Do you still support Ken Holland and Mike Babcock?

[BinCookin]

I think this is such an understated point. Look no further than Kindl.

Also, both Tatar and Nyquist took 3-5 games to start looking comfortable last season. Playing in a one game showcase to stay in the lineup is a good way to have guys think too much rather than just play.

I should have expanded this idea. But completely agree.

Too nervous to make a mistake, and you will make a mistake. They can't get any flow. Have too much time to listen to the coach, and "change" their game. Not to mention, my father, a big fan on the Red Wings, is not really aware of how good Nyquist or Tatar are. He knows Sammy, Bertuzzi, Cleary. When Nyquist and Tatar don't TEAR IT UP right away, they will be viewed as 'tied with the vets'. The statement that neither are good enough to take time away from Sammy/Bert/Cleary is supported. Not giving them playing time actually makes this argument true.

I honestly would be ok with Tatar and Nyquist (or god forbid just 1 of them).. sits in the press box for 15 games straight, then plays ALL the next 15 games. I think if they did that... I bet 2 of Sammy/Bert/Cleary will be outplayed.

 

[Yemack]

I am sure Holland and Babcock would love Nyquist and Tatar to have break out seasons.

So would all the fans, and the players.

But honestly, they can't have a break out season if they do not play.

I think Tootoo will leave the team by either Waivers (claimed or demoted to AHL) or trade. Then Nyquist will hopefully be recalled.

But honestly... just too many darn forwards for these 2 to get significant playing time.

There is something to be said about 1 game in, 1 game in the press box. That type of play did not help many players (Kindl, Ericsson, Mursak, Helm)... but as soon as steady playing time (even if its only 8 min a night) is given... players begin to improve.

I dont "HATE" any of our players. But some of them need to go just because.

Players i would remove from the roster:

Tootoo
Eaves
Emmerton (for Helm if he returns)

Z-D-Abby
Fran-W-Alfie
Nyquist-Andy-Tatar
Miller-Emmer/Hem-Cleary/Sammy/Bertuzzi

I mean... just too many STILL.

One of cleary sammy or bert need to get injured or traded. Sadly we are "loyal" to all 3.
Hoping for injuries is ridiculous. But looking at this roster and realizing Tatar is going bench most the season, and or Nyquist unlikely to get recalled is really annoying as a fan. Rookie defensemen are not nearly as fun to cheer for as rookie forwards. And it is high time we have some rookie forwards.

(our current "rookie" forwards are 30 and 41) LOL

honestly, if Tatar is a prospect who needs steady ice in order to show his stuff, I dont think he's THAT special player. If that were so, his ceiling probably isn't that high enough neither. Why not just get someone off UFA if worst comes.

 

[BinCookin]

honestly, if Tatar is a prospect who needs steady ice in order to show his stuff, I dont think he's THAT special player. If that were so, his ceiling probably isn't that high enough neither. Why not just get someone off UFA if worst comes.

I understand your point: Tatar has to OUTPLAY his competition.

I hope he gets to play 7 games in the first 14. (would be nice if someone like Cleary is benched for the exact 7 Tatar plays). Then we could compare their stats. If Tatar has 2 Goals - 3 Assists and Cleary has nothing... What do you think would happen then?

 

[Flowah]

I think that as long as we're winning, I'm good with whoever he ices.

Do I want the kids to play? Of course. Are we winning without them? Yes? I'll be patient.

So, despite the fact that playing the kids would:

1. Get them more experience, making them better players.

2. Young kids = team's future. Cleary, Sammy, Bert are not the future. You can talk about how effective they are but at this point it's a numbers game. Almost no one plays past 40 and these guys have only a few years left till they hit that mark. You're delaying the growth of the future of the team for players that even Babcock admits are not better than the kids.

3. The kids make the team better.

You're okay as long as we're barely beating bottom dweller teams?

I'm looking at the long-term health of the organization as well as the short-term. I think the kids make the team better *right now.* I think that we need to invest in them right now so that they'll be ready to step up and take over and D/Z retire.

So yes. We're winning, but at the cost of the team's future. And you can say "It's just game 1 of the season!" But this has been a trend for YEARS now. This isn't the first season where the kids have been held back. They should have both been up full time LAST year at the very least. Kindl should have been a couple of years ago. Even Babs said he wanted Smith a year before he was made a regular.

Management has made it a habit now for 4 years to continually push aside the youngsters for the sake of veterans. And it is hurting the teams future. And the worst part? The veterans aren't even better than the kids. The kids are better.

 

[Roy S]

There is something to be said about 1 game in, 1 game in the press box. That type of play did not help many players (Kindl, Ericsson, Mursak, Helm)... but as soon as steady playing time (even if its only 8 min a night) is given... players begin to improve.

That's a chicken or the egg dilemma. Maybe the players don't begin to get regular playing time until they start playing better to begin with and learning what they need to do to stay in the lineup. Thus, the regular playing time doesn't cause better play, but instead its better play that causes one to receive regular playing time.

 

[Yemack]

I understand your point: Tatar has to OUTPLAY his competition.

I hope he gets to play 7 games in the first 14. (would be nice if someone like Cleary is benched for the exact 7 Tatar plays). Then we could compare their stats. If Tatar has 2 Goals - 3 Assists and Cleary has nothing... What do you think would happen then?

well I'm not sure if this is even a question? why take out a guy having hot hands? I'm not sure if it's going to be danny cleary but obviously someone other than Tatar will be coming off. or rather not getting back in.

what I'm worried though, is we have same Jiri Hudler headache on our hands here. oh god, just thinking about it.. makes my head hurts

 

[RedWingsNow*]

This might have made sense in 2002, when we had 10 hall of famers in the lineup.
Let's keep the kids in the minors because we signed Robitaille and Hiull.
Yeah, I can see that.
Let's keep Maltby-Draper-McCarty around because they're the best energy/checking line in the game.
I get that.

But for Miller and Eaves?
For Sammy and Cleary?

 

[BinCookin]

well I'm not sure if this is even a question? why take out a guy having hot hands? I'm not sure if it's going to be danny cleary but obviously someone other than Tatar will be coming off. or rather not getting back in.

what I'm worried though, is we have same Jiri Hudler headache on our hands here. oh god, just thinking about it.. makes my head hurts

What is the Jiri Hudler headache??

-A disgruntled player who will move to europe? or demand a trade? or demand more money?

-Or you mean a young player with skills who doesn't light it up right away?

P.S. They did it to Tatar last year. He had a "hot hand" and they sent him down.

 

[BinCookin]

This might have made sense in 2002, when we had 10 hall of famers in the lineup.
Let's keep the kids in the minors because we signed Robitaille and Hiull.
Yeah, I can see that.
Let's keep Maltby-Draper-McCarty around because they're the best energy/checking line in the game.
I get that.

But for Miller and Eaves?
For Sammy and Cleary?

Imagine just for sake of argument that we lose Tatar and Nyquist (disgruntled or traded)

Honestly, Holland might be a jerk, and not play these guys, but i don't think he wants to lose them.

Our players below age 30 would then be:

Abby
Helm (if he plays again)
Miller
Andersson
Emmerton

...
...
Thats it?.. These guys are mostly 4th liners.. all of them.

I am realistic about Tatar and Nyquist. I think their upside is 2nd liners, average expectations 3rd liners. They still count as our BEST TWO PLAYERS under 30. Imagine if we lost them...

I unlike the rest here, am not overly impressed by Sheahan, Ferraro, Pulk, Jurco or Jarnkrok yet. These guys might all not even be 4th liners. MIGHT. They might be great but for sake of arguement pretend they are not.

 

[Yemack]

What is the Jiri Hudler headache??

there were people who believed Hudler was a special offensive machine. and they were adamant he was being mistreated by Wings and Babcock.

It's kinda like Tatar thread here. You just couldn't avoid Hudler thread. Obviously it went on for couple years and it kinda ended spectacularly with a member of this board signing himself off.

you should ask Red Menace if he's still around.

 

[Cyborg Yzerberg]

This might have made sense in 2002, when we had 10 hall of famers in the lineup.
Let's keep the kids in the minors because we signed Robitaille and Hiull.
Yeah, I can see that.
Let's keep Maltby-Draper-McCarty around because they're the best energy/checking line in the game.
I get that.

But for Miller and Eaves?
For Sammy and Cleary?

Even with all those hall of famers that were Stanley Cup bound, we STILL had rookie Pavel Datsyuk, and then the following season, we were able to add rookie Henrik Zetterberg. Yet, on this team, we can't squeeze Tatar and Nyquist in the line up?

At some point, our veterans will likely get hurt and it'll force Nyquist into the lineup and he will play more than 2 games further forcing Holland's hand requiring him to make moves.

The absolutely ludicrous thing is that we have so many young players coming through the system in the next 2 seasons and Holland's literally handling it in the worst possible way. Say what you will about Babcock scratching Tatar, Holland's the one who created this mess of a lineup and has literally sat on his hands through this whole fiasco.

 

[Yemack]

P.S. They did it to Tatar last year. He had a "hot hand" and they sent him down.

I dont believe they sent him down for no reason. Wings needed scoring last season why send him down for no reason?

well maybe he lacked his defensive side of game and was a liability thus Babcock was not going to trust him with ice time which means it would have been better for him in minors.

I didnt see him last season so I can't really comment. But Dekeyser played right after his college so I dont believe this notion of 'Holland hates young player'

 

[Mount Royal]

So, despite the fact that playing the kids would:

1. Get them more experience, making them better players.

2. Young kids = team's future. Cleary, Sammy, Bert are not the future. You can talk about how effective they are but at this point it's a numbers game. Almost no one plays past 40 and these guys have only a few years left till they hit that mark. You're delaying the growth of the future of the team for players that even Babcock admits are not better than the kids.

3. The kids make the team better.

You're okay as long as we're barely beating bottom dweller teams?

I'm looking at the long-term health of the organization as well as the short-term. I think the kids make the team better *right now.* I think that we need to invest in them right now so that they'll be ready to step up and take over and D/Z retire.

So yes. We're winning, but at the cost of the team's future. And you can say "It's just game 1 of the season!" But this has been a trend for YEARS now. This isn't the first season where the kids have been held back. They should have both been up full time LAST year at the very least. Kindl should have been a couple of years ago. Even Babs said he wanted Smith a year before he was made a regular.

Management has made it a habit now for 4 years to continually push aside the youngsters for the sake of veterans. And it is hurting the teams future. And the worst part? The veterans aren't even better than the kids. The kids are better.

I already said I want to see the kids play. It's literally right in the post you quoted.

Bottom line is whether we win or not. If we're winning, I'm ok with keeping the lineup as is. It's hard to win in pro sports, so if a winning formula is found, it's generally going to be kept.

Now if we're losing, I expect Gus and Tatar to see some time...what will get me complaining is if they don't. If we're losing, changes have to be made, right?

The topic is about Babcock and Holland. My argument here is that no matter what kind of roster Holland gives Babs, we've been in a position to win due to coaching (and Z, Pav, and Howie of course). Even when we lost in 5 to the Sharks...all games by one. The way I see it, the problem isn't the coaching.

 

[odin1981]

MOD He continually tries to institute a ducks roster. We do not play that way and we do not draft that way. Hopefully babs quits after this year. We stand to lose the prevelant aspect of the organization of having the old core teach and provide examples for the new core that is up and coming.

Babs has no patience for younger players that do not play "his way". The only reason we even saw the kids last year was old and useless vets were too hurt to play. Without the grand rapids line (yes I am aware that tatar was still down in the ahl) we more than likely don't get past anaheim last year. The kid line + brunner accounted for the gw goals of three of the games (all in ot as well).

The foundation of this teams make up has been puck possesion hockey. Since lidstrom retired babs has immediately went about instituting nothing but a bottom 6 grind style team. Our top 6 is not capable due to the average age of the players of sustaining 90% of our teams offense threw out the year and still have gas left in the tank for the playoffs.

Holland doesn't draft accordingly to this outlook. He isn't perfect and he has had problems letting things go (old washed up personnel). But he doesn't decide who plays he only decides who we bring in.

The biggest fear I have is that babs stubbornly goes about stashing our up and comers and further stagnates their progress in developement at the nhl level so that we do not have proper time to evaluate correctly who we need to keep to maintain a new core. And I fail to see why anyone would not want the new kids learning work ethics, determination, and 2 way ability from both datsyuk and z.

If we do not have the new comers get ample time in tweener roles and bottom six roles we will be rushed to identify who we need to keep. If we identify incorrectly who we need to keep due to not getting a good look at xyz players we are ****ed when datsyuk is gone. Babs also seems really terrible at teaching new players. And we are tops 1 year away from needing a coach with good abilities in develope young players into finished product.

I believe next year we will probably go after 1 fa forward (alfies replacement) and more than likely if holland has any balls (meh) have the majority of our bottom six become 1-2nd year nhlr's.

 

[Chance on Chance]

well I dont really agree Tatar is as good as some of you guys claim. He's got potential sure, He's proven it. However, execution speed in NHL is just totally different from AHL. You saw what happened last night. Why did Buffalo get beat like that? Sure Wings had more talent but Sabres young core just could not adapt to Wings speed of play. I'm sure Sabres went over the video tapes of how we attack and stuffs like that but the thing is, when the other guys come at you faster than you expect and you have no experience the plan goes right out the door and the other team sit in the driver seat.

I guess I'll try to answer why I think some of vets help the team more than youngsters and how that might actually help in long term management of this team. but you will have to excuse me for right now cuz I just got home, tired after a long day. I'll try to comment soon.

He's ranked 3rd by red wings central, 5th by hf boards and I assume top 5 when we did our own rankings. At what point do you put him in?

 

[Chance on Chance]

For some perspective in terms of promoting prospects, since 09-10, or over the last 5 seasons, the Wings have added 12 prospects or undrafted free agents (Howard, Ericcsson, Helm, Abdelkader, Kindl, Emmerton, Smith, Lashoff, Tatar, Dekeyser, Anderrsson and Mrazek) to their current active roster +LTIR. And that doesn't include Nyqyist who has played 58 career regular season and playoff games and played in each of the last two postseasons. They'll also likely add, at the very least, Nyquist and Sheahan next season (likely at the expense of Emmerton) and will have Jarnkrok, Jurco, Sproul and Ouellet knocking on the door the following season.

They basically promoted 2 to 3 players a year to complimentary/ bench roles and turned over half the roster in the last 5 seasons with prospects.

Other then Howard, Ericcsson, Helm no one is a top 6 or top 4 guy. We'll see for Smith and Kindl this year though.

Next year we have Nyquist, Tatar, Sheahan and Ferroro who cant clear waivers, the year after Jarnkrok, Jurco and Pulu. We cant keep doing what were doing

 

[Chance on Chance]

MOD He continually tries to institute a ducks roster. We do not play that way and we do not draft that way. Hopefully babs quits after this year. We stand to lose the prevelant aspect of the organization of having the old core teach and provide examples for the new core that is up and coming.

Babs has no patience for younger players that do not play "his way". The only reason we even saw the kids last year was old and useless vets were too hurt to play. Without the grand rapids line (yes I am aware that tatar was still down in the ahl) we more than likely don't get past anaheim last year. The kid line + brunner accounted for the gw goals of three of the games (all in ot as well).

The foundation of this teams make up has been puck possesion hockey. Since lidstrom retired babs has immediately went about instituting nothing but a bottom 6 grind style team. Our top 6 is not capable due to the average age of the players of sustaining 90% of our teams offense threw out the year and still have gas left in the tank for the playoffs.

Holland doesn't draft accordingly to this outlook. He isn't perfect and he has had problems letting things go (old washed up personnel). But he doesn't decide who plays he only decides who we bring in.

The biggest fear I have is that babs stubbornly goes about stashing our up and comers and further stagnates their progress in developement at the nhl level so that we do not have proper time to evaluate correctly who we need to keep to maintain a new core. And I fail to see why anyone would not want the new kids learning work ethics, determination, and 2 way ability from both datsyuk and z.

If we do not have the new comers get ample time in tweener roles and bottom six roles we will be rushed to identify who we need to keep. If we identify incorrectly who we need to keep due to not getting a good look at xyz players we are ****ed when datsyuk is gone. Babs also seems really terrible at teaching new players. And we are tops 1 year away from needing a coach with good abilities in develope young players into finished product.

I believe next year we will probably go after 1 fa forward (alfies replacement) and more than likely if holland has any balls (meh) have the majority of our bottom six become 1-2nd year nhlr's.

I think Babcock keeps pushing that way. We know he loves the bigger guys and remember how mad he was when we didnt land burns. The coach and GM need to at least kinda be on the same page

 

[Vladdy84]

He's ranked 3rd by red wings central, 5th by hf boards and I assume top 5 when we did our own rankings. At what point do you put him in?

He also had the 2nd highest points per 60 minutes on the team last year despite playing alongside mediocre talent.

 

[wingnutjeff]

Both Holland & Babcock still have my support but I have to say that Babcock lost me a little during the playoffs last year. When the Wings went up 3-1 against the Blackhawks it was completely obvious what the hawks would do. I know that many say that if it isn't broke, don't fix it but everyone and their uncle knew that the Hawks would goon it up and try to disrupt the flow of the game. An adjustment should have been made by Babcock and Tootoo should have been on the ice for that game. The only answer we had was Abby and Big E and those guys are pathetic as enforcers. They try but are really not a deterrence. I think if we had Tootoo in for game 5 & 6 if necessary, we would have been raising the cup. I think that Babcock's inability to anticipate what Chicago would do was a real coaching blunder that probably cost us the cup.

I too also think that he mismanages our younger players.

 

[Yemack]

He's ranked 3rd by red wings central, 5th by hf boards and I assume top 5 when we did our own rankings. At what point do you put him in?

Dont get me wrong I'm not saying he's a bad player. I just dont know if he's the difference maker at his point. Exceptional talent show right away they are to be reckoned with. I didnt really see that from him in his last preseason game. yeah I admit it's terribly wrong to judge a player on 1 game, preseason no less. If I'm wrong about that, that's fine. Actually that's great. This organization needs another potential star player. Though I doubt Tatar ceiling is that high.

if you've watched hockey long enough you should know Tatar is going to get more than his piece of action this season. Just because Tatar is benched right now doesn't mean sky is falling and some of you guys have to go about every thread and call of Holland's head.

 

[Chance on Chance]

Dont get me wrong I'm not saying he's a bad player. I just dont know if he's the difference maker at his point. Exceptional talent show right away they are to be reckoned with. I didnt really see that from him in his last preseason game. yeah I admit it's terribly wrong to judge a player on 1 game, preseason no less. If I'm wrong about that, that's fine. Actually that's great. This organization needs another potential star player. Though I doubt Tatar ceiling is that high.

if you've watched hockey long enough you should know Tatar is going to get more than his piece of action this season. Just because Tatar is benched right now doesn't mean sky is falling and some of you guys have to go about every thread and call of Holland's head.

What people are more mad about is Holland saw this coming. He knew Tatar wouldnt be able to clear waivers this year and didnt make room. And its been like this for a while. We have Zed, Franzen and Kronwall on these below market value cap hits and havent done much to take advantage of that. Hollands a reactive GM instead of a proactive one the past couple years.

 

[Brick Top]

So, despite the fact that playing the kids would:

1. Get them more experience, making them better players.

2. Young kids = team's future. Cleary, Sammy, Bert are not the future. You can talk about how effective they are but at this point it's a numbers game. Almost no one plays past 40 and these guys have only a few years left till they hit that mark. You're delaying the growth of the future of the team for players that even Babcock admits are not better than the kids.

3. The kids make the team better.

You're okay as long as we're barely beating bottom dweller teams?

I'm looking at the long-term health of the organization as well as the short-term. I think the kids make the team better *right now.* I think that we need to invest in them right now so that they'll be ready to step up and take over and D/Z retire.

So yes. We're winning, but at the cost of the team's future. And you can say "It's just game 1 of the season!" But this has been a trend for YEARS now. This isn't the first season where the kids have been held back. They should have both been up full time LAST year at the very least. Kindl should have been a couple of years ago. Even Babs said he wanted Smith a year before he was made a regular.

Management has made it a habit now for 4 years to continually push aside the youngsters for the sake of veterans. And it is hurting the teams future. And the worst part? The veterans aren't even better than the kids. The kids are better.

Great post. Of course, I LOL'd reading that the kids are the future and Cleary, Sammy & Bert are not... given Holland's love of keeping the old codgers around, I'm not so sure Babs' boys aren't the future

Agree that immediate wins over bad teams don't necessarily benefit the Wings in the long run in getting the young guys going. I'd rather see Tatar and Gus get a full season in the NHL and establish their roles heading into the playoffs. And I also don't get how Babs and Kenny don't see that Tatar and Gus are better players and bring more to the table than the old stiffs.

 

[BSHH]

While I would like to undo most of Holland's 2012 offseason decisions, I still trust him very much. He does not only continue to ice a contending team, but managed to pile up many interesting prospects. It speaks volumes that other teams like to poach among Holland's staff.

Babcock won me over again during the playoff series versus Chicago. I do not see this much (or frankly anything) of Cleary, either; but this seems negligible compared to what he has made of our defensive corps. Now even his questionable decision to promote Abdelkader to first line seems to pay off.

Gruß,
BSHH

 

[WingedWheel1987]

How has his questionable decision to play Gator on the first line "paid off"? What did Babcock specifically do during the Chicago series to win you over?

How many years does it take to lose trust in someone's competency? If you look at Holland's resume since the lockout, he has done a bad or mediocre job during half of that period.

I think using the term "contending team" and the Detroit Red Wings the past few years is absurd. How many contending teams only had two scoring lines and two fourth lines?

Making the playoffs technically makes you a "contender", but I could technically play in the NHL too. It's a term that exists only so mediocre teams and their fan base can delude themselves into believing they aren't just waiting to see how long it takes for the team to lose.

 

[AD1066]

I blame Holland more for enabling Babcock than anything Babcock actually does.

Babcock has a set of preconceived notions about the types of player he likes and the type of game he wants to play. Occasionally frustrating, but he does a good job and puts together a winning product. Babcock's job is to use what he's been given in the best way possible to maximize results.

Holland's job, on the other hand, is to manage the future of the entire organization. Babcock only needs to concern himself with the present roster, but it's Holland's duty to competently manage our prospects and set the team up for future success. And bringing back Cleary, whether Babcock asked him to or not, does not inspire faith in his ability to do so.

Scouting and coaching have made this team dominant for so long, last few years it seems like Holland's just been along for the ride. What happens when Dats and Z slow down? Holland certainly doesn't seem to be preparing for that.