Did Chicago surpass Red Wings?

[93LEAFS]

Maybe, as a neutral I'd say no. Chicago has had 3 cups but have had a lot of holdovers, Detroit's run (that is still going on playoff wise but not cup wise) the only key guy on all cup teams was Lidstrom. If Chicago can still be playoff team post Toews and Kane its a discussion. Granted you had a massive advantage in the key time of your run being one of the richest during the pre-cap area, and were smart/lucky (great risk assessment) in your hording of Russians pre-collapse of the wall. There is a reason you are viewed as the model organization, Stan Bowman replicates lessons his dad taught him when he helped create the Red Wing culture, which he took from his time in a the best run organization under Sam Pollack. There is a reason Tampa, Dallas and Chicago are successful implementing and adapting this approach, and I hope this also works for my Leafs.

Also realize all these teams (60's/70's habs, 90's/00's Wings and 00's/10's Hawks) did something insanely smart which competitors didn't catch on to or were able to do. The Habs when entering the draft era, post expansion realized the value of trading prospects and vets to desperate expansion teams loading up on high picks (got Lafleur and Shutt this way, also allowed them to repeat for a bit), Red Wings were early in scouting european youth and won their bet on the wall falling or players defecting and while Detroit was the first to do it (but not as extreme) the deals Chicago gave Hossa and Keith has kept their window open in the cap era.

Don't get me wrong, I hate your team, Blackhawks are an old rivalry, and despise the Habs, but I have nothing but respect for how you achieved it and the smart management.

Edit: i generally avoid opposing boards due to pissing matches that can occur, just though you might like an outsider/neutrals opinion.

 

[ap3x]

Sure, appreciate that. Thanks for your input.

 

[Frk It]

It's a myth that you can do a quick-rebuild by spending 2-3 years at the bottom of the league and then become a contender. The one example that sort of fits is Pittsburgh, but that only works if you get extremely lucky to pick players like Crosby and Malkin.

I agree with this, and I think people don't realize this when they advocate we tank.

I also think in most cases teams don't end up tanking by design. It's a series of bad decisions and bad luck that gets them in that position, and then they just embrace being bad.

 

[Shoalzie]

In the cap era, you have to give Chicago tons of credit for winning as much as they have in spite of chances to their supporting cast. It's almost apples to oranges comparing the Wings championships (pre-cap) to Chicago now. Chicago is winning in a tougher era.

When the Wings were at their best, the NHL more resembled the NBA now...you can probably count on one hand the contenders each year because they had the resources. The gap between the top and the bottom was much wider.

I think you can appreciate each team's success with the understanding of the era in which it was done. Winning when the league has more competitive balance and more of a level playing field financially shows who are the best ran organizations...not just the wealthiest.

 

[Shaman464]

Yeah they would have. When have Chicago traded upcoming UFAs before going into the playoffs?

The summer before that season? Or they would have signed then traded them? They wouldn't have just waited till the deadline, that's what bubble teams do.

 

[Pavels Dog]

The summer before that season? Or they would have signed then traded them? They wouldn't have just waited till the deadline, that's what bubble teams do.

They've done some smart moves to trade players instead of losing too many to UFA, but some of that has been pure necessity as well from getting into cap trouble and being unable to keep their role players. I mean they had two pretty mediocre seasons after their first cup win because they lost a big chunk of their roster. Did they do sign-and-trades? Can't remember. But it's hard to say at what point Holland should have moved Filppula and Hudler. I guess 2011-12 for Filppula, when he was having his best season to date and was part of our best line.. that would have gotten us some good value. But it takes stones to start selling off the team when you still have Nicklas Lidstrom anchoring your defense. Should have traded Jiri Hudler in 10-11 maybe, when we finished 1st in the Central.

I guess in hindsight you can think of a lot of things that could have been done. Lidstrom was basically useless to us after 08 since we didn't win anymore cups. Could have likely gotten us a 1st round pick at that point.

 

[8snake]

In the cap era, you have to give Chicago tons of credit for winning as much as they have in spite of chances to their supporting cast. It's almost apples to oranges comparing the Wings championships (pre-cap) to Chicago now. Chicago is winning in a tougher era.

When the Wings were at their best, the NHL more resembled the NBA now...you can probably count on one hand the contenders each year because they had the resources. The gap between the top and the bottom was much wider.

I think you can appreciate each team's success with the understanding of the era in which it was done. Winning when the league has more competitive balance and more of a level playing field financially shows who are the best ran organizations...not just the wealthiest.

The Blackhawks organization is run like the Patriots organization in the NFL. They've identified 4 or 5 core pieces and EVERYBODY else is expendable and can be moved or walked away from at the drop of a hat. Holland operates with a commitment to loyalty and what some define as "classy" treatment of his players. A guy like Ericsson would have never spent 12 years with the Blackhawks under their current management...home grown or not. Role players similar to Gator in Chicago are considered pieces to make moves or walk away from if the price is too high...in Detroit he gets re-signed and he's probably a Red Wing for his entire career. When I was a kid I was big on loyalty...I never wanted Coffey to get traded or Lapointe to go. I wanted guys to be here forever. Holland runs this team like I would when I was 15...and when everybody gets old and there's a talent drain you become a "treadmill team"...running in place never getting appreciably better or bottom of the barrel awful. That's where we are now and it pains me to see an organization run like the Hawks and see such a dramatic difference in philosophy.

 

[Pavels Dog]

The Blackhawks organization is run like the Patriots organization in the NFL. They've identified 4 or 5 core pieces and EVERYBODY else is expendable and can be moved or walked away from at the drop of a hat. Holland operates with a commitment to loyalty and what some define as "classy" treatment of his players. A guy like Ericsson would have never spent 12 years with the Blackhawks under their current management...home grown or not. Role players similar to Gator in Chicago are considered pieces to make moves or walk away from if the price is too high...in Detroit he gets re-signed and he's probably a Red Wing for his entire career. When I was a kid I was big on loyalty...I never wanted Coffey to get traded or Lapointe to go. I wanted guys to be here forever. Holland runs this team like I would when I was 15...and when everybody gets old and there's a talent drain you become a "treadmill team"...running in place never getting appreciably better or bottom of the barrel awful. That's where we are now and it pains me to see an organization run like the Hawks and see such a dramatic difference in philosophy.

When your core is young and increasing in cost, you have to shift out the pieces around them constantly to keep your core. When your core is old and either getting cheaper with each new contract, or disappearing from the roster, you are not forced to part with supporting players like Ericsson and Abdelkader UNLESS you are doing something else with that money. In the case that we could have picked up a big-name free agent like Andrew Ladd, we might have parted with Abdelkader. If we could have signed Suter, Ericsson wouldn't be here.

 

[DanZ]

Winning a cup in a season shortened by a strike isn't the same accomplishment as winning one after playing a full 82 game season.

They had to go through 4 rounds like every other Cup winner. Sure, they might have been more rested due to a shorter regular season, but so was the competition... It's the same accomplishment.

 

[Mount Suribachi]

The Blackhawks organization is run like the Patriots organization in the NFL. They've identified 4 or 5 core pieces and EVERYBODY else is expendable and can be moved or walked away from at the drop of a hat. Holland operates with a commitment to loyalty and what some define as "classy" treatment of his players.

The interesting thing is that you go back 5+ years and that's exactly what Holland said in interviews - the Patriots model ie pay big money to keep your core players and don't overpay for support players. And as time went on he got away from that and kept handing out loyalty contracts, 2 year contracts for players who should have been on 1 year deals etc.

I guess in hindsight you can think of a lot of things that could have been done. Lidstrom was basically useless to us after 08 since we didn't win anymore cups. Could have likely gotten us a 1st round pick at that point.

OK, you're being silly now, your previous point about needing stones to trade away support players when you have Lidstrom (and Datsyuk and Zetterberg...) is true, it does take stones. But that's were Holland's biggest fault is - his unwillingness to part with "his" players, which is compounded by failure to take advantage of his greatest strength (drafting and development). When you have promising youngsters waiting in the wings, you need to start feeding them in, see what they've got and be prepared to trade away the Filpulla's and Hudler's before you can't afford them anymore and replace them with said (cheap) kids.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Lidstrom was basically useless to us after 08 since we didn't win anymore cups. Could have likely gotten us a 1st round pick at that point.

Uh, anyone they would've gotten would've been inferior to the impact Lidstrom had on the team, and the Wings have never been in rebuild mode.

 

[Pavels Dog]

OK, you're being silly now, your previous point about needing stones to trade away support players when you have Lidstrom (and Datsyuk and Zetterberg...) is true, it does take stones. But that's were Holland's biggest fault is - his unwillingness to part with "his" players, which is compounded by failure to take advantage of his greatest strength (drafting and development). When you have promising youngsters waiting in the wings, you need to start feeding them in, see what they've got and be prepared to trade away the Filpulla's and Hudler's before you can't afford them anymore and replace them with said (cheap) kids.

So when do you trade Filppula and Hudler and who do you replace them with?

And about being silly... if we traded away Hudler and Filppula somewhere around 2009-2011, we might as well have traded Lidstrom too. Because our team would have become so much worse that we'd have zero chance at a cup.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

The Blackhawks organization is run like the Patriots organization in the NFL. They've identified 4 or 5 core pieces and EVERYBODY else is expendable and can be moved or walked away from at the drop of a hat. Holland operates with a commitment to loyalty and what some define as "classy" treatment of his players. A guy like Ericsson would have never spent 12 years with the Blackhawks under their current management...home grown or not. Role players similar to Gator in Chicago are considered pieces to make moves or walk away from if the price is too high...in Detroit he gets re-signed and he's probably a Red Wing for his entire career. When I was a kid I was big on loyalty...I never wanted Coffey to get traded or Lapointe to go. I wanted guys to be here forever. Holland runs this team like I would when I was 15...and when everybody gets old and there's a talent drain you become a "treadmill team"...running in place never getting appreciably better or bottom of the barrel awful. That's where we are now and it pains me to see an organization run like the Hawks and see such a dramatic difference in philosophy.

Doubt Ericsson gets as long of a contract or as much of a salary as he has if we have D Z and L in their prime.

I think people mistake the idea of rounding out the team with some semblance of talent while our best players get progressively worse with signing role guys to ridiculous contracts while we have top-tier players in the middle of their prime.

 

[TheOtherOne]

I think you can't say anything about which franchise had a better run until one of them ends.

I think you can't say anything about whether our playoff streak matters until it ends.

Imagine we continue the playoff streak for another 3 years or 5 years and then win another Cup. Then you will be able to say "Detroit started winning in 97, won 4 Cups, then rebuilt on the fly without ever dropping into the bottom half of the league, then won another Cup." That would be an impressive as hell quarter of a century, which would include the "borderline playoff years" drought as an integral part.

On the other hand if we end up missing without another Cup then people will only say we had a good 11 year run, and nobody will give a **** about how long the playoff streak was.

Similarly, if Chicago wins another Cup soon, then they would have a better run going than we currently have. But if they don't, then it was still only the second-best run in the modern era.

In any case we need to wait another few years to answer this question.

 

[Reddwit]

In the cap era, you have to give Chicago tons of credit for winning as much as they have in spite of chances to their supporting cast. It's almost apples to oranges comparing the Wings championships (pre-cap) to Chicago now. Chicago is winning in a tougher era.

When the Wings were at their best, the NHL more resembled the NBA now...you can probably count on one hand the contenders each year because they had the resources. The gap between the top and the bottom was much wider.

I think you can appreciate each team's success with the understanding of the era in which it was done. Winning when the league has more competitive balance and more of a level playing field financially shows who are the best ran organizations...not just the wealthiest.

Are they? What was the Wings biggest issue for pretty much the length of their dominant period?

Playing down to bad teams.

Imagine they had the same talent but played in an era where 25 of the teams they could possibly face would put up a battle?

The Wings lost several chances at a Cup because of the Red Army theory. You get into the habit of playing inferior teams game after game after game then the second the opposition decides to go balls to the wall, you're out of sorts.

Compare many of those late 90s and early 00s teams to the Hawks now and the Wings roster is more talented, top to bottom. What is wasn't, however, was battle-tested. The Wings Hall of Fame rosters in this era would be a sight to behold.

 

[Shaman464]

So when do you trade Filppula and Hudler and who do you replace them with?

And about being silly... if we traded away Hudler and Filppula somewhere around 2009-2011, we might as well have traded Lidstrom too. Because our team would have become so much worse that we'd have zero chance at a cup.

There was a point where Holland knew he wasn't going to sign either of them, from the news articles it seems both broke down in the summer before they hit free agency. At that point he should have traded them.

 

[Sadist]

Winning a cup in a season shortened by a strike isn't the same accomplishment as winning one after playing a full 82 game season.

I wonder if you would be using this line of logic had the Wings beat New Jersey in 1994-95?

 

[ArGarBarGar]

There was a point where Holland knew he wasn't going to sign either of them, from the news articles it seems both broke down in the summer before they hit free agency. At that point he should have traded them.

Holland offered Filppula a contract right before free agency, and by the time Filppula came back around during free agency apparently it was too late. He was being targeted by Detroit for a re-signing.

 

[Shaman464]

Holland offered Filppula a contract right before free agency, and by the time Filppula came back around during free agency apparently it was too late. He was being targeted by Detroit for a re-signing.

There were many articles, which you can still access, that made it clear Filppula wanted to test the FA waters. Holland could offer anyone a contract, but it's meaningless when they are on record in papers from their homeland and in Detroit that they weren't going to sign before July 1. Furthermore if Holland had any faith that Flip was going to consider a contract with Detroit then he wouldn't have signed Weiss off the get go.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

I agree with this, and I think people don't realize this when they advocate we tank.

I also think in most cases teams don't end up tanking by design. It's a series of bad decisions and bad luck that gets them in that position, and then they just embrace being bad.

I think you can't see it in terms of extremes. "Tanking" in the purest sense means you trade away your star players for picks and prospects and then hope to sink low enough by putting an AHL team on the ice to be able to pick the next superstar in the draft. That's the extreme approach and is typically taken by teams which already are in the lower 3rd of the league and know there's no quick fix for them anyway.

But then on the flip side there's what I'd call the "filling holes" approach of a team that feels they have a good team but are a couple pieces away from being a true contender. The team then tries to address those needs via trading for rentals or signing veteran FAs. Teams usually take this approach when their core seems good enough to win. Pittsburgh for example has been a team like this for much of the time they've had Malkin and Crosby as they reasonably have believed having two superstar centers means they are in a window of opportunity.

But the Wings have been in this camp as well basically up to this year. They traded for Zidlicky and Cole last year at the deadline, they signed Green in the summer this year. In 2014 they traded for Legwand at the deadline and had signed Alfredsson and Weiss the summer before. Those deals obviously turned out to be pointless and certainly did not help propel the Wings towards Cup contention. Given the apparent weaknesses of the Wings roster, it would have taken a lot more aggressive and risky maneuvers to do that. The correct answer would have been to 'do nothing'. And there's a difference between 'tanking' and not making moves designed to keep the team just enough above average to safely make the playoffs.

 

[chances14]

let's see what happens when current hawks core ages and declines. The wings were able to successfully win with 2 different cores.

If the hawks can do that, then I think it's debatable. Until that happens, I don't think they have surpassed the wings

 

[Reddwit]

let's see what happens when current hawks core ages and declines. The wings were able to successfully win with 2 different cores.

If the hawks can do that, then I think it's debatable. Until that happens, I don't think they have surpassed the wings

Not just that.

Two different cores - Yzerman/Feds/Lids/Konstantinov; Zetterberg/Datsyuk/Lidstrom/Raffi

Two different financial eras - No cap; Cap

But also styles:

Veteran/size dominance; "Youth"/skill dominance.

I say "youth" because it seemed like it was more of a sub-30, over-30 issue, outside of a few exceptions.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

There were many articles, which you can still access, that made it clear Filppula wanted to test the FA waters. Holland could offer anyone a contract, but it's meaningless when they are on record in papers from their homeland and in Detroit that they weren't going to sign before July 1. Furthermore if Holland had any faith that Flip was going to consider a contract with Detroit then he wouldn't have signed Weiss off the get go.

Then show me the damn articles if they are so easy to access. I remember them offering him a contract, he went to FA, then the Wings chose to go in a different direction once they felt they needed to make a decision one way or the other.

 

[Shaman464]

Then show me the damn articles if they are so easy to access. I remember them offering him a contract, he went to FA, then the Wings chose to go in a different direction once they felt they needed to make a decision one way or the other.

Here's one right here: http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2013/06/free-agent_forward_valtteri_fi.html literally saying "Free-agent forward Valtteri Filppula taking wait-and-see approach to future with Detroit Red Wings"

 

[chances14]

Here's one right here: http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2013/06/free-agent_forward_valtteri_fi.html literally saying "Free-agent forward Valtteri Filppula taking wait-and-see approach to future with Detroit Red Wings"

nowhere in that article did filppula outright obviously say he wanted to test the free agent market

that's just typical media rehortic for a player currently negotiating a new contract