Do you still support Ken Holland and Mike Babcock?

[Flowah]

What's the threshold for determining whether a move was right or not? If the bar is set at winning the cup or it's a total failure, I think it's wholly unfair. With that sort of standard, there should be a lot of GMs losing their jobs.

I don't think it's cup or fail. There is certainly progress to be made. For example, a team that doesn't even make the playoffs for 5 years and then does, that's progress, and that's a GM doing his job. Can't expect Calgary or Edmonton to win next year, but if they get closer and closer, that's certainly good on the GM.

Objectively, it's about how close you get to winning the cup. Obviously Finals > Conference Finals > Second round > First round > not making the playoffs. On that front, it just seems like we've been going downhill since 2009 and spinning our wheels. We haven't gotten past the second round. We've barely made the playoffs a couple of times. Playoffs used to be a foregone conclusion. Last year it came down to the last game of the season.

Other than that, it's hard to come up with "objective" standards, but I've got a few.

1. Development pipeline. If there's not a steady stream of young talent being introduced, evaluated, and molded in, then something is wrong.

2. Flexibility. Does the GM seem to move pieces that aren't working? Does he hoard? Can he acquire pieces by the deadline? I don't think Kenny has shown very much flexibility in the past few years during the season. He likes to stand pat. He likes the team. He loves the prospects (but not enough to give them a roster spot I guess).

3. GM's thoughts and strategy. This is really tough to evaluate, because you never know how much he believes what he throws out there publicly, but I am irritated when I hear the same thing from Holland year after year. Because it hasn't been working. It's sorta like how Flames fans felt with Feaster. (Alliteration!) When a GM just keeps denying the reality that the strategy isn't working, it's mind-boggling. Just admit it, adjust, and move on. I haven't seen too much adjustment from Holland over the past few years though, so I think what he says to the media is what he really believes. He likes this strategy of a roster filled with veterans and basically, only veterans. Looking at the forward group is sad sometimes. His GMing over the 4 years can be summed up as "conservative" to put it mildly. He never wants to take a chance on the prospects he values so highly. But he also won't trade them for key pieces for a cup run either. Confusing.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

fyi-

if we cant scrutnize the past then that HAS to go for both the good and the bad decisions, outcomes, etc

it has too

i would think its acceptable to not talk about hossa vs franzen so long as we dont talk about 22 straight playoffs, 4 stanley cups etc etc and simply look at it as 1 playoff year, 8th seed, 1 pt out of 9th, 2nd rd loss, only 1 forward draft pick from the last 6 years good enough to crack our top 12 and go from there

 

[BinCookin]

I don't think it's cup or fail. There is certainly progress to be made. For example, a team that doesn't even make the playoffs for 5 years and then does, that's progress, and that's a GM doing his job. Can't expect Calgary or Edmonton to win next year, but if they get closer and closer, that's certainly good on the GM.

Objectively, it's about how close you get to winning the cup. Obviously Finals > Conference Finals > Second round > First round > not making the playoffs. On that front, it just seems like we've been going downhill since 2009 and spinning our wheels. We haven't gotten past the second round. We've barely made the playoffs a couple of times. Playoffs used to be a foregone conclusion. Last year it came down to the last game of the season.



Looking at the forward group is sad sometimes. His GMing over the 4 years can be summed up as "conservative" to put it mildly. He never wants to take a chance on the prospects he values so highly. But he also won't trade them for key pieces for a cup run either. Confusing.

These are good points. But teams at the top can't be expected to stay at the top.

"spinning wheels since our cup final" implies with the right choices the DRW make it the cup final every year.
I don't think that is a reasonable expectation no matter WHAT choices can or were made.

The fact that we fall a little was required i think sooner or later. Look at Vancouver. They have fallen much harder after their cup final.

I agree with your premise though. We need to use our youth better and be less loyal to NON-ELITE veterans.

 

[RedWingsNow*]

of course hindsight is 20/20

Have you read the posts on this board? Hindsight is not 20/20

 

[BinCookin]

fyi-

if we cant scrutnize the past then that HAS to go for both the good and the bad decisions, outcomes, etc

it has too

i would think its acceptable to not talk about hossa vs franzen so long as we dont talk about 22 straight playoffs, 4 stanley cups etc etc and simply look at it as 1 playoff year, 8th seed, 1 pt out of 9th, 2nd rd loss, only 1 forward draft pick from the last 6 years good enough to crack our top 12 and go from there

I never name the 20 years of success as reasons to keep these 2
That is a blind platitude.

20 years of success has limited our draft picks though... and that does affect the quality of our prospects. So these issues are connected.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

I agree with your premise though. We need to use our youth better and be less loyal to NON-ELITE veterans.

I think it goes a bit deeper than that, though, because the organization is tremendously eager to use certain young players but not others. I think the Wings brain trust thinks there's a specific way they can win, and they're targeting that. That means certain players don't immediately fit that model and should only have small roles until either they adapt or a spot more suitable to their style opens up.

That's the only way their actions make even a shred of sense. That's not to say that the idea that Holland and Babcock aren't thinking rationally is an irrational idea itself, though.

 

[RedWingsNow*]

So he was passed over four times by most teams. Not necessarily directed at you, but it's too easy to look back at a draft and say we should have drafted this or that guy. If we went back over the draft threads we have every year, though, we would see a ton of guys we would be saying we should have taken with this or that pick just to see them bust three years later anyway.

Despite the slow development path the Wings push, it looks like they stand a good chance of having a couple of NHLers from every draft dating back to 2009. Maybe no one like Benn or Giroux, but some decent players regardless.

The point is that it's NOT unrealistic to make getting a franchise center a priority./

Instead of making excuses, why don't you tell us what you think this team needs, long term, to regain its mojo?

 

[RedWingsNow*]

I am not making excuses RWN. I disagree with management on many of the same points you do.
If we have Hossa, and the Blackhawks don't... do we win the stanley cup? Because that year, he didn't actually play that well. Also how do we know that Hossa just didnt think Chicago was better... and that he was going to choose to be there either way? We don't actually know.

You Blame Holland without enough information too vocally is my only point.

"Load up on high-quality UFAs" i would argue there has been a shallow pool to choose from each year.
Parise/Suter was the nicest year. We missed.

You Blame Holland specifically for not offering enough money (maybe right, maybe wrong) but
you disregard the point that these 2 guys talked and moved to their home city. The both got 7.5 Mil a year to move home. Would you be ok with paying each of them 9.5 Mil a year to choose Detroit instead? They might not even go for that.

I am just saying that if YOU were the Detroit GM, I don't think you could have put together the best team in hockey given the same circumstances, not because of your talent or ideas, but because you would have needed alot of luck with limited choices. Its very possible that many of the players we complain about our reasons we are still a good team.

I mostly disagree with your assessment of the team. They are a good team. They just are not the best team. You think playing Nyq and Tatar in the top group makes us stronger. So do I. But I cannot state it as a fact. I just hope for trades or injuries or something. I agree with you. I am not making excuses for Mike and Ken. But you are stating the team is horrible, and these guys are idiots and its more like a grey area. Thats my only point. The extreme nature of your points do create discussion though

I would really like to see Sammy get traded. Plz Plz Ken do something to get rid of some of the OLD forwards. God its frustrating to have alfie perfectly set up Cleary, instead of Andersson. Really wanted Cleary to have no points at all.

Could I have done better? On paper, yes. In practice -- being the leader of an organization with relationships and politics? I'd hide under my desk in a fetal position
But on paper -- Holland's mistakes are pretty easy to track.

 

[TheNextDaigle]

So he was passed over four times by most teams. Not necessarily directed at you, but it's too easy to look back at a draft and say we should have drafted this or that guy. If we went back over the draft threads we have every year, though, we would see a ton of guys we would be saying we should have taken with this or that pick just to see them bust three years later anyway.

Despite the slow development path the Wings push, it looks like they stand a good chance of having a couple of NHLers from every draft dating back to 2009. Maybe no one like Benn or Giroux, but some decent players regardless.

It wasn´t a dig at DRW. Just recognising that there are possibilities to snatch some awesome talent in the latter rounds. Benn and the likes of him are of course extremely rare cases, but with some luck and "specific" scouting (going for extreme skill, or leadership etc) you can get lucky every now and then.

 

[BinCookin]

It wasn´t a dig at DRW. Just recognising that there are possibilities to snatch some awesome talent in the latter rounds. Benn and the likes of him are of course extremely rare cases, but with some luck and "specific" scouting (going for extreme skill, or leadership etc) you can get lucky every now and then.

We might have that in Nyquist or Tatar right now. We just have not played them enough or long enough at the NHL level to KNOW that or not.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

I never name the 20 years of success as reasons to keep these 2
That is a blind platitude.

20 years of success has limited our draft picks though... and that does affect the quality of our prospects. So these issues are connected.

not you specifically, it was a general comment on the tone of mnay peoples debates

 

[Brick Top]

I do not see the same experiments being tried on the Red Wings. I mean Nyquist or Tatar have never really been put on a higher line. Its the DRW way... not rush people in, not put too much pressure on them. But Nyquist and Tatar are not 19 year olds. They would probably handle the top line spot for a few games without ruining them. Maybe Nyquist-D-Z would be amazing... or maybe Tatar-D-Z would be amazing. Why do I feel like a 3 game trial period of different wingers on the top line would be worth the effort? Just seems like we are not going to even try to do the same thing as SJ, because we have a belief we are still good - "we do have something to lose". That attitude i question.
I think its clear Nyquist has offensive upside and should not be put on a 4th line spot. Why not try him up there for 2-3 games.. "why not?" ??

The pressure on the young guys is a funny thing on the Wings team... I'd say that guys like Tatar and Gus probably feel and/or have more pressure on them by having to play with stiffs on the 4th line for 8 or 9 mins a night vs getting to play on a scoring line with actual NHL offensive talent.

Instead of being able to use their offensive skills naturally with the safety net of playing with elite NHL defensive forwards like D & Z, they are forced to make chicken salad out of chicken **** on the 4th line with the Miller/Emmerton types. And the whole time they know that one scoreless game or turnover anywhere on the ice will likely land them back in the press box (or GR) for the foreseeable future to be replaced by less talented vets favored by the coach and/or GM.

That's pressure.

 

[BinCookin]

The pressure on the young guys is a funny thing on the Wings team... I'd say that guys like Tatar and Gus probably feel and/or have more pressure on them by having to play with stiffs on the 4th line for 8 or 9 mins a night vs getting to play on a scoring line with actual NHL offensive talent.

Instead of being able to use their offensive skills naturally with the safety net of playing with elite NHL defensive forwards like D & Z, they are forced to make chicken salad out of chicken **** on the 4th line with the Miller/Emmerton types. And the whole time they know that one scoreless game or turnover anywhere on the ice will likely land them back in the press box (or GR) for the foreseeable future.

That's pressure.

I have to agree.

 

[TheNextDaigle]

We might have that in Nyquist or Tatar right now. We just have not played them enough or long enough at the NHL level to KNOW that or not.

Yeah, we might. But the chances are slim.

 

[WingedWheel1987]

Yeah, we might. But the chances are slim.

They are still going to need to play. That will delay the next group of prospects. It's a lose/lose situation.

 

[BinCookin]

Yeah, we might. But the chances are slim.

Your right. Odds are they are not the next Z.

But maybe they are the next Hudler. And if we had Hudler right now... ill tell you what. He would beat out cleary for ice time!

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

Your right. Odds are they are not the next Z.

But maybe they are the next Hudler. And if we had Hudler right now... ill tell you what. He would beat out cleary for ice time!

if true, thats terrible roster mgmt no?

 

[SoupNazi]

if true, thats terrible roster mgmt no?

Because they aren't the next Zetterberg but might be the next Hudler, that's terrible management?

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

Because they aren't the next Zetterberg but might be the next Hudler, that's terrible management?

hahah no no, he said had we kept hudler he would beat out cleary for ice time and as we all know, KH chose to not keep Hudler while cleary was once again resigned, thus thats terrible roster mgmt

 

[Chance on Chance]

Because they aren't the next Zetterberg but might be the next Hudler, that's terrible management?

The way I see it is we don't know what they are and who knows when we'll find out. I'd argue that Tatar not playing and gus in the AHL is hindering their development

 

[SoupNazi]

hahah no no, he said had we kept hudler he would beat out cleary for ice time and as we all know, KH chose to not keep Hudler while cleary was once again resigned, thus thats terrible roster mgmt

I honestly disagree, though, (and I realize this isn't even your point) that Hudler would beat Cleary for ice time given Babcock's mancrush for Cleary and his treatment at times of Hudler.

 

[Chance on Chance]

I honestly disagree, though, (and I realize this isn't even your point) that Hudler would beat Cleary for ice time given Babcock's mancrush for Cleary and his treatment at times of Hudler.

And that's where it would be good if Holland and Babcock were on the same type of team philosophy

 

[Winger98]

The minimum a GM must do every season is make sure you got something out of the season. Ken Holland has not gotten the Wings anything these past four years. He didn't play the kids and he kept rolling with washed up garbage. There was no growth. Last season was the first time since 09 I viewed the Wings as having a successful season. Prospects developed and played a crucial role in helping the Wings advance to the second round.

What did we get this season? More washed up garbage.

Ken Holland was making terrible moves and people were calling him out on them before they happened or five seconds after they happened. Hindsight maybe 20/20, but the most vocal Holland critics have been calling him out on his BS long before you could argue our criticisms were after the fact.

If you consider Weiss and Alfredsson garbage, I'm not sure there's much to talk about.

There is one example i am thinking of:

Tomas Hertl in SJ. I bet they put him on the top line with Thornton because
"why the hell not, we have nothing to lose" - The idea that the team needs tweaks etc. The idea that the team is not necessarily a winner with the status quo.
It has worked for them.

I do not see the same experiments being tried on the Red Wings. I mean Nyquist or Tatar have never really been put on a higher line. Its the DRW way... not rush people in, not put too much pressure on them. But Nyquist and Tatar are not 19 year olds. They would probably handle the top line spot for a few games without ruining them. Maybe Nyquist-D-Z would be amazing... or maybe Tatar-D-Z would be amazing. Why do I feel like a 3 game trial period of different wingers on the top line would be worth the effort? Just seems like we are not going to even try to do the same thing as SJ, because we have a belief we are still good - "we do have something to lose". That attitude i question.
I think its clear Nyquist has offensive upside and should not be put on a 4th line spot. Why not try him up there for 2-3 games.. "why not?" ??

I agree with this. Cleary signing was called out immediately. Good call.
I think we are EQUALLY strong, if not stronger if cleary was replaced by Tatar right now.

And if I am wrong... not the end of the world, we try Nyquist instead of Tatar.

Lets say I am wrong again. And neither are good. Then we can finally KNOW who is good and who is bad and make trades accordingly.

Basically all upside no matter the outcome.

I do not need to go back 2-3 years to agree with this most recent (1 month) ago plan. We do not yet know the outcome of 2013-2014 Dan Cleary. But I am ok with saying NO right now.. I want to see 2013-2014 Nyquist or Tatar instead. And I think Our team is better, no matter how it works out.

I'd have been okay with saying no to Cleary, too. If we didn't have so many other guys already signed, I could just not care about him being in the lineup, but it's really hard to like him right now. I didn't want Miller re-signed, though, either.

I wouldn't try Nyquist or Tatar on the first line, though, because they're not needed there. Z and D will carry that line with whoever - part of the whole bert/abdelkader thing that I find ridiculous is that neither of the third wheels have done a whole helluva lot - but Nyquist or Tatar could make big differences on the second and third line. Regardless of where they're slotted into the lineup, though, I agree entirely about getting them in there, and creativity hasn't been a wings strong suit since McClellan left.

San Jose is also in a weird spot, though. Marleau, Thornton, and Boyle are UFA after this year, and there was talk of them buying Havlat out at some point. For all of the talk about the day when Z and/or D retire, the Sharks might be much closer to one of those moments of serious turnover.

I don't think it's cup or fail. There is certainly progress to be made. For example, a team that doesn't even make the playoffs for 5 years and then does, that's progress, and that's a GM doing his job. Can't expect Calgary or Edmonton to win next year, but if they get closer and closer, that's certainly good on the GM.

Objectively, it's about how close you get to winning the cup. Obviously Finals > Conference Finals > Second round > First round > not making the playoffs. On that front, it just seems like we've been going downhill since 2009 and spinning our wheels. We haven't gotten past the second round. We've barely made the playoffs a couple of times. Playoffs used to be a foregone conclusion. Last year it came down to the last game of the season.

Other than that, it's hard to come up with "objective" standards, but I've got a few.

1. Development pipeline. If there's not a steady stream of young talent being introduced, evaluated, and molded in, then something is wrong.

2. Flexibility. Does the GM seem to move pieces that aren't working? Does he hoard? Can he acquire pieces by the deadline? I don't think Kenny has shown very much flexibility in the past few years during the season. He likes to stand pat. He likes the team. He loves the prospects (but not enough to give them a roster spot I guess).

3. GM's thoughts and strategy. This is really tough to evaluate, because you never know how much he believes what he throws out there publicly, but I am irritated when I hear the same thing from Holland year after year. Because it hasn't been working. It's sorta like how Flames fans felt with Feaster. (Alliteration!) When a GM just keeps denying the reality that the strategy isn't working, it's mind-boggling. Just admit it, adjust, and move on. I haven't seen too much adjustment from Holland over the past few years though, so I think what he says to the media is what he really believes. He likes this strategy of a roster filled with veterans and basically, only veterans. Looking at the forward group is sad sometimes. His GMing over the 4 years can be summed up as "conservative" to put it mildly. He never wants to take a chance on the prospects he values so highly. But he also won't trade them for key pieces for a cup run either. Confusing.

I have a hard time complaining about the development pipeline. I don't like how Tatar and Nyquist aren't being put into the lineup, but we've also moved a bunch of guys into the lineup from GR over the past five years. I wish Holland would open the spigot a bit and get some of these guys up sooner, but we've moved

Lashoff
Smith
Kindl
Andersson
Abdelkader

into regular spots, and Tatar and Nyquist are right there on the cusp. We also signed Dekeyser.

I agree the most with the lack of flexibility. I don't know why we don't come into every camp with an open spot on the roster. Invite some vets, have the kids up, and just give it to the guy who earns it. this offseason was just ridiculous in that sense. I entirely get adding Weiss and Alfredsson. They're guys who you can slot in and expect production from. You make room for them. But re-signing Miller? Cleary? Just let them go.

I don't get some of the things Holland does. I really think some of the vet signings last offseason was to prepare for a lockout shortened season, expecting vets to be more ready to go with little to no training camp, and maybe not wanting to bone GR by taking half their team away half way through their season. While I didn't mind the individual signings, I hated how Holland didn't deal guys out to make room for Nyquist and Smith and to balance the roster. Conservative is a nice way of putting it.


---


thanks for the convo folks, off to supper.

 

[RedWingsNow*]

If you consider Weiss and Alfredsson garbage, I'm not sure there's much to talk about.



I'd have been okay with saying no to Cleary, too. If we didn't have so many other guys already signed, I could just not care about him being in the lineup, but it's really hard to like him right now. I didn't want Miller re-signed, though, either.

I wouldn't try Nyquist or Tatar on the first line, though, because they're not needed there. Z and D will carry that line with whoever - part of the whole bert/abdelkader thing that I find ridiculous is that neither of the third wheels have done a whole helluva lot - but Nyquist or Tatar could make big differences on the second and third line. Regardless of where they're slotted into the lineup, though, I agree entirely about getting them in there, and creativity hasn't been a wings strong suit since McClellan left.

San Jose is also in a weird spot, though. Marleau, Thornton, and Boyle are UFA after this year, and there was talk of them buying Havlat out at some point. For all of the talk about the day when Z and/or D retire, the Sharks might be much closer to one of those moments of serious turnover.



I have a hard time complaining about the development pipeline. I don't like how Tatar and Nyquist aren't being put into the lineup, but we've also moved a bunch of guys into the lineup from GR over the past five years. I wish Holland would open the spigot a bit and get some of these guys up sooner, but we've moved

Lashoff
Smith
Kindl
Andersson
Abdelkader

into regular spots, and Tatar and Nyquist are right there on the cusp. We also signed Dekeyser.

I agree the most with the lack of flexibility. I don't know why we don't come into every camp with an open spot on the roster. Invite some vets, have the kids up, and just give it to the guy who earns it. this offseason was just ridiculous in that sense. I entirely get adding Weiss and Alfredsson. They're guys who you can slot in and expect production from. You make room for them. But re-signing Miller? Cleary? Just let them go.

I don't get some of the things Holland does. I really think some of the vet signings last offseason was to prepare for a lockout shortened season, expecting vets to be more ready to go with little to no training camp, and maybe not wanting to bone GR by taking half their team away half way through their season. While I didn't mind the individual signings, I hated how Holland didn't deal guys out to make room for Nyquist and Smith and to balance the roster. Conservative is a nice way of putting it.


---


thanks for the convo folks, off to supper.

List names an numbers and it sounds great.

It's great that we give 4th liners a shot.
Maybe it's great to you that guys like Kindl and Smith are getting their chance at 25 or 26 years old.

But cold hard truth is that we haven't produced an impact player since when? Franzen? Howard?

 

[Bench]

But cold hard truth is that we haven't produced an impact player since when? Franzen? Howard?

Even so, 14 of the Wings current regulars on the roster are 100% products of Wings drafting. That's 60% on a 23 man roster.

And that number is only expected to increase as I didn't include Nyquist and Mrazek. And there's a half dozen other guys that are guaranteed to get chances to earn spots like Jurco, Frk, Mantha, Ouellet and others.

The Wings live and die on their drafting. A better question is when is the last time a free agent was an impact player for the Wings? I don't think I'm going to like the answer...