Thoughts now that we are 33% of the way through the season

[Heaton]

This means more than just points. This would also be about culture, and the fact that mistakes are allowed and encouraged. Everyone is entitled to a job no matter how much you suck... That was an Oilers Problem more so than their points.

And that was a problem under their old management. If Holland and co. are as good as people like to say, then the rebuild wouldn't go terribly under them. The Oilers (and most other rebuilding teams) change GMs and other management during the rebuild process, because they've screwed up the process. That's why they take so long. Competent rebuilds take 3-5 years.

 

[BinCookin]

At what point will it be silly to mention the Oilers as a negative example of rebuilding?

If the whole goal is for them to win a stanley cup... then they will win one... eventually.... I mean it might take 100 years... but eventually.

I would say their new GM is finally putting vets around their rookies, after 6-7 years of "dont worry high talented, no experience rookies is what we will base our team off of"... Ya that was a failure.

Going out and trading for D men, to and tougher players, to create a team identity... that is starting to look successful.

I dont want to be the oilers of the last 7 years, not THIS year. They have turned a corner, and are starting to make good decisions. But you well know what their mistakes were PRIOR to this year.

 

[BinCookin]

And that was a problem under their old management. If Holland and co. are as good as people like to say, then the rebuild wouldn't go terribly under them. The Oilers (and most other rebuilding teams) change GMs and other management during the rebuild process, because they've screwed up the process. That's why they take so long. Competent rebuilds take 3-5 years.

Sorry But WRONG!!! Dead Wrong. (Trump Voice)


"competent" rebuilds.....

How about Lucky as ****, BEST REBUILDS EVER.. take 4 years!

BEST EVER also included the right timing to get Crosby / Ovechkin / McDavid types...

BEST EVER rebuilds is what you are saying. Not Competent.

Oh not convinced by my statement? Think I am making **** up? Just inventing some numbers for you? Willy Nilly like:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2103093

 

[Frk It]

This means more than just points. This would also be about culture, and the fact that mistakes are allowed and encouraged. Everyone is entitled to a job no matter how much you suck... That was an Oilers Problem more so than their points.

So how come the players developed in that culture are winning now?

Draisaitl got a spot right after the draft... and struggled... now he has 26 pts in 31 games.

 

[njx9]

DUDE WTF? I am making a very simple point.

Sproul ****ed up. He got benched ON PURPOSE. ... By management ... ON PURPOSE?! This is a fact, not an opinion.
Why did Lashoff come in? I dont know... My opinion is that They prefered Lashoff to their only other options of Russo or Hickets.

They preferred Lashoff to Sproul. Russo, Hicketts, whatever. There are two players on NHL roster 'right now' and they've picked Lashoff over Sproul. Perhaps neither would be playing if Marchenko et al weren't hurt, I don't think it's really material when you have two healthy players and one roster spot.

You do realize that practises exist in the NHL right?
they watch game tape.
Hell, they are people and TALK to other people.

You don't think Sproul is working with coaches at practise to improve?
You don't think Lashoff and Sproul might you know exchange a conversation?

Sure, I also know that practice reps aren't even close to game reps. It's why there are AHL and ECHL clubs affiliated with NHL teams - because having 60 guys practice and sit in the press box isn't even close to as valuable as having them on the ice playing games that ostensibly matter.

Also you have to realize Detroit management doesnt WANT to lose games on purpose.
They are not tanking no matter how much you want them to.

I have *never* advocated for a tank. I have *always* advocated for playing the guy who might benefit the team more, though I don't limit that benefit to the current season alone. Further, playing Sproul is demonstrably not the same as losing games on purpose, given that the record is the same as it was before he was benched.

So when you say the "right choice" is to just play him... AND hope the team loses because of it... and in 1-2 years.. Sproul will be better... Ya we have a different opinion. But most importantly its clear the actual Detroit management has a different opinion.

THEY ARE NOT TANKING... So all your "points" that say we should play players who "you dont care make mistakes" is an argument that may work for others who want to TANK. But not for reality of how our Team is currently run.

Again, let's stop with the tanking stuff. It's like anyone who doesn't want to spend to the cap on mediocre junk to try to eke out 8th place thinks we should start intentionally losing or something. That's not at all what I've suggested or proposed. Unless your opinion of Sproul is that playing him, in spite of evidence to the contrary, is the same as tanking?

You think Sproul's +'s outweigh his -'s. And when he ****s up there should be NO CONSEQUENCES? He should have no real motivation? He should just be gifted Ice time? Just cause?

Consequences shouldn't be spending the rest of the season watching inferior players with no future from the press box. Sit him a game? Fine. But maybe we ought to 'bench' Blashill for putting a green player into a terrible position in OT in the first place? I think we're punishing the wrong guy, in this case.

I don't want to be the Oilers Thanks.

Let me be Clear I am NOT stating that management is making the right decision
I am NOT stating Lashoff is a better player.
Let those last 2 lines sink in.
Everything is not Black and White.

I wouldn't be here discussing things with people I fundamentally disagree with if I thought everything was black and white. But I don't think a good case has been made for Sproul sitting the last 4 games, or any of the games he was press boxed before that. It's abysmal roster management: they're trading absolutely no short term gain for a long term loss.

 

[BinCookin]

It's abysmal roster management: they're trading absolutely no short term gain for a long term loss.

IMO The long term gain is to have Sproul Play Better

(We can agree on that right?)

My contention is that sitting Sproul is part of his learning curve. That he needs to know he could be cut from the roster if he doesn't play well.
My contention is also that bringing up Lashoff (Yes hes the only option as there were 2 other injured players) would aid Sproul in learning some defensive abilities.

Maybe it doesn't work, maybe it does.

You feel continuing to play Sproul is the best move. You think he is not costing us games any worse than Lashoff is. I disagree, and say his learning curve IS costing the team games... Maybe just 2 games.. but thats MORE than the games he has won for us (1 game).

You are losing your mind if you think Detroit is Leaving Lashoff on the Roster all year. Thats obviously insane, and I am not for that at all.
But I am fine with Sproul being benched for 2-3 weeks to learn.

Whether he does learn or not. And how he learns or not is where we disagree.

But i think both of us can agree we would like Sproul to become an NHL D man for the DRW.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

If the whole goal is for them to win a stanley cup... then they will win one... eventually.... I mean it might take 100 years... but eventually.

I would say their new GM is finally putting vets around their rookies, after 6-7 years of "dont worry high talented, no experience rookies is what we will base our team off of"... Ya that was a failure.

Going out and trading for D men, to and tougher players, to create a team identity... that is starting to look successful.

I dont want to be the oilers of the last 7 years, not THIS year. They have turned a corner, and are starting to make good decisions. But you well know what their mistakes were PRIOR to this year.

Correct. However the more time passes and the more successful they become, it just proves that if you have good management to supplement those high draft picks (the Oilers killed themselves by having one of the worst drafting records outside of the 1st round) your rebuild will be more successful than what Holland is trying right now.

 

[BinCookin]

So how come the players developed in that culture are winning now?

Draisaitl got a spot right after the draft... and struggled... now he has 26 pts in 31 games.

If you want to take 5 years to develop Sproul at the NHL thats your choice.
Oh and if there are players that can handle ****** development, its top 5 picks. Our guys will drown

 

[Winger98]

Not sure what Sproul could learn from Lashoff that he can't learn from Dekeyser, Ericsson, Kronwall, or Green. And after being stashed in GR until waivers ran out and then being rotated with XO/Marchenko/Smith doesn't tell you you're expendable, not sure what will.

 

[njx9]

IMO The long term gain is to have Sproul Play Better

(We can agree on that right?)

My contention is that sitting Sproul is part of his learning curve. That he needs to know he could be cut from the roster if he doesn't play well.
My contention is also that bringing up Lashoff (Yes hes the only option as there were 2 other injured players) would aid Sproul in learning some defensive abilities.

Maybe it doesn't work, maybe it does.

You feel continuing to play Sproul is the best move. You think he is not costing us games any worse than Lashoff is. I disagree, and say his learning curve IS costing the team games... Maybe just 2 games.. but thats MORE than the games he has won for us (1 game).

You are losing your mind if you think Detroit is Leaving Lashoff on the Roster all year. Thats obviously insane, and I am not for that at all.
But I am fine with Sproul being benched for 2-3 weeks to learn.

Whether he does learn or not. And how he learns or not is where we disagree.

But i think both of us can agree we would like Sproul to become an NHL D man for the DRW.

I certainly don't think Lashoff is on the roster all year - as soon as the standard 6 are healthy, Lashoff will go back to GR and Sproul will go back to the box with XO or Marchenko, depending on which other young defenseman we're screwing over that day in favor of giving Kronwall or Smith max ice time.

And while you look at the two mistakes Sproul made that may have directly led to losses, his overall body of play has us at the same record as Lashoff's, suggesting that the team's record is likely dependent on more than who our #5 or #6 D is that day. Given that, it seems silly to continue to play Lashoff, when the team isn't doing any better. At least if we'd brought up a guy like Russo, we could still say we were playing guys who might eventually contribute to the team.

All that said, I appreciate the opposing views, even if I vehemently disagree with them. I think it's fair to say that I have no faith in the team's leadership developing anyone, if it thinks there's some other way to squeeze 1 more point from the team in a different way, where it seems like you think this (Sproul's handling) represents development of an asset?

 

[BinCookin]

I certainly don't think Lashoff is on the roster all year - as soon as the standard 6 are healthy, Lashoff will go back to GR and Sproul will go back to the box with XO or Marchenko, depending on which other young defenseman we're screwing over that day in favor of giving Kronwall or Smith max ice time.

And while you look at the two mistakes Sproul made that may have directly led to losses, his overall body of play has us at the same record as Lashoff's, suggesting that the team's record is likely dependent on more than who our #5 or #6 D is that day. Given that, it seems silly to continue to play Lashoff, when the team isn't doing any better. At least if we'd brought up a guy like Russo, we could still say we were playing guys who might eventually contribute to the team.

All that said, I appreciate the opposing views, even if I vehemently disagree with them. I think it's fair to say that I have no faith in the team's leadership developing anyone, if it thinks there's some other way to squeeze 1 more point from the team in a different way, where it seems like you think this (Sproul's handling) represents development of an asset?

I think its a mix of both. Get more points AND develop the asset.
I feel competition for the spot will drive a harder work ethic on Sproul (if possible). And I feel they can work on his deficiencies in practice while he is out of the lineup.

Also as much as i can say Lashoff and Sproul (5-6 D man) has very little effect on our winning any single game. I can say this:

It takes a whole team effort to win. Very rarely can one guy make a team win (when the team plays badly) - Superstar level guys..
But 1 Horrible play (Like if Howard lets in a horrible goal), or Some D man makes a turnover that leads to a goal against... ya 1 guy can lose you a game.

In these circumstances, I feel SUCH A BAD play just screws the whole team over. Smith is especially bad for this. Sproul only made 2 bad mistakes in 2 different games, but i do agree that for a 6th D man... id prefer they just lose us games. This was always a Risk with Sproul, and I hope his D game continues to develop maybe just enough so he learns how not to get out of position in a board battle.

Not sure what Sproul could learn from Lashoff that he can't learn from Dekeyser, Ericsson, Kronwall, or Green. And after being stashed in GR until waivers ran out and then being rotated with XO/Marchenko/Smith doesn't tell you you're expendable, not sure what will.

I mean i agree, he is what he is. But overall I had found Sproul to be decent defensively up until his few mistakes. So I think he has come a long way. He just needs to be good enough to not give the game away by himself. I don't know if he will ever get good enough to do that... but I do not think he can't learn still.

 

[Frk It]

If you want to take 5 years to develop Sproul at the NHL thats your choice.
Oh and if there are players that can handle ****** development, its top 5 picks. Our guys will drown

Playing Sproul and letting him figure it out would take him 5 years to develop?

How does benching him and telling him to watch Lashoff accelerate that?

 

[BinCookin]

Playing Sproul and letting him figure it out would take him 5 years to develop?

How does benching him and telling him to watch Lashoff accelerate that?

already answered in previous comment

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

I haven't noticed, is Kronwall killing penalties this year?

 

[Dotter]

I haven't noticed, is Kronwall killing penalties this year?

Nah, he's too busy killing offense.

 

[ap3x]

Because when he had a good roster (Griffins) he gets results

Can't follow the analogy you're implying. Until he hasn't proven that, I won't buy it. Hell, he can't even fulfill legit expectations of developing the young guns so far.

 

[Winger98]

I mean i agree, he is what he is. But overall I had found Sproul to be decent defensively up until his few mistakes. So I think he has come a long way. He just needs to be good enough to not give the game away by himself. I don't know if he will ever get good enough to do that... but I do not think he can't learn still.

I don't disagree with any of that, just not about how Lashoff really figures into that. We could send the same message by knocking Sproul's minutes down to ten minutes a night for a couple of games or giving Sproul his own personal bag skate the next practice.

If we want to sit Sproul, and we don't mind playing a guy just ten minutes, I'd rather see Russo or even Hicketts given a look, as they bring something we still sorely lack with some better puck movement from the backend.

 

[The Zermanator]

Correct. However the more time passes and the more successful they become, it just proves that if you have good management to supplement those high draft picks (the Oilers killed themselves by having one of the worst drafting records outside of the 1st round) your rebuild will be more successful than what Holland is trying right now.

I agree. I mean Bin can be as condescending as he wants, doesn't change the fact that his argument will look silly when Edmonton starts winning Cups (not Cup) and Detroit's still spinning their tires under Holland. I care about the team progressing towards a Stanley Cup more than I care about playoff participation pats on the head. Holland doesn't have it anymore.

I swear some people just can't see the forest for the trees. It's about winning CHAMPIONSHIPS, that's the whole point!!! What we're doing now is like a NASCAR driver killing it in the heats every year then shi**ing the bed in the Daytona 500. At the end of the day, nobody remembers the heats. Besides, I'm tired of watching this team play mediocre hockey after growing up watching Yzerman, Lidstrom, Hasek, Shanny, Chelios, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Franzen and Co. I want a return of elite players playing elite hockey, even if it means taking a step back for a few years.

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

Can't follow the analogy you're implying. Until he hasn't proven that, I won't buy it. Hell, he can't even fulfill legit expectations of developing the young guns so far.

I get that you don't like Blashill. That much is clear. What specifically, however, would you like him to do differently with this team apart from cliché personnel changes? More importantly, why would you expect a team that is a fringe playoff team to fire their coach when they are three points out of a playoff spot (and thus by that very definition a fringe playoff team)? Do you think that makes Detroit look like a good job for the next coach you want to hire?

For the record I am totally indifferent about Blashill given the state of the Wings roster. *****ing about coaching, however, detracts from the real issues with this team and how it is managed. I am not the type of person to ***** about a hangnail when I have cancer.

 

[SimplySolace]

Nah, he's too busy killing offense.

savage

 

[ap3x]

I get that you don't like Blashill. That much is clear. What specifically, however, would you like him to do differently with this team apart from cliché personnel changes? More importantly, why would you expect a team that is a fringe playoff team to fire their coach when they are three points out of a playoff spot (and thus by that very definition a fringe playoff team)? Do you think that makes Detroit look like a good job for the next coach you want to hire?

For the record I am totally indifferent about Blashill given the state of the Wings roster. *****ing about coaching, however, detracts from the real issues with this team and how it is managed. I am not the type of person to ***** about a hangnail when I have cancer.

First off, I was initially one of the guys around here that vehemently defended Blash against users like Actual Thought, that didn't give him a chance from the start on. The more time passed, the more I started to dislike him due to an increasingly obvious lack of coaching skills at this stage.

U consider it "cliché personnel changes", I do not. If u've got a limited roster like ours, a good coach is measured by how much he gets out of it. His personal decisions & distribution of IT makes it even worse. That's weird when considering that most of the expectations were based on his good results with a bunch of younger players at the AHL stage. Expectations that he didn't fulfill at all so far. I don't buy him just having no other choice at all.

On top of that, PP is catastrophic, whereas the recent PK is one of the few things that works right now. Not good enough for me. No one's talking about making this team to a contender or making it into the playoffs without any problems. But mistakes that he's making is costing us too much.

He's still nothing else than a cheap imitation of Babcock to me. And that's when most of us hoped that he was exactly the opposite. As much hate as Holland is getting here, just blaming him for giving him no other choice is too easy, imo.

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

First off, I was initially one of the guys around here that vehemently defended Blash against users like Actual Thought, that didn't give him a chance from the start on. The more time passed, the more I started to dislike him due to an increasingly obvious lack of coaching skills at this stage.

U consider it "cliché personnel changes", I do not. If u've got a limited roster like ours, a good coach is measured by how much he gets out of it. His personal decisions & distribution of IT makes it even worse. That's weird when considering that most of the expectations were based on his good results with a bunch of younger players at the AHL stage. Expectations that he didn't fulfill at all so far. I don't buy him just having no other choice at all.

On top of that, PP is catastrophic, whereas the recent PK is one of the few things that works right now. Not good enough for me. No one's talking about making this team to a contender or making it into the playoffs without any problems. But mistakes that he's making is costing us too much.

He's still nothing else than a cheap imitation of Babcock to me. And that's when most of us hoped that he was exactly the opposite. As much hate as Holland is getting here, just blaming him for giving him no other choice is too easy, imo.

Ok, I was looking for something a little more specific in terms of what you would actually change. For me I wish he would allow the third forward to chase to the strong side on the fore check. I most certainly do not agree with all of his line ups (see Brian ****ing Lashoff) or his allocation of ice time at times. At the same time, however, I didn't agree with many of Babcock's either. I agree that the PP is a mess. It was a mess last year and he re-assigned an assistant and hired a new one to run the PP just as everyone wanted. What did that bring us? Similar results. If we hire yet another assistant to run the PP and it doesn't improve, are we allowed to start asking whether it might just be our players?? Look, there just isn't much accountability in the organization. People call it a country club and you know what, they are more right than wrong.

I was in St Louis a lot for work when Quenneville was coaching there and he very much underachieved with a decent roster. He came out to Colorado to coach the Aves shortly after I moved here and **** the bed during a very short stint. He next moved to Chicago to coach a team loaded with some great young talent and what happens? All of a sudden he is the next Scotty Bowman. Do you know why he was so successful in Chicago? Because he had an awesome roster stacked with elite, elite talent. If you show me a "great coach," I will show you great players. At the end of the day, the players play the game, not the coach. The absolute best hockey players in the world should not need great coaching to figure out how to score more than one goal a game (which is where we are at). Can a really good coach bring a very good team to a championship level? Absolutely. Is coaching paramount at developmental levels? ABSOLUTELY. Give even the best NHL coaches a mediocre roster, however, and they start to look mediocre. Anyways, that is a long way of saying I am more sympathetic to coaches than players when a team starts to underachieve, especially in a game like hockey.

I expect that you will get your wish and that Blash will be fired after Christmas. Watch though, the results of his successor will not differ significantly.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Not sure what Sproul could learn from Lashoff that he can't learn from Dekeyser, Ericsson, Kronwall, or Green. And after being stashed in GR until waivers ran out and then being rotated with XO/Marchenko/Smith doesn't tell you you're expendable, not sure what will.

This. Why lashoff? Anyone defending lashoff is just trying to pick straws making themselves feel better

Greens better defensively. Danny d is better. Kronwall and Ericsson are vets.

 

[ricky0034]

there's a BIG difference between just not sitting Sproul ever and sitting him for 10 games in a row in favor of Brian Lashoff

there's so so much middle ground there

you can send a message without sitting a guy for an entire month,at that point you're just flat out hurting his development

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

What do you guys think the likelihood is of Wings selling off is?

Can a guy like Nyquist play LW?

I was in St Louis a lot for work when Quenneville was coaching there and he very much underachieved with a decent roster. He came out to Colorado to coach the Aves shortly after I moved here and **** the bed during a very short stint. He next moved to Chicago to coach a team loaded with some great young talent and what happens? All of a sudden he is the next Scotty Bowman. Do you know why he was so successful in Chicago? Because he had an awesome roster stacked with elite, elite talent. If you show me a "great coach," I will show you great players. At the end of the day, the players play the game, not the coach. The absolute best hockey players in the world should not need great coaching to figure out how to score more than one goal a game (which is where we are at). Can a really good coach bring a very good team to a championship level? Absolutely. Is coaching paramount at developmental levels? ABSOLUTELY. Give even the best NHL coaches a mediocre roster, however, and they start to look mediocre. Anyways, that is a long way of saying I am more sympathetic to coaches than players when a team starts to underachieve, especially in a game like hockey.

I expect that you will get your wish and that Blash will be fired after Christmas. Watch though, the results of his successor will not differ significantly.

Q's decent rosters in St Louis were never a match for the dynasty teams that he had to face yearly

90's/early 00 Wings + Stars + Avs had far more talent then Blues especially in net

Avs were on decline when Q took over and he still coached them to respectable performance

43-30-9 for 95 pts (4-5 in playoffs)
44-31-7 for 95 pts missed playoffs
44-31-7 for 95 pts (4-6 in playoffs)

His #1 goalies in Colorado

David Aebischer , Peter Budaj and Jose Theodore.... Your not winning a cup with any of those 3 as your #1