Do you want the Wings to make the playoffs?

[JHaggis]

Of cours! Playoff streak must continue

 

[Ezekial]

Of course I want them to make the playoffs. I never subscribed to the losing to improve strategy. I want my team to succeed through excellence as opposed to dumb luck. Unfortunately they are going to need to find a coach before they will step up to another level. This guy pretty much sucks. This team should be much, much better than they are.

The "best coach in the world" was in the same position last year with a comparative team. I think Richie + Green + Larkin + slumping Tats/Nyquie and the difference b/w PPG Datsyuk and this year's Kron/Z make the comparison pretty easy.

 

[YpsiWings]

The "best coach in the world" was in the same position last year with a comparative team. I think Richie + Green + Larkin + slumping Tats/Nyquie and the difference b/w PPG Datsyuk and this year's Kron/Z make the comparison pretty easy.

I don't think it is an easy comparison, but I do agree that Detroit would be in a very similar position if Babcock was still here. Blashill has little to do with the regression of several important players on the ice, most notably Kronwall. It is alarming how far his game has slipped. Wonder how much of that can be attributed to his knee?

 

[cnwinger]

why? for a near-guaranteed 3rd straight first round loss?

 

[Ezekial]

why? for a near-guaranteed 3rd straight first round loss?

Why not? To be 99% sure to pick 1 or 2 spots sooner?

 

[cnwinger]

Why not? To be 99% sure to pick 1 or 2 spots sooner?

Because the sooner "the streak" ends, the better. This team in it's current form cannot win a stanley cup.

 

[Ezekial]

Because the sooner "the streak" ends, the better. This team in it's current form cannot win a stanley cup.

 

[invsb]

Some times you need some losses to win. Chicago is largely build around a long history of losing and the top picks hey acquired during that process. The current big bad wolf of the league would be neither so big nor bad without Kane and Toews. The same is true of the Penguins, remove Crosby and Malkin and they suddenly become quite manageable. How about the Capitals, several top 5 draft picks there too.

As for parity, there are no fewer elite tier teams than there was 10 years ago. They are just called something different. Instead of Detroit, Colorado and New Jersey, you have Los Angeles, Chicago and Anaheim.

It is no harder making the playoffs, still 16 of 30 teams. Every year 14 teams will miss, so if you are in the bottom 14 teams you are out, otherwise you are in. Playoffs aren't deviating away from the favourite, the same way Carolina was in the finals in 02 there will always be years with teams just getting that magic spark and going far.

There is no such thing as a losing culture. There are bad teams and good teams. Good teams have an easy time retaining their good players and attracting good players and coaches, bad teams not so much. There was a time when a superstar like Marian Hossa took a 1 year deal and left money on the table to come play in Detroit. This coming offseason the Wings wouldn't even be able to sign a comparable player at market value, not because of culture, but because of talent - there is non.

The sooner Wings fans stop living in a prayer, hoping for that punchers chance, and get back to the fundamental of building a team of talented players for the long run the better. The reason the Wings used to be so good was because they were able to underdraft highly talented European players because of a superior scouting organization. That advantage is gone now, so it has to be replaced and there are no signs that it is being replaced. This team is heading surely for the unenviable fate of the 00 Leafs, good enough to be close to the playoffs, bad enough to never draft a good player. And like the Leafs we get to watch some highly talented players waste their time being too good to fail and not good enough to succeed.

Seriously. We aren't "adopting" the losing culture of Edmonton, we are slowly sinking into that losing culture because our management has lowered the standards to "make the playoffs anything can happen'. You don't operate like that in a competitive environment or any business.

Holland is a master at PR spin. If you can see through the BS it is evident this team is going to need a rebuild. To be honest, we don't know what Larkin is yet. I love the kid, but I'm not ready to anoint him the franchise C yet. It is too early for that.
The sooner the management and us fans embrace the necessity of a rebuild the faster the process will happen and we will get on top.

I want to see a Cup again. If that means 10 years of no playoffs with a cup in the 11th I would take it.

 

[YpsiWings]

I am getting the impression that some of the fans who voted no think there is some kind of guarantee that if the Wings miss the playoffs for a few seasons they will automatically be contenders again.

In 2007 some Michigan fans (myself included) were tired of the complacency of Lloyd Carr. He couldn't win the big games later in his career and Tressel owned him. To his credit he ran a clean program, always went to a bowl, and was a lock for 8-10 wins a year.

After basically forcing him out the Wolverines went into a free fall and made that change look extremely short sighted. A lot of reasons for this, namely Dave Brandon the AD.

My point is be careful what you wish for because Pandora doesn't go back in the box. He only comes out.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

I am getting the impression that some of the fans who voted no think there is some kind of guarantee that if the Wings miss the playoffs for a few seasons they will automatically be contenders again.

In 2007 some Michigan fans (myself included) were tired of the complacency of Lloyd Carr. He couldn't win the big games later in his career and Tressel owned him. To his credit he ran a clean program, always went to a bowl, and was a lock for 8-10 wins a year.

After basically forcing him out the Wolverines went into a free fall and made that change look extremely short sighted. A lot of reasons for this, namely Dave Brandon the AD.

My point is be careful what you wish for because Pandora doesn't go back in the box. He only comes out.

But on the other hand, I think some people confuse "not being awful" with somehow keeping the winning culture of the last 20 years alive. Some of us think that culture is already dead, which is why the team is so lifeless right now. It's just Holland beating the dead horse of his glory years, trying to limp into the playoffs with a team that resembles previous ones in name only. So it may well be that Pandora is already out of her box, whether anyone likes it or not.

Personally, I don't think it's a guarantee that the Wings will be contenders in short order. But I think that's the hard, painful work that needs to be done to rebuild this franchise. This team needs first line and first pairing players, and right now it doesn't have any of those... anywhere. Thinking the Wings were going to just luck into those players time after time is wishful thinking. The Wings will have to get those players where they're found: in the top 10 draft picks. And, wouldn't you know it, the Wings are performing worse every year now, so it looks like they'll get there. I think that's okay. It's the franchise circle of life. Nobody is on top forever.

 

[KJoe88]

Of course I do.

And Holland will refuse to suck for ten years like some are saying. Ridiculous. He's gonna want to go into a new arena with a positive attitude and winning culture.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Who gives a crap? Blow it up. Trade everyone who isn't nailed down. Hell, find nails, nail Abdelkader to a board and trade him too.

Let's run a U-18 team out there as the Detroit Red Wings.

 

[aar000n]

Playing playoff matchups gains you playoff experience. Both at player and coaching level.

Don't fool yourselves by ignoring that fact.

Agree aa and larking could benefit from the experience.

 

[14ari13]

Making the playoffs this year gives guys like Larkin and AA the chance to experience and learn what playoff hockey is all about from champions like Datsyuk and Zetterberg while they are still around. So I'm all for extra experience for the young guys, even if it's just 4-5 games.

Just the other day when we played jackets they quoted Tortorella saying he wanted the jackets to win games cause it is needed for the winning culture. Once you get used to losing, you might just get used to it and keep on. We were close knocking out Hawks and bolts.
Our main issue is goaltending. Even our last 3 losses were due to our goalies being badly outplayed.

Fair point, though I still think 4-5 games is better than going home early.

Not really. He missed the point. To be a playoff beast you first should be a regular season beast. Neither Tatar nor nyquist is that.
So the poster you replied to is very wrong.

This. I'd rather lose in 5 games in round 1 and pick 16/17 then miss the playoffs and pick 13/14. The way we are currently playing though, I really don't know if we get in. Need to start playing hockey soon.

We need better goaltending.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

I am getting the impression that some of the fans who voted no think there is some kind of guarantee that if the Wings miss the playoffs for a few seasons they will automatically be contenders again.

In 2007 some Michigan fans (myself included) were tired of the complacency of Lloyd Carr. He couldn't win the big games later in his career and Tressel owned him. To his credit he ran a clean program, always went to a bowl, and was a lock for 8-10 wins a year.

After basically forcing him out the Wolverines went into a free fall and made that change look extremely short sighted. A lot of reasons for this, namely Dave Brandon the AD.

My point is be careful what you wish for because Pandora doesn't go back in the box. He only comes out.

There's no guarantees for anything in sports, but that's an invalid comparison. Pro sports reward you for sucking, and it's a natural part of the team development cycle (i.e. basically every team will suck at some point and there's a couple mechanisms built in to help you climb out of it).

The reason people talk about whether making the playoffs is a good thing is because the system the way it is designed, assists the worst teams but does very little to help the teams in the middle - because they are considered decent enough not to require such assistance. While that sounds like the rationale of welfare, it's actually a lot more potent.

It turns out that in a capped league, where you can't just buy yourself a good team and everyone is worried about the next contract for good players there's an extremely high value placed on young assets and there's literally only one way to acquire them. And that's the main mechanism designed to benefit the worst teams.

So while there's plenty of examples of bad teams getting this benefit over and over and not doing much with it, there's also plenty of examples of this being a franchise path-changing event. As said above there's no guarantees for anything and a team that's bad enough for long enough to pick 1st or 2nd or 3rd over and over again probably has an issue in identifying talent. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

But even those badly run franchises are still essentially given a shot at a golden lottery that could even by pure chance make them winners. The Islanders of all teams have somehow ended up above us in the standings. It took them long enough to get there and it's not like they've been especially clever with their options, they just eventually drafted enough high end talent to be respectable

And pretty much every team in the league above us in the standings has at least one but usually more than one difference-making player that the current Wings simply couldn't have because they weren't available when the Wings as a perennial playoff team first pick in the draft. There are difference makers drafted late - but it will be very difficult to find these guys late reliably enough.

And that's the problem isn't it? The Wings haven't drafted anyone as good as Zetterberg and Datsyuk since then. And I was in high school when those guys were drafted. And really that's kinda when the problem started if you think about it.

Look at a guy like Kronwall. A typical Wings product really. Drafted very late in the 1st round and slowly built into a top pairing D-man. Problem is that he's never been an elite Norris caliber D-man. That wasn't a problem when Lidstrom was around, and Schneider and Chelios and Rafalski. He slipped into the role of top D-man because everyone on D better than him retired and we have simply had no-one better coming in. But that helped turn the D from "Cup-winning elite core" to "OK" and that's been a major part in the slow but steady decline of the team from elite to middle of the pack.

Remember, if you win a Cup you're basically reaping the rewards of scouting and team development choices made 5 to 10 years ago. If you're winning Cups, you won't be able to make the same choices. You can't pick Yzerman or Lemieux or Crosby if you're winning Cups. That's fine as long as you're winning Cups because you're doing this for the Ws in the playoffs not on draft day after all.

But once the Cup winning stops because those really great development choices are now more like 15 years in the past, you gotta ask yourself how you're gonna bring yourself in a position to repeat this process. And I think this is the heart of the Wings' problem. The Wings as an organization have allowed a certain conceit to fester because of the success with Datsyuk and Zetterberg.

The conceit that because the Wings are the Wings, they have as good a chance as any team to land elite talent no matter where they pick. Even as many of the decision makers from that time had moved on to other jobs or retirement, even as a decade passed without that kind of success in the draft. We have to this day people on this forum who think drafting is always a matter of luck - as if a 7th rounder has as good a chance of being a good NHLer as a top 10 pick.

And part of that is because the Wings have turned a lot of marginal picks into decent NHL players in that time frame using a clever but time-consuming development process while seemingly defying the odds. But none of them turned into high-end players. And that's the problem. Decent NHL players can be acquired one way or the other, it's the elite players that are scarce. A Hudler isn't going to make or break a team and we're beginning to realize, neither is a Nyquist or Tatar.

So where do you get that kind of guy? You can't really anywhere other than the draft. And we live in the age of total scouting. Every team spends a lot of money on it, every team knows there's great talent even in Lithuania or god knows where. Nobody is sleeping on Europe anymore and many European prospects come over to North America anyway. Not saying there's no sleepers but there's typically a good consensus on the elite prospects - which might well be wrong but quite often isn't. It's not a *great* option because you may well be wrong even on a top 5 pick but it's the *only* option because you will never get the chance to acquire most of these guys any other way. What's the alternative?

Try to build a core hoping to hit the jackpot repeatedly picking at 15 or 17? Try to build a team with a bunch of OK players complimented by 34 year old over the hill 2nd tier free agents? Is there evidence to suggest the franchise is capable of doing that? Even if we assume it's possible to build an elite core of young players without high-end picks..then what evidence is there to suggest this management is the one capable of doing it? They've not done it in a decade.

 

[YpsiWings]

You are right, it was a flawed comparison. I should have prefaced by saying hoping for change, would have made more sense.

I just don't think Detroit can get the kind of pick you are talking about without trading Hank and Pav. And that met a lot of resistance, myself included.

 

[Henkka]

So pissed of about Abdelkader and Ericsson. Both seem to care carry this team to playoffs.

 

[Reddwit]

So pissed of about Abdelkader and Ericsson. Both seem to care carry this team to playoffs.

Ericsson doesn't carry anything. Please don't tell me you're equating his flukey goal to carrying them to the playoffs. That's embarrassing.

 

[ShelbyZ]

I voted "No". Only because I feel like the organizations sole focus is on keeping the playoff streak going. If that ends, maybe becoming a serious contender might move to the fore front. That said, I'm sure the chance is slim.

"Salesman Kenny" already has his excuses lined up for whatever the outcome ends up.

If they miss the playoffs, it'll be because of young players, a rookie coach, and a not so great start because of Datsyuks injury.

If they get steamrolled in the first round against Washington, it'll be because Washington is so amazing.

If they drop in the first round against another opponent, it'll be because anything goes, and he'll point to a low seeded Cinderella team.

Then he'll make some questionable UFA signings. Rinse/Repeat.

 

[Red Stanley]

There's no guarantees for anything in sports, but that's an invalid comparison. Pro sports reward you for sucking, and it's a natural part of the team development cycle (i.e. basically every team will suck at some point and there's a couple mechanisms built in to help you climb out of it).

The reason people talk about whether making the playoffs is a good thing is because the system the way it is designed, assists the worst teams but does very little to help the teams in the middle - because they are considered decent enough not to require such assistance. While that sounds like the rationale of welfare, it's actually a lot more potent.

It turns out that in a capped league, where you can't just buy yourself a good team and everyone is worried about the next contract for good players there's an extremely high value placed on young assets and there's literally only one way to acquire them. And that's the main mechanism designed to benefit the worst teams.

So while there's plenty of examples of bad teams getting this benefit over and over and not doing much with it, there's also plenty of examples of this being a franchise path-changing event. As said above there's no guarantees for anything and a team that's bad enough for long enough to pick 1st or 2nd or 3rd over and over again probably has an issue in identifying talent. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

But even those badly run franchises are still essentially given a shot at a golden lottery that could even by pure chance make them winners. The Islanders of all teams have somehow ended up above us in the standings. It took them long enough to get there and it's not like they've been especially clever with their options, they just eventually drafted enough high end talent to be respectable

And pretty much every team in the league above us in the standings has at least one but usually more than one difference-making player that the current Wings simply couldn't have because they weren't available when the Wings as a perennial playoff team first pick in the draft. There are difference makers drafted late - but it will be very difficult to find these guys late reliably enough.

And that's the problem isn't it? The Wings haven't drafted anyone as good as Zetterberg and Datsyuk since then. And I was in high school when those guys were drafted. And really that's kinda when the problem started if you think about it.

Look at a guy like Kronwall. A typical Wings product really. Drafted very late in the 1st round and slowly built into a top pairing D-man. Problem is that he's never been an elite Norris caliber D-man. That wasn't a problem when Lidstrom was around, and Schneider and Chelios and Rafalski. He slipped into the role of top D-man because everyone on D better than him retired and we have simply had no-one better coming in. But that helped turn the D from "Cup-winning elite core" to "OK" and that's been a major part in the slow but steady decline of the team from elite to middle of the pack.

Remember, if you win a Cup you're basically reaping the rewards of scouting and team development choices made 5 to 10 years ago. If you're winning Cups, you won't be able to make the same choices. You can't pick Yzerman or Lemieux or Crosby if you're winning Cups. That's fine as long as you're winning Cups because you're doing this for the Ws in the playoffs not on draft day after all.

But once the Cup winning stops because those really great development choices are now more like 15 years in the past, you gotta ask yourself how you're gonna bring yourself in a position to repeat this process. And I think this is the heart of the Wings' problem. The Wings as an organization have allowed a certain conceit to fester because of the success with Datsyuk and Zetterberg.

The conceit that because the Wings are the Wings, they have as good a chance as any team to land elite talent no matter where they pick. Even as many of the decision makers from that time had moved on to other jobs or retirement, even as a decade passed without that kind of success in the draft. We have to this day people on this forum who think drafting is always a matter of luck - as if a 7th rounder has as good a chance of being a good NHLer as a top 10 pick.

And part of that is because the Wings have turned a lot of marginal picks into decent NHL players in that time frame using a clever but time-consuming development process while seemingly defying the odds. But none of them turned into high-end players. And that's the problem. Decent NHL players can be acquired one way or the other, it's the elite players that are scarce. A Hudler isn't going to make or break a team and we're beginning to realize, neither is a Nyquist or Tatar.

So where do you get that kind of guy? You can't really anywhere other than the draft. And we live in the age of total scouting. Every team spends a lot of money on it, every team knows there's great talent even in Lithuania or god knows where. Nobody is sleeping on Europe anymore and many European prospects come over to North America anyway. Not saying there's no sleepers but there's typically a good consensus on the elite prospects - which might well be wrong but quite often isn't. It's not a *great* option because you may well be wrong even on a top 5 pick but it's the *only* option because you will never get the chance to acquire most of these guys any other way. What's the alternative?

Try to build a core hoping to hit the jackpot repeatedly picking at 15 or 17? Try to build a team with a bunch of OK players complimented by 34 year old over the hill 2nd tier free agents? Is there evidence to suggest the franchise is capable of doing that? Even if we assume it's possible to build an elite core of young players without high-end picks..then what evidence is there to suggest this management is the one capable of doing it? They've not done it in a decade.

That's all well and good and I can't disagree with it, but it's not like we don't already have some of the next core pieces in place. Larkin, Mrazek, DK and even AA all look like good building blocks for the immediate future. I still think we can transition into a good team without missing the playoffs. It will require some key pieces being added through trade, though. Don't need an elite defenseman, really, just two good ones. Really need at least one skilled power forward to anchor the top scoring line and stir up the PP. That's three key acquisitions which will make our team pretty good. Hopefully all three would bring a physical game that's been largely missing. Other things that need to happen are getting a new PP coach, cutting the vets' minutes way down and bringing up some more kids from the minors. We'll see how Holland manages the cap this summer.

 

[DanZ]

Because the sooner "the streak" ends, the better. This team in it's current form cannot win a stanley cup.

And ending the streak would somehow improve their current form?

 

[Classicnamesup]

And ending the streak would somehow improve their current form?

The draft pick is better than when they get slapped down by WSH in 5 games.

 

[Eggberto]

The draft pick is better than when they get slapped down by WSH in 5 games.

We could just as easily play Florida, Boston, or Tampa.

 

[Classicnamesup]

We could just as easily play Florida, Boston, or Tampa.

Do you think the Wings will beat any of those teams?

 

[Eggberto]

Do you think the Wings will beat any of those teams?

I'd say we have a decent chance against Florida despite some of our regular season struggles against them.

And if Mrazek regains his early season form I'd say we match up well against Tampa. Maybe 50/50. 40/60 against us at worse. Especially if they slow down before the playoffs.

Lots of changeover in Boston. Krejci/Bergeron is rough. Still I could see it going to 7 and a tossup because they aren't as good as they were a couple years ago. Although if we can't score I don't like this matchup.