Who would you want to replace Blashill?

[Claypool]

I cared about those players.
If Jurco and Pulkkinen are playing top 9 roles instead of Abdelkader and Helm, maybe those guys turned into decent top 9 forwards.
Maybe we don't have these god awful contracts to Helm and Abdelkader.
Maybe Mrazek is here as a goalie as the kind of goalie that can upset a defending cup champion in round 1 sometime in the next 5-7 years.
Maybe a Marchenko and Ouellet are here and developed as legit defenseman at 26 and 27 years... and the kind of guys who can be veterans as the young kids join the lineup.

Lord knows that NOTHING good came of Abdelkader and Helm in the top 6. Or playing Brad Richards in the top 9.

Log off and go enjoy the rest of the summer.

 

[MBH]

Log off and go enjoy the rest of the summer.

You asked. I answered.
Nothing else needs to be said.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

I cared about those players.
If Jurco and Pulkkinen are playing top 9 roles instead of Abdelkader and Helm, maybe those guys turned into decent top 9 forwards.
Maybe we don't have these god awful contracts to Helm and Abdelkader.
Maybe Mrazek is here as a goalie as the kind of goalie that can upset a defending cup champion in round 1 sometime in the next 5-7 years.
Maybe a Marchenko and Ouellet are here and developed as legit defenseman at 26 and 27 years... and the kind of guys who can be veterans as the young kids join the lineup.

Lord knows that NOTHING good came of Abdelkader and Helm in the top 6. Or playing Brad Richards in the top 9.

If your aunt had balls she would be your uncle.... I mean some of the guys you're listing don't have really anything to do with Blashill and it is amazing how none of these guys have reached their enormous potential elsewhere...

Mrazek is really the only one on that list that has true NHL quality and guess what being an unprofessional immature jerk has consequences. Hopefully he learned that moving forward, not sure.

I guess Jurco had sone but torched his back under Babcock and hasn't been the same.

This also sort of ignores a system designed to achieve parity and create cyclical periods of good and bad is working no matter the coach and gm. You know because that is what the league has designed to have happen.

But the amount of maybe and ifs to your theory seems to be a bit much in your explanation in my opinion.

 

[ManwithNoIdentity]

He better not bring back the McRib or we need to shoot him into space.

You take that back. Right now!

 

[MBH]

If your aunt had balls she would be your uncle.... I mean some of the guys you're listing don't have really anything to do with Blashill and it is amazing how none of these guys have reached their enormous potential elsewhere...

Mrazek is really the only one on that list that has true NHL quality and guess what being an unprofessional immature jerk has consequences. Hopefully he learned that moving forward, not sure.

I guess Jurco had sone but torched his back under Babcock and hasn't been the same.

This also sort of ignores a system designed to achieve parity and create cyclical periods of good and bad is working no matter the coach and gm. You know because that is what the league has designed to have happen.

But the amount of maybe and ifs to your theory seems to be a bit much in your explanation in my opinion.

I was hopeful that a team in desperate need of a rebuild might have been putting it off in deference to its egomaniac coach Babcock. That maybe, with Babcock gone, this rookie coach who'd won a Calder cup with some of those young guys, and who'd watched some of these kids develop, might be the guy who changed things up.

But he takes over and he reduces the icetime, not only of Jurco and Sheahan, but of Tatar and Nyquist.
After Holland failed to trade Howard, following two straight substandard years, he pulled the plug on Mrazek as starter, at the first hint struggles.

With the exception of Larkin, who seemed to get no blowback from the coach during an awful 12 month stretch (February rookie year to March sophomore year), any youngster who struggled was bounced around the lineup, into the press box or worse.
Youngsters like XO or Marchenko, despite playing better than veteran counterparts, were dumped from the lineup.

This team wasn't managed like a team that needed to rebuild.

It wasn't coached like a team that needed to rebuild.

And despite that, it continued losing like a team that needed a rebuild.

In almost every single facet of the organization, the Red Wings' willingness to understand their reality came too late.

 

[Run the Jewels]

I still think Gerard Gallant is the right guy once Yzerman puts together a competitive roster.

 

[MBH]

I still think Gerard Gallant is the right guy once Yzerman puts together a competitive roster.

Could be.
When Gallant was in Columbus, he was one of the worst NHL coaches I'd ever seen. I mean, I couldn't believe how bad they were.

To his credit, he seems to have turned himself into a good coach.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Could be.
When Gallant was in Columbus, he was one of the worst NHL coaches I'd ever seen. I mean, I couldn't believe how bad they were.

To his credit, he seems to have turned himself into a good coach.

It's almost like talent level is really important to a coach. Gallant and DeBoer are guys that Blashill reminds me of a lot, along with Cooper of course as they share a bunch of transition philosophies when they talk.

 

[MBH]

It's almost like talent level is really important to a coach. Gallant and DeBoer are guys that Blashill reminds me of a lot, along with Cooper of course as they share a bunch of transition philosophies when they talk.

The talent level in Cbus wasn't so bad. There was no structure, whatsoever.

Talking about transitions/strategies is nice.

Implementing is nicer.

 

[SantosHalper]

It would be interesting to see what Scott Sandelin could do with our young roster.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Jurco. Pulkkinen. Mrazek. Ouellet. Marchenko. Sheahan
6 names that come to mind.
6 guys who had decent to very good starts with Detroit and who fell out of favor under Blashill. At a time when the Wings needed to get younger.

Jurco was "ruined" by Babcock before he ever played for Blashill. If you want to revile him, give him that, at least. By the time Blash got him he wasn't the Tomas Jurco from Youtube that they drafted anymore.

Pulkkinen was a guy with a big shot with a slow windup. That was literally his one NHL level skill. His "great start" was ripping apart the AHL and then he scored at a, what, 0.50 ppg pace? How was his defense or play without the puck in those games? Could you tell me?

Mrazek was given a litany of chances. Like they did everything but fully bow to his wishes of trading Howard out of town and taking a bath on his contract. Mrazek wasn't pushed out of a damn place. They moved on from him because he turned into a pissy jerk who used the leverage he had to get a good deal as an RFA (good on him for that one) but then followed it up by playing really really badly. You can be a jerk and lobby for a raise, but you probably shouldn't choose to go out there and fail more than you succeed in your job after you do that.

Ouellet had Jonathan Ericsson stats in his one "good" year in Detroit. He was never anything more than OK. I mean, points aren't the be-all, end all, but he had over 100 games in Detroit over 5 years and scored 23.

Marchenko was literally a bottom pairing D who was an offensive black hole. And was here several years.

Sheahan? The Wings gave Sheahan regular minutes in a season where he provided NOTHING. They gave Sheahan more opportunities than his play warranted. They literally did the opposite of run him out of town.

Those guys "fell out of favor" because they weren't or didn't do anything special. Blashill didn't give young guys minutes just to give young guys minutes. I'm surprised you're not glomming onto Mattiases Backman and Janmark as evidence. And oh man, how dare Blashill lose Tomas Nosek and Andrej Nestrasil.

 

[MBH]

Jurco was "ruined" by Babcock before he ever played for Blashill. If you want to revile him, give him that, at least. By the time Blash got him he wasn't the Tomas Jurco from Youtube that they drafted anymore.

Pulkkinen was a guy with a big shot with a slow windup. That was literally his one NHL level skill. His "great start" was ripping apart the AHL and then he scored at a, what, 0.50 ppg pace? How was his defense or play without the puck in those games? Could you tell me?

Mrazek was given a litany of chances. Like they did everything but fully bow to his wishes of trading Howard out of town and taking a bath on his contract. Mrazek wasn't pushed out of a damn place. They moved on from him because he turned into a pissy jerk who used the leverage he had to get a good deal as an RFA (good on him for that one) but then followed it up by playing really really badly. You can be a jerk and lobby for a raise, but you probably shouldn't choose to go out there and fail more than you succeed in your job after you do that.

Ouellet had Jonathan Ericsson stats in his one "good" year in Detroit. He was never anything more than OK. I mean, points aren't the be-all, end all, but he had over 100 games in Detroit over 5 years and scored 23.

Marchenko was literally a bottom pairing D who was an offensive black hole. And was here several years.

Sheahan? The Wings gave Sheahan regular minutes in a season where he provided NOTHING. They gave Sheahan more opportunities than his play warranted. They literally did the opposite of run him out of town.

Those guys "fell out of favor" because they weren't or didn't do anything special. Blashill didn't give young guys minutes just to give young guys minutes. I'm surprised you're not glomming onto Mattiases Backman and Janmark as evidence. And oh man, how dare Blashill lose Tomas Nosek and Andrej Nestrasil.

Never has so much sarcasm been risked for so much ineptitude.

I'll take $1.4M Marchenko over $3M Daley.
I'll take $950,000 XO over $4.2M Ericsson.
I'll take Teemu Pulkkinen, coming off a stupendous AHL season, and then scoring at a 20-goal pace through 20 games in 13 minutes a night at the NHL level, at under $950,000, over Brad Richards or Abdelkader at $4,2M.

Were the Red Wings still a good team, with great players in their prime, I'd see some value in Blashill's decisions.
But we were a mediocre to bad team, with great players on their last legs.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

We are still on the defense of Pulkkinen, despite the fact he played a grand total of 13 games in the NHL outside of Detroit and scored two goals in that time? And Xavier Oullet, who played only 19 games in Montreal last year and had a whopping three assists? And Alexey Marchenko who can't even crack 20 points in the KHL now?

Talk about wasting your time complaining about the loss of such insignificant players.

 

[MBH]

We are still on the defense of Pulkkinen, despite the fact he played a grand total of 13 games in the NHL outside of Detroit and scored two goals in that time? And Xavier Oullet, who played only 19 games in Montreal last year and had a whopping three assists? And Alexey Marchenko who can't even crack 20 points in the KHL now?

Talk about wasting your time complaining about the loss of such insignificant players.

Well, the choice was
Abby in the 9 or Pulkkinen in the top 9.
Helm in the top 9 or Jurco in the top 9.

You tell me which was worse for the hockey team.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

Well, the choice was
Abby in the 9 or Pulkkinen in the top 9.
Helm in the top 9 or Jurco in the top 9.

You tell me which was worse for the hockey team.

I really don't care enough about Pulk/Jurco/XO/etc. to worry about them in particular.

The Helm and Abdelkader contracts were bad on their own merits. Invoking the "lost" prospects" or whatever you are actually doing seems like a silly stance to take. And I am unsure how Abdelkader and Helm being given contracts they didn't deserve from a GM who isn't even here anymore ties into Blashill (unless you can actually demonstrate that Blashill not making them consistent top-9 players is why they never amounted to anything in the NHL, other than the fact they were marginal NHL players at best).

 

[MBH]

I really don't care enough about Pulk/Jurco/XO/etc. to worry about them in particular.

The Helm and Abdelkader contracts were bad on their own merits. Invoking the "lost" prospects" or whatever you are actually doing seems like a silly stance to take. And I am unsure how Abdelkader and Helm being given contracts they didn't deserve from a GM who isn't even here anymore ties into Blashill (unless you can actually demonstrate that Blashill not making them consistent top-9 players is why they never amounted to anything in the NHL, other than the fact they were marginal NHL players at best).

It's another example of how bad coaching impacts your team.
This was a team that needed to rebuild - that needed to develop skill.

Instead, we buried young talent on line 4, playing with checkers like Glendening and Miller, while checkers played alongside Zetterberg and Datsyuk.

Those decisions had ramifications.
1) They led to Abby and Helm getting overpaid.
2) They led to two promising prospects withering and dying.

And, in the end, we got neither short term or long term satisfaction as a result.

These guys are long gone.
But we see the same kind of thinking playing out.

It took until the trade of Nyquist and the "injuries" that shut down countless other vets for the kids to take the reins last year (outside Larkin).

I'm hopeful we'll see Blashill start the season with trust in those kids this year.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

It took until the trade of Nyquist and the "injuries" that shut down countless other vets for the kids to take the reins last year (outside Larkin).

I'm hopeful we'll see Blashill start the season with trust in those kids this year.

Perhaps the reason behind that is up until Larkin was drafted we didn't have any "kids" worth giving that kind of trust into?

The "kids" did some good things in 2013, but during the next few seasons those "kids" did not take the step necessary and therefore were not just handed the reigns (also considering Datsyuk and/or Zetterberg were still around and kicking up until last season). That happened because the Wings didn't draft that well and we either traded 1st round picks or picked middle to late in the first round where the odds of getting that impact player are much less than if you draft in the top-10. Now it seems we are getting some players who can really make an impact other than on a marginal role, so we are letting them take the majority of the minutes and big responsibilities.

I don't think it should be surprising to see that progression in how the lines have evolved in the last few seasons.

 

[MBH]

Perhaps the reason behind that is up until Larkin was drafted we didn't have any "kids" worth giving that kind of trust into?

The "kids" did some good things in 2013, but during the next few seasons those "kids" did not take the step necessary and therefore were not just handed the reigns (also considering Datsyuk and/or Zetterberg were still around and kicking up until last season). That happened because the Wings didn't draft that well and we either traded 1st round picks or picked middle to late in the first round where the odds of getting that impact player are much less than if you draft in the top-10. Now it seems we are getting some players who can really make an impact other than on a marginal role, so we are letting them take the majority of the minutes and big responsibilities.

I don't think it should be surprising to see that progression in how the lines have evolved in the last few seasons.

That's where I disagree.
No, Jurco was not a Larkin.
Nor was he even an Athanasiou.
But he was a big forward with 20 goal potential and the ability to cycle and go to the net.
Pulkkinen never going to be a Larkin.
But he didn't have to be either.
He could have been a 25 goal one-trick pony who helped the PP.
Guys who helped.
Or who played well enough until we got the guys who helped, and then could be traded for real assets.

Anyway, Blash trying to show he belonged in the NHL. Trying to prove it.
Afraid to lose
He adopted Babcock's stances.
But they hadn't done much good for Babcock, a superior coach. So they did even less for Blashill.

And when the dust settled, we ended up with massively overpriced grinders and an era of prospects completely wiped out.

Lose-Lose.

 

[ShelbyZ]

Unless Blashill's replaced in the offseason, I don't see where a midseason coaching change is going to rectify some of the complaints in here. That and Bylsma should NOT be a solution unless it's as interim guy destined to be replaced.

Usually a mid season coaching change sees the new coach really tighten down on defensive hockey to glean out some initial wins. If you think Blashill is "low event", you probably aren't going to like who ever replaces him mid-season.

Anytime I see Bylsma presented as an option, I cringe. The guy took over a stacked team later in a season and won a Cup, then massively underachieved for years. Then was a trainwreck in Buffalo. He also represented a point in time where the Pens were AWFUL when it came to developing young players, while he insisted on dressing more than one guy most nights that made Justin Abdelkader look like Teemu Selanne like Craig Adams and Tanner Glass. If you love seeing Abdelkader in the top 6, then you'll probably love Dan Bylsma as a head coach...

Unless the wheels really come off this next year, I'm fine sticking with Blashill going forward. Given where this teams at, they need to develop young players and maintain some sort of competitive culture. Despite all the complaints and whining about ice time and running off studs like Teemu Pulkkinen and Tomas Jurco, it seems to be happening. Interestingly, most of the guys that have debuted at the NHL level under Blashill (and thus contain only his fingerprints), had some sort of expected future upside and have now played multiple seasons at the NHL level have all seen some measureable improvement. That includes Larkin, Mantha, AA and Bertuzzi and we also saw Nick Jensen go from almost forgotten organizational depth to being one of their better dmen last season. Save for Mrazek, a lot of the young guys that didn't pan out under Blashill had already started to trend down under Babcock, or weren't projected to make any sort of major impact at the NHL level anyway. If we see Hronek and some other guys make strides next season, then Blashill is doing just fine.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

That's where I disagree.
No, Jurco was not a Larkin.
Nor was he even an Athanasiou.
But he was a big forward with 20 goal potential and the ability to cycle and go to the net.
Pulkkinen never going to be a Larkin.
But he didn't have to be either.
He could have been a 25 goal one-trick pony who helped the PP.
Guys who helped.
Or who played well enough until we got the guys who helped, and then could be traded for real assets.

But none of those guys could even do that with other teams. They were not talented enough to stick around so they failed. You are seemingly assuming to attribute success to them (or enough success to where they would be actual assets) when they did not demonstrate it except for incredibly small bunches (and for some, not really at all). That is a silly stance to take, and the more you try to justify it the more silly your argument becomes.

To what degree are players responsible for their own development?

 

[TheOtherOne]

After Holland failed to trade Howard, following two straight substandard years, he pulled the plug on Mrazek as starter, at the first hint struggles.

Oh man this part is just hilarious.

Mrazek got so many second chances I couldn't keep track of them all. How many times did we say "hmm this past 2 weeks Mrazek has been lights out- let's hope he can keep it going this time and not regress AGAIN"?

 

[Retire91]

I share the same feelings as Veleno, when you look at each player in hindsight individually there are so many great points people make about why they didn't cut it. But when you put the whole timeline together is what Veleno is talking about. The situations all feed off each other. If we go in a time capsule and wings go full-on Jurco Marchenko Murask and crew, current reality shows very likely it would have been a dumpster fire. But that disaster would have led to the ultimate need of rebuilding so much sooner than it did and we won't still be on the books for players like Weiss, Abby, Helm, and had to witness other disasters like Richards, Legwand, Cleary etc... The wings kept the foot on the gas long after the engine already exploded.

I always felt that Blash was pretty much a Babcock clone so when he took over I expected more of the same lines and 'tie goes to the vet' especially being under Holland. So I held no illusions that Blash was going to be a catalyst for organizational change. I think that is where Veleno and I differ. However, the overall impact of not facing reality for so many years has ripple effects that don't get acknowledged when you talk about this player or that. And in that respect, I totally agree

Playing the youngsters at this point has happened organically as a result of finally letting the older players fall off the roster and not having playoff's or else over Yzerman's head. So I think the type of impact a coach could have had back then is no longer a window of opportunity. And in that respect, I don't really care if Blash stays or goes in regards to this season.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

It's another example of how bad coaching impacts your team.
This was a team that needed to rebuild - that needed to develop skill.

Instead, we buried young talent on line 4, playing with checkers like Glendening and Miller, while checkers played alongside Zetterberg and Datsyuk.

Those decisions had ramifications.
1) They led to Abby and Helm getting overpaid.
2) They led to two promising prospects withering and dying.

And, in the end, we got neither short term or long term satisfaction as a result.

These guys are long gone.
But we see the same kind of thinking playing out.

It took until the trade of Nyquist and the "injuries" that shut down countless other vets for the kids to take the reins last year (outside Larkin).

I'm hopeful we'll see Blashill start the season with trust in those kids this year.

No... what led to Pulkkinen and Jurco withering and dying were two things.

Pulkkinen had a slow as **** release on his shot and it wasn't super accurate when he did get it off. And he was mediocre to bad in everything else that makes up a hockey player.
Jurco had a nagging back injury along with getting pushed by Babcock to be a grinder not the skill guy he was.

And no, those did not lead to Abby and Helm getting overpaid. Abby and Helm are their own deals. Abby was the piano puller, physical presence, "hard-nose" guy. It was a mistake to sign him to that deal, but the results of Pulkkinen and Jurco had literally nothing to do with that contract. And Helm... Helm got that contract because he was C capable and the Wings center depth, they felt, was going to be ****ing awful if they let him walk.

And come on... the young kids had the shot early in the year when the top 4 D all went out. When the rest of their "older" guys were hampered by injury early. The team was completely noncompetitive in those games. There was not this huge "oh man, the kids took over and they just started rolling." That 10-11 game stretch to end the year was predicated on some of their opponents pulling off the accelerator heading into the playoffs/end of the season draft jockeying, a couple of those younger guys (AA, Hirose, Mantha, Larkin) getting hot and seeing the ice well. It wasn't a fundamental shift in how they played or anything. They played tight games and late in the year they won several of the same types of games they lost earlier.

 

[MBH]

But none of those guys could even do that with other teams. They were not talented enough to stick around so they failed. You are seemingly assuming to attribute success to them (or enough success to where they would be actual assets) when they did not demonstrate it except for incredibly small bunches (and for some, not really at all). That is a silly stance to take, and the more you try to justify it the more silly your argument becomes.

To what degree are players responsible for their own development?

Players own a lot of responsibility.
But Jurco and Pulkkinen aren't Athanasiou.

There needs to be balance.
When you give a guy like Jurco a job on a line with Sheahan and Tatar, and he plays really well... why start the next season with him on Line 4?

When Pulkkinen scores plays 20 games to start the season, scoring at a 20-goal pace in 13 minutes a night, and has a plus rating and a high CF%...
then he gets hurt and gets banished to the 4th line at 6-8 minutes a night, if he gets to play at all...

That's not development.
The coach decided Abdelkader was the better option in the top 9. Or Helm. Or Brad Richards.

In the end, we paid more for shitty players.
We let players who'd show good progress stall out.
And we lost anyway.

It was that 5 years of spinning the winged wheel and going nowhere and burning up assets and youth.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Or more likely they regress to the mean and holding everything to your own ideal viewpoint doesn't reflect the industry. The other 30 teams operate similarly for a reason... They still haven't panned out for a reason. Good players break through these thresholds and work harder while improving.