. Yzerman was one of the ablest leaders in hockey history, and the most famous Red Wing of the modern era, yet Babcock severely reduced his ice time and role in 2005-2006 because of his knee problems. Last season, Dan Cleary had knee issues that reduced his level of play to well below Yzerman's in his own final season, yet Babcock continued to play him 14 minutes per night and in all situations, all the time raving about his leadership abilities. For that matter, his injuries made his 2013 season inferior to Yzerman's final campaign as well. No problem, apparently; Holland and Babcock begged him back onto the team with the promise of an unconditional extension, and the ensuing campaign, by far the worst of his career and in no way worthy of an NHL player, got him a raise.

Let's go over the numbers. In 2005-2006, Yzerman got 12:46 of ice time per game, and scored at a 46-point pace. In 2013, Cleary got 16:26 of ice time per game, scoring at a 26-point pace; and in 2013-2014, the very worst season of his career, Cleary got 13:53 of ice time per game, scoring at a 13-point pace. It may NOT be said that his ice time was reduced as the season went along; of the final 12 games of his season, he played more than 15 minutes in all but one. His ice time was in the 16s in one of those games, in the 17s three others, and in the 18s in another. In one of those games, he led all Red Wings forwards in time on ice, and he played nearly 16 minutes in his final game of the season. This, while being perhaps the very worst player on the team. That ought to give everyone a good idea of Babcock's inability to be objective where Cleary is concerned; indeed, I'm unconvinced that Babcock would not have returned Cleary to the lineup had the latter's injuries healed in time, in the process benching a far worthier player. For the record, Yzerman played 13 minutes in the final game of his career; he ended that series with four points in four games against Edmonton, or half as many as Cleary had in 52 last season.

Needless to say, the fact that very similar situations saw Cleary treated better than Yzerman is a disgrace and indicative of an unfortunate double standard, and the thoroughly absurd preferential treatment bestowed upon Cleary by both the coach and the general manager gives me absolutely no confidence that they'll approach this next season any differently. I cannot properly get across just how exceedingly ludicrous I find this situation.

Wait? You are making a comparison between Yzerman and Dan Cleary while making a case that Holland is an idiot?

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Wait? You are making a comparison between Yzerman and Dan Cleary while making a case that Holland is an idiot?

I think that was more targeting Babcock if you were following along and it isn't hard to see why. Dan Cleary should never play more than all our other forwards. In fact since his 17 year old season in Belleville it shouldn't have happened again.

Now Yzerman himself wanted to buy in, much like the Alfredsson discussion. But they really should know better and Holland needs to know better than to trust Babcock with dispersing his minutes correctly. It is something Babcock has flat out been unwilling to do since oddly enough Holland forced playing time on him when Dan Cleary was trying out and a much better player.

Since then he has banked two gold medals and a Cup, Holland isn't as inclined to flex his muscle on personnel or player placement. I really think these two are too powerful to be a team and that is a problem.

Holland could well have lost it, some of his aggressiveness is way down, though it is part of the reason we are still competitive and have the best stable of youngsters we have had since the early 90's. However, incidents like the Nyquist will play are few and far between. They seem to have an egg shell approach with each other and when they have an agreement about something it is generally to our detriment lately. So they don't fight over Sammy, Cleary and Bert, well they should.

Cleary's stature within this organization was earned through blood, sweat and tears. Unfortunately that isn't all that relevant outside of if he wants to move into an organizational role. It shouldn't be rewarded with ice time and more contracts. He plays a ridiculous amount, he is brought back without good reasons.

It is not defensible and by the way if Cleary was the leader they plaster across him much like Alfie and Yzerman he would be okay with admitting his failures and bumping himself into more acceptable roles. Yes they were stars with money, but Dallas Drake for instance gave us the best five minutes he could a night. He didn't want more, he wanted to be a solid teammate and do what he could do. Cleary has a lot of pride and hey the check is nice, but if he is the same player the guy they bill him into being so often should basically walk in and ask to be a fourth line checker. Harsh but something I am beginning to believe, he is disgracing his legacy, he has gone from one of the more liked players of the last decade to the least. It is impossible that all three don't notice somebody in the Cleary, Babcock and Holland camp needs to step up and do the right thing. Cut his ice time, force his role down or gone entirely. If we believe in his character and I am inclined to, he will still be a member of this organization and a positive one, he just won't be seeing ridiculous ice time or maybe the ice at all. Tough situation, but they make big money and it isn't to be friends.

One of the reasons I somewhat am not afraid of Babcock moving on is I think it gets the pecking order back to what it should be. Holland is the boss and he needs to act like it, this situation is an embarrassing example of him not doing that in my opinion.

 

[Frk It]

It is not defensible and by the way if Cleary was the leader they plaster across him much like Alfie and Yzerman he would be okay with admitting his failures and bumping himself into more acceptable roles. Yes they were stars with money, but Dallas Drake for instance gave us the best five minutes he could a night. He didn't want more, he wanted to be a solid teammate and do what he could do. Cleary has a lot of pride and hey the check is nice, but if he is the same player the guy they bill him into being so often should basically walk in and ask to be a fourth line checker. Harsh but something I am beginning to believe, he is disgracing his legacy, he has gone from one of the more liked players of the last decade to the least. It is impossible that all three don't notice somebody in the Cleary, Babcock and Holland camp needs to step up and do the right thing. Cut his ice time, force his role down or gone entirely. If we believe in his character and I am inclined to, he will still be a member of this organization and a positive one, he just won't be seeing ridiculous ice time or maybe the ice at all. Tough situation, but they make big money and it isn't to be friends.

One of the reasons I somewhat am not afraid of Babcock moving on is I think it gets the pecking order back to what it should be. Holland is the boss and he needs to act like it, this situation is an embarrassing example of him not doing that in my opinion.

Agree with all of this. Well said.

I don't know about the last part though. You're making it seem like this is all
Babcock. Babcock benched him. Holland is the one who made the off the record, unbreakable pinky promise, that no level of sucking could nullify apparently.

All 3 of them look foolish for this little circus they have going.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Agree with all of this. Well said.

I don't know about the last part though. You're making it seem like this is all
Babcock. Babcock benched him. Holland is the one who made the off the record, unbreakable pinky promise, that no level of sucking could nullify apparently.

All 3 of them look foolish for this little circus they have going.

I don't think it is all Babcock, though Holland seemed okay for a little bit on letting him go last season. He at least looked over the cliff and then made a promise after being talked into it or after that whole debacle worked out.

What I do think is a problem in general though is I don't really like this relationship anymore. They seem to get along but in more of a huge respect and knowing what each other has accomplished. I don't think it leads to an honest narrative at times.

We will see, something out of 24/7 was their conversations are very matter of fact. It is clear both guys believe the other guy knows a lot about hockey. I think I prefer a harder swing from the front office. The coaches input should matter. But there are certain situations where one of these guys needs to be an alpha male and it seems both are deferring. By title that is Holland's role and I would like to see him have more command of it.

I really liked two seasons ago when Babcock came out and said Nyquist was sitting and later that night he was not with Holland saying we didn't call him up to watch. I think that needs to happen from time to time. I however understand why you don't tell a two time Gold medalist and Cup winner every part of their business. But I just feel there needs to be more accountability in both guys actions. Why isn't this guy playing in certain roels, I think most GMs can ask that, I don't know that ours can because of the coach anymore. We will see, but I think we might be better off with one chef in the kitchen.

The Smith thing befuddles me, especially when they had polar opposite comments on the kind of player he was two years ago and it seems now Babcock has talked Holland into Smith not being as good offensively and that kind of stuff concerns me. Like when Babcock spoke up on Burns, Holland should have nailed him for wanting a guy that cannot actually make a consistent outlet pass and knows where defensive positioning is. Which is something that really bothers me, how in the world can Mike Babcock like Brent Burns but put the shackles on offensive D-man? The guy is absolutely deplorable in his own zone, honestly one of the worst in the entire league but his mistakes were okay?

I don't know, but I think they have mixed messages and while they try to cater to each other it isn't going well. Putting Babcock's more hardened approach on a team that had loads of skill was perfect, now we have swung too far the other direction of hard and defensive oriented without enough skill. This isn't how Holland built teams or ran drafts clear back to the late 80's. He does talk some about the change in the game, but I think that is the Babcock influence. For a time they complimented each other, now I am not so sure and it seems the only time they are in agreement we should all cover our eyes, their neutral ground on guys like the aged Bertuzzi, Sammy, Cleary and even the usefulness of Quincey in his changed role isn't good. It might be best for both if they part, it isn't going well lately.

 

[Frk It]

I don't think it is all Babcock, though Holland seemed okay for a little bit on letting him go last season. He at least looked over the cliff and then made a promise after being talked into it or after that whole debacle worked out.

What I do think is a problem in general though is I don't really like this relationship anymore. They seem to get along but in more of a huge respect and knowing what each other has accomplished. I don't think it leads to an honest narrative at times.

We will see, something out of 24/7 was their conversations are very matter of fact. It is clear both guys believe the other guy knows a lot about hockey. I think I prefer a harder swing from the front office. The coaches input should matter. But there are certain situations where one of these guys needs to be an alpha male and it seems both are deferring. By title that is Holland's role and I would like to see him have more command of it.

I really liked two seasons ago when Babcock came out and said Nyquist was sitting and later that night he was not with Holland saying we didn't call him up to watch. I think that needs to happen from time to time. I however understand why you don't tell a two time Gold medalist and Cup winner every part of their business. But I just feel there needs to be more accountability in both guys actions. Why isn't this guy playing in certain roels, I think most GMs can ask that, I don't know that ours can because of the coach anymore. We will see, but I think we might be better off with one chef in the kitchen.

The Smith thing befuddles me, especially when they had polar opposite comments on the kind of player he was two years ago and it seems now Babcock has talked Holland into Smith not being as good offensively and that kind of stuff concerns me. Like when Babcock spoke up on Burns, Holland should have nailed him for wanting a guy that cannot actually make a consistent outlet pass and knows where defensive positioning is. Which is something that really bothers me, how in the world can Mike Babcock like Brent Burns but put the shackles on offensive D-man? The guy is absolutely deplorable in his own zone, honestly one of the worst in the entire league but his mistakes were okay?

I don't know, but I think they have mixed messages and while they try to cater to each other it isn't going well. Putting Babcock's more hardened approach on a team that had loads of skill was perfect, now we have swung too far the other direction of hard and defensive oriented without enough skill. This isn't how Holland built teams or ran drafts clear back to the late 80's. He does talk some about the change in the game, but I think that is the Babcock influence. For a time they complimented each other, now I am not so sure and it seems the only time they are in agreement we should all cover our eyes, their neutral ground on guys like the aged Bertuzzi, Sammy, Cleary and even the usefulness of Quincey in his changed role isn't good. It might be best for both if they part, it isn't going well lately.

A lot of good points in here. I think their relationship has evolved quite a bit, and I agree, it may not have the best balance any more.

Regarding Burns- I would say the fact that Burns is 6'5", 230+ lbs, and right handed plays a big part in Babs favoring him over Smith.

The fact that Smith isn't utilized properly (power play) is one of the most baffling things to me. It's so obvious. Not sure if you caught it, but per an analysis done by WIIM, B Smith was the best Red Wing last year at gaining the zone last year. Regardless of position. And that was a huge issue on the man advantage last year.

 

[Crymson]

Wait? You are making a comparison between Yzerman and Dan Cleary while making a case that Holland is an idiot?

I made that comparison to illustrate the ludicrous preferential treatment given to Cleary by Holland and Babcock.

 

[Squirrel in the Hole]

There is no parallel. McCarty had been one of the most beloved Red Wings over the prior decade-plus. He worked his way up through the IHL, then to the AHL, and finally to the NHL. He accepted and played in a complementary role, contributing where he could; he provided a valuable physical presence in the games he played in the playoffs, and the fans absolutely loved having him back. When, the next season, he was ineffective, he was shucked to the AHL. One assumes he was OK with this, and he worked as hard there as he would have in the NHL.

Cleary was the worst player on the team last season. He earned a spot on the team by default. He received an extension that he did not deserve; worse, it was well in excess of league minimum. He has incessantly received preferential treatment both on and off the ice, receiving ample ice time in all situations despite play that consistently ranged from mediocre to absolutely putrid in quality. He carries no clout whatsoever with the fans, and so lacks even the popularity that McCarty brought to the table. Quite the opposite, really; he's now actively disliked by the fanbase (though this is perhaps undeserved). Nobody expects him to be put in the AHL; the coach is his self-professed biggest fan, and the GM begged him back onto the team last offseason with the promise of an unconditional contract extension.



I'll vomit if I see him in a net-front role next season. He was on the ice for one goal in 76 minutes of power play time last season. ONE. He had zero power play points. He couldn't deflect a puck to save his life, and his horrid mobility made him unable to participate in the cycle. And he was on the ice for a shorthanded goal against, making his contribution far worse than simply nil. He is utterly unfit for the role, and literally any other player on the roster last season could have done a better job. They all could at least skate and pass properly; he could not. If by some unfairness he actually makes the team, he ought to be near the end of the depth chart. Even if grit and willingness are prerequisites, the likes of Franzen, Sheahan, Callahan, Helm, Glendening, Abdelkader, Miller, and several others would fit the bill. Size isn't an issue here, as Cleary is only 6'0".

I wasn't comparing McCarty to Cleary, you're right, there's no comparison. I was comparing the situations (McCarty 2008-2009 and Cleary 2014-2015). And yes, the situations are not exactly the same, but the McCarty situation in 2008-2009 at least provides a scenario that I believe the Cleary situation this year may follow.

 

[Crymson]

I wasn't comparing McCarty to Cleary, you're right, there's no comparison. I was comparing the situations (McCarty 2008-2009 and Cleary 2014-2015). And yes, the situations are not exactly the same, but the McCarty situation in 2008-2009 at least provides a scenario that I believe the Cleary situation this year may follow.

Something about Cleary makes Babcock and Holland abandon their good judgment.