Missing the Playoffs would cause a shift in philosophy.
- Thread starter BinCookin
- Start date
DeYarmond Edison
drinkingpinkrabbits
I saw it the same way IIRC. That was the most hopeless I've felt watching the Wings in the playoffs in recent memory. Even more so than the Boston series.
Maybe I'm exaggerating, but I remember leaving those games thinking we were just outmatched.
I mean Howard vs Rinne isn't even fair to Jimmy, when Rinne is on his game he is one of the best.
And they had the Suter-Weber pairing at the time, so that's like 30 minutes of going up against an absolute nightmare pairing
Plus I remember Kevin Klein played the series of his life in that one.
I guess it doesn't really matter in the context of this discussion. My point was that the Wings that year, 2012, weren't a roster with an expectation of failure. They may have met their perfect foil, but they weren't an underdog by an stretch. They had a very competitive roster. They were 5th in goal differential finishing the season with a +45. They have been +9, -9, +14, and presently +0 since.
2012 was the last consistently great roster the Wings have put on the ice.
Frk It
Mo Seider Less Problems
- Jul 27, 2010
- 36,246
- 14,755
InjuredChoker
Registered User
the fancy stats match the eye-test imo.
we controlled the play and outshot them handily. but had trouble getting close to the net and high danger scoring chances were pretty even. and when wings could get to the slot, rinne stopped everything.
we controlled the play and outshot them handily. but had trouble getting close to the net and high danger scoring chances were pretty even. and when wings could get to the slot, rinne stopped everything.
All situations:
5v5:
Thank you. If I'm reading this right, it seems to assert the Wings did drive the play far more, but Howard's .880 sv% really hurt. Whether you blame him or golden chances, whatever, not really the debate I'm interested in right now, ha.
Well now I want to compare the above fancy stats with the Boston series, because I don't think they were anywhere near equally hopeless. In the Nashville series I remember going "Why didn't that bounce left?!" In the Boston series I went, "Why can't they keep the puck more than 3 seconds?"
Yeah, thank you. That's exactly what I was driving at. That year the Wings were a great team that could control the play.
Wow I don't remember the Wings outshooting Nashville so heavily in that series. I just remember the helpless feeling in the last 10 minutes of those games when the Wings couldn't generate any sort of scoring chances.
skate skate skate
Registered User
skate skate skate
Registered User
skate skate skate
Registered User
Wings had a PDO of 90.3 (sh% 3.4 and sv% 86.9
) 5v5, while Preds was 109.7 (sh% 13.1 and sh% 96.6 ) which is just insane! Wings CF% was 57 and the number of High Quality Scoring Chances for was 49-50, basically the same. Looking at these stats is sure looks like Wings was insanely unlucky, and far from outplayed. Obviously stats doesn't tell the whole story and as I haven't watch that series, I can't comment on the play. But I think it's safe to say they didn't play quite as bad as you remember.
WingedWheel1987
Registered User
Detroit would have to move heaven and earth to score one goal and ten seconds later Nashville would come down the ice and score a freebie from a egregious defensive breakdown.
That's how almost every game played out.
That's how almost every game played out.
Henkka
Registered User
PDO is a lot of luck (mainly in shooting percentage), but another part of the total figure is the level of goaltending. Which is partly luck, but mostly it's also a REAL SKILL.
Howard was not good and Rinne was phenomenal on that series. That's about it what I remember.
Pekka Rinne was a TOP3 goalie in the league on that time. His peak seasons were from 2010-11 to 2011-12. Now he has had injuries, has plastic hips etc. Guy will never be same again.
Howard was not good and Rinne was phenomenal on that series. That's about it what I remember.
Pekka Rinne was a TOP3 goalie in the league on that time. His peak seasons were from 2010-11 to 2011-12. Now he has had injuries, has plastic hips etc. Guy will never be same again.
Last edited:
skate skate skate
Registered User
all i remember from that series was plays like this
Omg, that is hilarious, hahaha. What the heck are they doing?
Against Nashville it was a case of Super-hot goalie and incredibly effective smothering defence against a superior team prone to incredible defensive gaffes and with a goalie who slightly cracked under pressure of needing to match the other guy.
Boston was a massive uphill struggle. They were near their peak, Big, Nasty, on a roll and pretty much without injuries. Detroit started the series with a small, slow and totally unbalanced roster, with the team's key playoff players injured and the key supporting cast scorers getting their first taste of the playoffs. Even getting to play Boston was a massive achievement.
As for the original question, when you have a brand new Arena opening you would prefer to have a competitive team regardless of the fact that it probably won't make much difference financially. The ownership has a certain pride. Sure missing the playoffs would remove the pressure to maintain the streak, but I can't see why anyone wouldn't want to maintain the streak. In a sport specifically structured to ensure parity and a lack of domination over a long period by any team, the streak is an extraordinary achievement, especially in the salary cap world. Sure it might not be as sexy as getting to the Conference or Cup finals, but in 50 years, a 25+ year playoff streak will be a lot more impressive than a few good years every decade culminating in conference final defeats. Just like Jagr is rather more memorable than Justin Williams despite less cup rings.
Alongside the arena, you have the final years of 13, 40 and to a lesser extent 55. The organisation will want them to retire Wings, and there is a chance one or both might yet reach the rafters. And with them in situ, you can guarantee no-one will be blowing this team up. And rightly so. A key difference to other tank scenarios is that these guys (and one or two others) provide a fantastic mentorship group for the next core, and provide the chance to continue the unbroken PO streak captaincy lineage from #19 to #5 to #40 to perhaps #71. As all the tanking teams that haven't become the LA kings or the Blackhawks show us, the culture within the organisation as a whole and its locker-room is vital.
Also, and possibly more importantly, D and Z are still fine players, and despite losing a step (or more) are still scoring at about 0.7 ppg in a team that has had its worst goalscoring season in decades. Crucially this is accompanied by the emergence of Larkin (top +/- in the NHL) and Mrazek ( top sv %), and the maturation of Dekeyser. Indeed apart from 13, 40, 55 and 52 and possibly 25 (and 17's one year), the rest of the active roster are at or approaching their peaks. And several have shown signs of room for growth (even #2 this year looks a genuine top 6 d-man) - its easy to forget that Sheahan, Jurco and Tatar all started the season in their early 20s, and thus could well improve their output. Jury's out on #56, but as the coach says, he's good enough to play in the NHL, and on a better balanced roster his 0.4 ppg and +3 from the 3rd line would see him as a decent bet for 15-20 goals a year minimum. Our farm team is 10th out of 30, which about matches the ranking of our prospect pool, and we have 2 or 3 prospects that we know are NHL ready.
Sure its been a frustrating year with our awful goalscoring and continued defensive inconsistency, but we are slightly better than the mediocrity that many fear, and have just enough in the prospect pool to suggest the general trajectory decline has been arrested and at worst has hit a plateau of #5-8 seed in the east.
People are talking as though the franchise is a mess and the team are no threat to anyone. In the short term a fit Mrazek currently gives this team a chance against almost anyone (after all we were 1 officiating error and 1 bad defensive play from getting past TBL last year), although we clearly are among a large group of outsiders behind a very small group of favourites.
In the longer term, we know exactly what we need. A #1 D-Man. Another Top level or potential top level Forward to help larkin take over from the twins. More size & Snarl.
But for me, this thread is odd. Why would the organisation blow it up when the picture is actually more positive from a long-term perspective than it was a year ago due to the emergence of Larkin and Mrazik as potential franchise cornerstones and smaller things (like the aforementioned Smith proving that he does have a future as a 4/5/6 d-man if given the right role). Even the fact that the D looks just as solid without Kronwall is a nod to the future.
For the philosophy to shift, things would have to get significantly worse quickly. Of course a lot depends on the euro-twins. Should Dats decide to leave next year and Hank's skating reach Holmstrom levels of paucity, and no other prospects develop, then the picture changes.
But as things stand the wings are in the top 1/3 of the NHL on current performance and in the top 1/3 in terms of prospect rankings, plus are almost certain to acquire more draft picks or some more apt player assets as they make room for some of those from the minors who need to play next year. And that's assuming cap limitations or rejections mean free agency yields nothing else.
Of course Holland could repeat his worst follies and trade for a rental or two (and not as a salary dump) or allow more prospects worth at least a late pick to walk on waivers, and that would slow the on the fly re-tool. Its also possible that he in FA or via the mythical trade table (or more likely via the draft) could pull another rabbit out of the hat.
Long and the short of it - The wings are still actually quite good, and certainly too good to tank, as they have too many assets with too much salary to be able to ice a team bad enough to finish with a top 5 pick, assuming they want to retain those players that could become the start of the future core. Unless deals obviously stacked in Holland's favour are presented to him, it makes no sense to deliberately weaken the team.
And unless a combination of drafting, trading and FA yields no meaningful results by the team D & Z are both gone, it seems tanking will remain a non-viable option going forward.
Particularly as over half of D-men this team covets most were drafted lower than our first round pick or traded for assets that we could easily equal without damaging the roster too much.
Boston was a massive uphill struggle. They were near their peak, Big, Nasty, on a roll and pretty much without injuries. Detroit started the series with a small, slow and totally unbalanced roster, with the team's key playoff players injured and the key supporting cast scorers getting their first taste of the playoffs. Even getting to play Boston was a massive achievement.
As for the original question, when you have a brand new Arena opening you would prefer to have a competitive team regardless of the fact that it probably won't make much difference financially. The ownership has a certain pride. Sure missing the playoffs would remove the pressure to maintain the streak, but I can't see why anyone wouldn't want to maintain the streak. In a sport specifically structured to ensure parity and a lack of domination over a long period by any team, the streak is an extraordinary achievement, especially in the salary cap world. Sure it might not be as sexy as getting to the Conference or Cup finals, but in 50 years, a 25+ year playoff streak will be a lot more impressive than a few good years every decade culminating in conference final defeats. Just like Jagr is rather more memorable than Justin Williams despite less cup rings.
Alongside the arena, you have the final years of 13, 40 and to a lesser extent 55. The organisation will want them to retire Wings, and there is a chance one or both might yet reach the rafters. And with them in situ, you can guarantee no-one will be blowing this team up. And rightly so. A key difference to other tank scenarios is that these guys (and one or two others) provide a fantastic mentorship group for the next core, and provide the chance to continue the unbroken PO streak captaincy lineage from #19 to #5 to #40 to perhaps #71. As all the tanking teams that haven't become the LA kings or the Blackhawks show us, the culture within the organisation as a whole and its locker-room is vital.
Also, and possibly more importantly, D and Z are still fine players, and despite losing a step (or more) are still scoring at about 0.7 ppg in a team that has had its worst goalscoring season in decades. Crucially this is accompanied by the emergence of Larkin (top +/- in the NHL) and Mrazek ( top sv %), and the maturation of Dekeyser. Indeed apart from 13, 40, 55 and 52 and possibly 25 (and 17's one year), the rest of the active roster are at or approaching their peaks. And several have shown signs of room for growth (even #2 this year looks a genuine top 6 d-man) - its easy to forget that Sheahan, Jurco and Tatar all started the season in their early 20s, and thus could well improve their output. Jury's out on #56, but as the coach says, he's good enough to play in the NHL, and on a better balanced roster his 0.4 ppg and +3 from the 3rd line would see him as a decent bet for 15-20 goals a year minimum. Our farm team is 10th out of 30, which about matches the ranking of our prospect pool, and we have 2 or 3 prospects that we know are NHL ready.
Sure its been a frustrating year with our awful goalscoring and continued defensive inconsistency, but we are slightly better than the mediocrity that many fear, and have just enough in the prospect pool to suggest the general trajectory decline has been arrested and at worst has hit a plateau of #5-8 seed in the east.
People are talking as though the franchise is a mess and the team are no threat to anyone. In the short term a fit Mrazek currently gives this team a chance against almost anyone (after all we were 1 officiating error and 1 bad defensive play from getting past TBL last year), although we clearly are among a large group of outsiders behind a very small group of favourites.
In the longer term, we know exactly what we need. A #1 D-Man. Another Top level or potential top level Forward to help larkin take over from the twins. More size & Snarl.
But for me, this thread is odd. Why would the organisation blow it up when the picture is actually more positive from a long-term perspective than it was a year ago due to the emergence of Larkin and Mrazik as potential franchise cornerstones and smaller things (like the aforementioned Smith proving that he does have a future as a 4/5/6 d-man if given the right role). Even the fact that the D looks just as solid without Kronwall is a nod to the future.
For the philosophy to shift, things would have to get significantly worse quickly. Of course a lot depends on the euro-twins. Should Dats decide to leave next year and Hank's skating reach Holmstrom levels of paucity, and no other prospects develop, then the picture changes.
But as things stand the wings are in the top 1/3 of the NHL on current performance and in the top 1/3 in terms of prospect rankings, plus are almost certain to acquire more draft picks or some more apt player assets as they make room for some of those from the minors who need to play next year. And that's assuming cap limitations or rejections mean free agency yields nothing else.
Of course Holland could repeat his worst follies and trade for a rental or two (and not as a salary dump) or allow more prospects worth at least a late pick to walk on waivers, and that would slow the on the fly re-tool. Its also possible that he in FA or via the mythical trade table (or more likely via the draft) could pull another rabbit out of the hat.
Long and the short of it - The wings are still actually quite good, and certainly too good to tank, as they have too many assets with too much salary to be able to ice a team bad enough to finish with a top 5 pick, assuming they want to retain those players that could become the start of the future core. Unless deals obviously stacked in Holland's favour are presented to him, it makes no sense to deliberately weaken the team.
And unless a combination of drafting, trading and FA yields no meaningful results by the team D & Z are both gone, it seems tanking will remain a non-viable option going forward.
Particularly as over half of D-men this team covets most were drafted lower than our first round pick or traded for assets that we could easily equal without damaging the roster too much.
BinCookin
Registered User
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
2024 NHL Draft Lottery Team that wins #1 pick - PICK ONLY ONE TEAMWagers: 10Staked: $12,250.00Event closes- Updated: