How the Red Wings attempt to maintain a dynasty caused their demise

[Tirekicker]

I think after 2011, at the latest, Holland should have started talking about rebuild on the fly.

Wasn't going to happen. There isn't a single GM-owner duo in the league (aside from Melnyk-Dorion, maybe) that would've switched to rebuild mode with Datsyuk and Zetterberg and Lidstrom and Franzen still on the team. Maybe you start thinking about it and you hold on to a pick or two that you might've otherwise traded. But for the most part? It was perfectly reasonable to believe the window was still open and to proceed accordingly.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, my complaint here is that Holland never really shot his shot. Like, are we all-in or not? If the answer is yes, then do what it takes to land a big fish to bolster the lineup. (I refuse to accept that we couldn't have afforded Brent Burns.) If the answer is anything other than yes, then maybe you quietly start a rebuild-on-the-fly attempt and move a piece or two for youth/futures.

Well, don't look now. Because Holland tried to avoid the tank - and guess where we are for the fourth straight year.
And realistically, we've probably got a few more years here.

We're at the bottom of the standings, which is where we need to be. We're the Leafs right before they got Matthews. (How are the Leafs doing?) We're the Rangers right before they got Kakko. (How are the Rangers doing?) We're the Devils right before they got Hischier and right before they got Hughes. (How are the Devils doing?)

We've got a pretty good shot at landing Lafreniere or Byfield. Yzerman may have a signficant degree of cap flexibility this summer and moving forward. We have a good top line and a young defenseman whose floor appears to be a high-scoring, minute-munching 2D. Zadina's been playing like the player we thought we were getting when we drafted him. Seider's put up 10 points through his first 18 AHL games.

All things considered, I don't think The Holland Plan has totally cratered this franchise the way a lot of people say it has. We're dealing with the consequences of some mismanagement (the death by a thousand cuts that I mentioned before), and the past few years have definitely been hard, but it's not like Holland left us with nothing.

 

[Tirekicker]

The true problem with Holland, wasn't the plan persay, but the creative vision IMHO. He lost that touch, and Yzerman has brought that back.

- Signing useless stop gap vets like Nemeth and Fil to insulate the kids = typical Holland move, showing Yzerman and Holland generally had the same plan
- Trading for Fabbri, Biega, and Perlini = innovative move Holland never would have attempted

I mean, Holland did bring in Bowey, who's the same kind of low-risk early-20s reclamation project that Yzerman is targeting this season. But, yeah, I know where you're coming from and I agree. It's almost like losing the Suter sweepstakes broke his heart and his spirit and he never recovered.

"What's the point? We lost Suter; nothing matters anymore. We're gonna keep making the playoffs and we're gonna do it just to spite God, who has done me dirty." - Ken Holland, 2012-2019

 

[TheClap]

And if we had added a Maata or Vasi that year there's a good chance we don't get Mantha or Larkin in preceding years. It's butterfly effect. The only thing worse than tanking 100% in the NHL is mediocrity. If you don't like the mediocre late streak years, I would argue adding a decent piece in 2012 may have only served to extend that...

I sincerely doubt either Maatta or Vasi break into the line-up by 2013 and 2014 when Mantha and Larkin were drafted. Mike Babcock isn't inserting a 19 year old foreign defensemen into his line-up like the injury plagued Pittsburgh Penguins were forced to. And Vasi didn't get his NHL start until 2014-2015.

 

[Tirekicker]

you can keep spinning it any way you want a holland defender is gonna holland defend. There is a way to build a team with the best odds of success. Just because it does not "GUARANTEE" success and just because there are a "FEW EXAMPLES" of success that didn't follow that path doesn't mean there isn't a best course. I can swim to hawaii and odds are I won't even make it, but if I did we all stop traveling by plane right?

I would gladly watch season after season of kids developing even if they get DESTROYED because that means the team is trying to build a future. Stop gap declining hockey is not fun to watch or root for.

You're completely removing the human element from the matter. You're disregarding multiple facets of player development and team building. "Who cares if kids are getting DESTROYED every night? As long as we call that progress, it's all good. As long as we finish at the bottom and we have a great shot at picking 1st overall, it's all good. It's a chance I'd be willing to take." It's easy for you and me to say that. It's easy for you and me to convince ourselves that reality really ought to conform to our half-baked visions of it. But that's not how reality works.

Even Shanahan, who many people point to as the guy who proved that blowing it up and going with an all-kids roster is the best way to go, didn't blow everything up all at once and never once told Babcock to ice an all-kids lineup.

 

[izlez]

- Trading for Fabbri, Biega, and Perlini = innovative move Holland never would have attempted

I don't know about that.

Off the top of my head:
Eaves and Cleary were former first round picks. 25/26 years old when brought in.
As pointed out, Bowey was a 23 year old former 53rd overall.
Adding Leino, Brunner, Dekeyser, Sulak, Kaski, Hirose all seem like "innovative" moves

They didn't work out. He can be blamed for that.
Yzerman doesn't seem to operate all that differently than Holland (and as of yet, has no success to show for his methods)

 

[Shaman464]

The problem I think started when Detroit (and Holland specifically) started to believe the hype that Detroit could restock top talent from late picks, and find gold in UFA retreads. When their ability and advantage in the draft finally started to wain and they stopped hitting on guys who just needed a chance in FA things really started to go off the rails. And this was at the same time they were losing Lidstrom, Datsyuk and Zetterberg to father time. This is why some of us really wanted Holland to leave. He wasn't and isn't a bad GM, but, somethings you're someone for so long, and so use to success that when things change, you're not able to keep up. And the Wings faded. Now that Yzerman is here, I believe that the team is finally back on the right track, and we will see incremental improvements after this season.

 

[ChrisReevesLegs]

I sincerely doubt either Maatta or Vasi break into the line-up by 2013 and 2014 when Mantha and Larkin were drafted. Mike Babcock isn't inserting a 19 year old foreign defensemen into his line-up like the injury plagued Pittsburgh Penguins were forced to. And Vasi didn't get his NHL start until 2014-2015.

Bud, I just picked two of the most relevant high draft picks we have, that's all I meant by that. You're technically right though, so just sub out Mantha and Larkin for Svech/Ras/Zadina/Seider etc etc and my point remains the same.

I don't know about that.

Off the top of my head:
Eaves and Cleary were former first round picks. 25/26 years old when brought in.
As pointed out, Bowey was a 23 year old former 53rd overall.
Adding Leino, Brunner, Dekeyser, Sulak, Kaski, Hirose all seem like "innovative" moves

They didn't work out. He can be blamed for that.
Yzerman doesn't seem to operate all that differently than Holland (and as of yet, has no success to show for his methods)

I agree Yzerman is 90% no different than Holland.

Bowey = throw in like McIlrath was, and honestly IMO Bowey is pretty terrible.
Leino = didn't work out
Brunner = didn't work out
Dekeyser = completely fell into Holland's lap
Sulak = AHL depth signing
Kaski = AHL depth signing
Hirose = smart pick up out of his own backyard, I think Holland learned his lesson and applied it here after Krug escaped their attention

I'm genuinely a huge fan of Holland and his methods. He will go down as a HOF GM and I was sad to see him go.

However Yzerman is probably more in tune with the modern game ATM, and I include his scouting staff when I say this. He recognizes that the game is more about mobility than it is size at this point. He's not afraid to make trades in October. In general he seems much more assertive when addressing issues, whereas Holland had the old school wait n see approach. And perhaps most importantly, he has no loyalty to the current roster hampering him. I honestly do not think Holland would have organized the Fabbri/DLR trade, and even if it had presented itself to him, I'm not 100% he would have pulled the trigger. Yzerman is the better fit for our current situation.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Sometimes you lose to a better team....
Sometimes you take a 3-1 series lead and can't figure out how to get another win.

As for Abby - he got his 7 year, $30+million deal thanks to Babcock.
Helm got his 5 year $20M deal thanks to Babcock.

These guys had ZERO business riding shotgun next to Datsyuk and/or Zetterberg.

Had Babcock simply left them where they belonged - Glendening's 4-year, $7.2M deal would look ****ing generous for these guys.

You can't figure out how to get another win because your goalie gets peppered with 45 shots in game 6 which was a one goal game until the eh, kinda questionable, Frolik penalty shot and you lose a one goal affair in game 7. The Wings were woefully outgunned in that Chicago series. They shouldn't have won 3 games is the point. They did, so kudos to them, but it wasn't bad lines why they lost to Chicago. It's that Toews and Kane and Keith and Seabrook and Hossa were just straight up better than the guys on Detroit's side and Crawford did enough to win.

Abby got his contract due to Holland. Helm got his contract due to Holland. They were both bad deals when the ink dried. And also, no, Glenny's deal wouldn't look generous for them. A casual glance shows that both Helm and Abby were paid damn near the same deal as Glenny for their second contracts. Abby at 1.8 and Helm at 2.25. Also, Helm got his deal in part because he was a really good 3C for awhile. And Abby's deal was awful, but it was done in the same time frame as Matt Belesky and Bryan Bickell and other "power forwards" that had 20 goals go in off of them were getting around 4M. Not defending the contract because it was a bad deal, but it was the going rate for a player of Abby's ilk. Should have walked away from him... but if they wanted to keep him, that's what it was going to take.

you can keep spinning it any way you want a holland defender is gonna holland defend. There is a way to build a team with the best odds of success. Just because it does not "GUARANTEE" success and just because there are a "FEW EXAMPLES" of success that didn't follow that path doesn't mean there isn't a best course. I can swim to hawaii and odds are I won't even make it, but if I did we all stop traveling by plane right?

I would gladly watch season after season of kids developing even if they get DESTROYED because that means the team is trying to build a future. Stop gap declining hockey is not fun to watch or root for.

Burning a team to the ground is not the best way to rebuild a roster. It doesn't even have the highest level of success. The most successful rebuilds were completed based off of dumb luck or over a decade of being an also-ran. You don't trade away everyone and then get better in a short period of time. Stuff like Chicago and Pittsburgh... that worked because their cores had rotted so they started fresh with guys who wouldn't stop grinding and they got big time pieces who fit that mold too. If you force a rebuild by dealing away anyone with a pulse... you get the Detroit Tigers, the Ottawa Senators, the Cincinnati Bengals, or the Miami Dolphins. Where you are stuck at the bottom for longer than you need to be because you just gut any sense of culture that you have at all. I know winning culture is an intangible thing... but you've got to have your team of young kids knowing that they've got the organization behind them and putting out completely unprepared kids to get their dicks knocked in to "let them grow" is moronic. It's a rare player that can come in and succeed on a crap roster. ****, look at Edmonton with Hall and RNH and Yakupov and Eberle and Strome. They had some of the best player material in the league and they were a damn joke. Then, you get Eberle out of Edmonton and he's a good player. Get Strome out of there and he's good. Get Hall out of there and he's an MVP candidate.

You don't develop if you're getting your teeth kicked in daily. It just doesn't happen.

 

[Retire91]

You're completely removing the human element from the matter. You're disregarding multiple facets of player development and team building. "Who cares if kids are getting DESTROYED every night? As long as we call that progress, it's all good. As long as we finish at the bottom and we have a great shot at picking 1st overall, it's all good. It's a chance I'd be willing to take." It's easy for you and me to say that. It's easy for you and me to convince ourselves that reality really ought to conform to our half-baked visions of it. But that's not how reality works.

Even Shanahan, who many people point to as the guy who proved that blowing it up and going with an all-kids roster is the best way to go, didn't blow everything up all at once and never once told Babcock to ice an all-kids lineup.

If the choice is perpetual decline to consistent last place to chase a couple wild card playoff early exits vs an attempt to build a new core with our best chances at top draft positions I pick new core with top draft picks. It wouldn't even take burning it down to go that direction but they could have started a lot sooner than they did and they started ridiculously later than everyone knew they should have. I respect that no one size fits all answer exists for that question but I am going to call out terrible strategy and terrible management when I see it.

 

[Retire91]

You can't figure out how to get another win because your goalie gets peppered with 45 shots in game 6 which was a one goal game until the eh, kinda questionable, Frolik penalty shot and you lose a one goal affair in game 7. The Wings were woefully outgunned in that Chicago series. They shouldn't have won 3 games is the point. They did, so kudos to them, but it wasn't bad lines why they lost to Chicago. It's that Toews and Kane and Keith and Seabrook and Hossa were just straight up better than the guys on Detroit's side and Crawford did enough to win.

Abby got his contract due to Holland. Helm got his contract due to Holland. They were both bad deals when the ink dried. And also, no, Glenny's deal wouldn't look generous for them. A casual glance shows that both Helm and Abby were paid damn near the same deal as Glenny for their second contracts. Abby at 1.8 and Helm at 2.25. Also, Helm got his deal in part because he was a really good 3C for awhile. And Abby's deal was awful, but it was done in the same time frame as Matt Belesky and Bryan Bickell and other "power forwards" that had 20 goals go in off of them were getting around 4M. Not defending the contract because it was a bad deal, but it was the going rate for a player of Abby's ilk. Should have walked away from him... but if they wanted to keep him, that's what it was going to take.



Burning a team to the ground is not the best way to rebuild a roster. It doesn't even have the highest level of success. The most successful rebuilds were completed based off of dumb luck or over a decade of being an also-ran. You don't trade away everyone and then get better in a short period of time. Stuff like Chicago and Pittsburgh... that worked because their cores had rotted so they started fresh with guys who wouldn't stop grinding and they got big time pieces who fit that mold too. If you force a rebuild by dealing away anyone with a pulse... you get the Detroit Tigers, the Ottawa Senators, the Cincinnati Bengals, or the Miami Dolphins. Where you are stuck at the bottom for longer than you need to be because you just gut any sense of culture that you have at all. I know winning culture is an intangible thing... but you've got to have your team of young kids knowing that they've got the organization behind them and putting out completely unprepared kids to get their dicks knocked in to "let them grow" is moronic. It's a rare player that can come in and succeed on a crap roster. ****, look at Edmonton with Hall and RNH and Yakupov and Eberle and Strome. They had some of the best player material in the league and they were a damn joke. Then, you get Eberle out of Edmonton and he's a good player. Get Strome out of there and he's good. Get Hall out of there and he's an MVP candidate.

You don't develop if you're getting your teeth kicked in daily. It just doesn't happen.

None of the pieces that Detroit had at that time were going to be part of the new core because the roster was filled with either aged out vets or player with not enough talent to matter. I agree with you that you don't have to burn it down, but there was nothing on the roster that mattered anyway. You give Zetts and Dats a choice you can retire a wing or we can trade you its your choice.

I know not everyone thinks that is a good idea but if the alternative theory is that you sit down with Zetts and Dayts and tell them we know you can still compete for a cup and we are going to fill all the holes you need to get there. We are going to sign Abby to a franchise term, keep Cleary, get you Weiss, Alfredson, and Green and rent 16 games of Legwand. Sound good? Its getting hard to type and I can't tell if I am laughing or crying.

 

[ChrisReevesLegs]

If the choice is perpetual decline to consistent last place to chase a couple wild card playoff early exits vs an attempt to build a new core with our best chances at top draft positions I pick new core with top draft picks. It wouldn't even take burning it down to go that direction but they could have started a lot sooner than they did and they started ridiculously later than everyone knew they should have. I respect that no one size fits all answer exists for that question but I am going to call out terrible strategy and terrible management when I see it.

If you're going to start a rebuild with early to mid thirties Zetterberg and Datsyuk still on the roster, you absolutely have to trade those two away. Those two would be pretty big thorns in your rebuilds side and you'd be squandering their personal careers. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone in favor of trading those two away at that time and still today...

Again you make the whole scenario sound very clear cut. It's not. Tanking and rebuilding while you still have two hall of fame players on the roster who are still putting up point per game seasons is pretty hard to justify. And it makes total sense why Illitch would want to keep going for it with them around.

Now, if you want to say Holland did a poor job at assembling a playoff worthy team in those last remaining streak years that's an entirely different issue.

 

[Tirekicker]

It wouldn't even take burning it down to go that direction but they could have started a lot sooner than they did and they started ridiculously later than everyone knew they should have.

We're on roughly the same page, then. It was wise of Holland to resist tearing everything down, but he leaned a little too hard in the opposite direction.

 

[kliq]

I don't know about that.

Off the top of my head:
Eaves and Cleary were former first round picks. 25/26 years old when brought in.
As pointed out, Bowey was a 23 year old former 53rd overall.
Adding Leino, Brunner, Dekeyser, Sulak, Kaski, Hirose all seem like "innovative" moves

They didn't work out. He can be blamed for that.
Yzerman doesn't seem to operate all that differently than Holland (and as of yet, has no success to show for his methods)

Not to speak for CRL, but I think his point is that Holland never really tried to improve in this way via trade. Correct me if I'm wrong, but all those names were free agent signings. No doubt that Holland was willing to play ball in free agency.

As for Bowey, he was more of a throw in for Jensen, it wasnt a trade specifically designed to target Bowey in the way that the Fabbri trade was done.

 

[kliq]

If you're going to start a rebuild with early to mid thirties Zetterberg and Datsyuk still on the roster, you absolutely have to trade those two away. Those two would be pretty big thorns in your rebuilds side and you'd be squandering their personal careers. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone in favor of trading those two away at that time and still today...

Again you make the whole scenario sound very clear cut. It's not. Tanking and rebuilding while you still have two hall of fame players on the roster who are still putting up point per game seasons is pretty hard to justify. And it makes total sense why Illitch would want to keep going for it with them around.

Now, if you want to say Holland did a poor job at assembling a playoff worthy team in those last remaining streak years that's an entirely different issue.

This would pretty much be the equivalent of Pittsburgh trading Crosby, Malkin, and Letang. Anything can happen, but I would almost surely bet that those players all retire as Penguins and the Pens go down the exact same path as us in a few year.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

This would pretty much be the equivalent of Pittsburgh trading Crosby, Malkin, and Letang. Anything can happen, but I would almost surely bet that those players all retire as Penguins and the Pens go down the exact same path as us in a few year.

Malkin's name has been dangled from time to time over the years. I wouldn't be surprised if they all retire there but we will have to see where they are here shortly. He could just move back to Russia instead of taking one last run somewhere else in the league even if both parties were okay with moving on.

 

[kliq]

Malkin's name has been dangled from time to time over the years. I wouldn't be surprised if they all retire there but we will have to see where they are here shortly. He could just move back to Russia instead of taking one last run somewhere else in the league even if both parties were okay with moving on.

Maybe he goes to the KHL and the Pens ship him off to the desert.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Maybe he goes to the KHL and the Pens ship him off to the desert.

Only signed for two more years after this one in terms of his contract ending in 21-22. I doubt he leaves before the end of that contract.

 

[kliq]

Only signed for two more years after this one in terms of his contract ending in 21-22. I doubt he leaves before the end of that contract.

I'm just making a joke given the original comparison I made to Datsyuk and Zetterberg. I dont actually see him leaving, I think all three will retire as Penguins.

 

[ChrisReevesLegs]

Malkin's name has been dangled from time to time over the years. I wouldn't be surprised if they all retire there but we will have to see where they are here shortly. He could just move back to Russia instead of taking one last run somewhere else in the league even if both parties were okay with moving on.

Malkin being traded is literally a joke meme lol

 

[Snuggs]

Just seen the title a few times and honestly, truely. I really don't blame anyone in the organization or ownership for attempting to win.

They signed the wrong guys and over paid there own guys too often... (Nielsen/Weiss/Franzen/Ericssson/Abdelkader/DeKeyse/ arguably even Howard ) Also didn't draft TOO well. While also not really making a swing for the fence trade to try and get a star. I feel like if money was a little more well spent between those 5 players, things could have been a little different. Idk if they just couldn't get players to come or didn't wanna over spend on one player or what.

I apperciate teams that attempt to build winners year in and out and don't have a 5-10 year rebuild draft plan. I like to integrate both into one. Draft well, sign players who are good, don't let your good players go. Make a trade if you think it'll put you over the top. I mean I know that's what everyone tries to do but that's what imo went wrong. Bad Judgement in those departments are why they are where the Red Wings are now more than just cause they didn't start a "rebuild" earlier.

 

[TheClap]

Bud, I just picked two of the most relevant high draft picks we have, that's all I meant by that. You're technically right though, so just sub out Mantha and Larkin for Svech/Ras/Zadina/Seider etc etc and my point remains the same.

Well your original argument was that the Wings would still be in the same position they are in now. But now you're trying to argue they would have been too good to make some of these picks? So which is it? You don't get both ways.

And hey, if the Wings were just a bit better in 2018, perhaps in Carolina's position, they hit the lottery and leap up 9 slots to nab Svech's better brother like the Hurricanes did. Or NJ/Chicago/NYR did last year.

And Ras and Seider were huge reaches where they were drafted. It's very possible they're still on the board in the middle of the first round.

 

[ChrisReevesLegs]

Well your original argument was that the Wings would still be in the same position they are in now. But now you're trying to argue they would have been too good to make some of these picks? So which is it? You don't get both ways.

Nice attempt at a straw man, but I can tell you're smarter than this.

I'll spell it out again: Maatta doesn't change the scenario were in, and probably only extends our mediocrity, which is not good.

The KFQ trade was a bad one. Everyone agrees. But that trade did not radically shift this team and Wings fans in general are overly obsessed with it. As is on display here.

And hey, if the Wings were just a bit better in 2018, perhaps in Carolina's position, they hit the lottery and leap up 9 slots to nab Svech's better brother like the Hurricanes did. Or NJ/Chicago/NYR did last year.

And Ras and Seider were huge reaches where they were drafted. It's very possible they're still on the board in the middle of the first round.

Your hindsight vision is alarmingly superb. Kudos.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

You can't figure out how to get another win because your goalie gets peppered with 45 shots in game 6 which was a one goal game until the eh, kinda questionable, Frolik penalty shot and you lose a one goal affair in game 7. The Wings were woefully outgunned in that Chicago series. They shouldn't have won 3 games is the point. They did, so kudos to them, but it wasn't bad lines why they lost to Chicago. It's that Toews and Kane and Keith and Seabrook and Hossa were just straight up better than the guys on Detroit's side and Crawford did enough to win.

Abby got his contract due to Holland. Helm got his contract due to Holland. They were both bad deals when the ink dried. And also, no, Glenny's deal wouldn't look generous for them. A casual glance shows that both Helm and Abby were paid damn near the same deal as Glenny for their second contracts. Abby at 1.8 and Helm at 2.25. Also, Helm got his deal in part because he was a really good 3C for awhile. And Abby's deal was awful, but it was done in the same time frame as Matt Belesky and Bryan Bickell and other "power forwards" that had 20 goals go in off of them were getting around 4M. Not defending the contract because it was a bad deal, but it was the going rate for a player of Abby's ilk. Should have walked away from him... but if they wanted to keep him, that's what it was going to take.



Burning a team to the ground is not the best way to rebuild a roster. It doesn't even have the highest level of success. The most successful rebuilds were completed based off of dumb luck or over a decade of being an also-ran. You don't trade away everyone and then get better in a short period of time. Stuff like Chicago and Pittsburgh... that worked because their cores had rotted so they started fresh with guys who wouldn't stop grinding and they got big time pieces who fit that mold too. If you force a rebuild by dealing away anyone with a pulse... you get the Detroit Tigers, the Ottawa Senators, the Cincinnati Bengals, or the Miami Dolphins. Where you are stuck at the bottom for longer than you need to be because you just gut any sense of culture that you have at all. I know winning culture is an intangible thing... but you've got to have your team of young kids knowing that they've got the organization behind them and putting out completely unprepared kids to get their dicks knocked in to "let them grow" is moronic. It's a rare player that can come in and succeed on a crap roster. ****, look at Edmonton with Hall and RNH and Yakupov and Eberle and Strome. They had some of the best player material in the league and they were a damn joke. Then, you get Eberle out of Edmonton and he's a good player. Get Strome out of there and he's good. Get Hall out of there and he's an MVP candidate.

You don't develop if you're getting your teeth kicked in daily. It just doesn't happen.

Taking Zetterberg off Toews in the third period of game 6 has to be one of the worst and most perplexing moves I ever saw Babcock make.

They came out to play off the glass hockey and absorb and abandoned the things that got them the lead in the first place.

 

[MBH]

Wasn't going to happen. There isn't a single GM-owner duo in the league (aside from Melnyk-Dorion, maybe) that would've switched to rebuild mode with Datsyuk and Zetterberg and Lidstrom and Franzen still on the team. .

That's patently false.
This is precisely what Chicago did.
They identified their core. They moved out the guys who weren't core.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

That's patently false.
This is precisely what Chicago did.
They identified their core. They moved out the guys who weren't core.

When did Chicago go into rebuild mode in the 2010s? They identified their core and paid them like core guys. And then the cap kinda took care of the rest. The vast majority of their moves were 100% necessitated by the cap.
You think they chose to deal Byfuglien and Ladd for practically nothing? Toss Teraveinen in to get Bickell gone? Trade Patrick Sharp and another good prospect for Johnny Oduya who in the span of one season literally became NOTHING (Sharp + Johns for Garbutt (bought out) and Oduya. Oduya for Scuderi. Scuderi for Ehrhoff, Ehrhoff waived.).

The Wings in the mid 2000s identified their core and paid them like core guys (Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Lidstrom) and paid them like core guys. Chicago's moves were always cap driven. Also, Chicago isn't in rebuild mode. They're just an eh team that is running out of steam from running the West for the majority of a decade.

I mean, the last really big moves that Chicago did were the Hossa contract dump and trading Panarin and things to get back Brandon Saad and things. Again, 100% cap motivated.

And it's not even really the same because if the Wings dealt Zetterberg, they'd be in the Nashville pickle with his recapture. If they traded Franzen at that point, they'd be in recapture hell. Lidstrom left in 2012. Datsyuk maybe could have been moved, but he was 34-38 and was still a PPG player. There is no "rebuilding move" that would have had anywhere near the same positive effect as having him wear the Winged Wheel. I mean, what do you get for him as a mid 30s skater essentially wanting to go year to year on contract? A first and a decent prospect? If a main reason you are so vehemently against trading AA off a bad roster is that he's entertaining and brings excitement... why on Earth would you deal Datsyuk? As soon as the ink dried on a Datsyuk trade, it would have been reviled in Detroit. The 2012 lockout did a hell of a lot to lock Detroit into a certain path.