Winging It in Motown: Detroit Red Wings and the Media

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

i'm really mad that the sports writer guy doesn't ask the sports people some hard sports questions

Who says that some are'nt.

 

[lilja4mvp*]

A2Y is an abomination. they're trying to take their made-up terms outside of KK now?

barf.

 

[icKx]

That's just hyperbole and you know it. As unhappy as we are (myself included) with Holland's decision-making in recent years he still gets up and works every day and spends half of a very long season living out of hotels. The man is human, let him have his vacation.

You're using the term 'work' rather flippantly. Especially in this town.

He's paid millions to have conversations with colleagues and view games the rest of us pay hundreds for the privilege to attend.

 

[FlashyG]

You're using the term 'work' rather flippantly. Especially in this town.

He's paid millions to have conversations with colleagues and view games the rest of us pay hundreds for the privilege to attend.

Anyone who believes that all there is to being a GM is watching games while talking on the phone has played far too many video games.

There isn't anyone on this forum who could hold a candle to even the WORST GM in the NHL.

 

[Pavels Dog]

So, is there anything about the Wings we haven't freaked out over yet this offseason?

The veterans, the kids, the future, the GM, the coach, free agents, trades, draft choices, contracts, salary cap, defense, goaltending, forwards, the media, the city... yeah I think we've just about covered it all.

The beatwriters report the news and give some general insight and analysis. I'm fine with that. Leave the namecalling and witchhunting and doomsday prophecies to the bloggers and message boards. I haven't seen anyone spreading 'propaganda' about Cleary and Quincey being good signings, but not everyone needs to act like the sky is falling because of it.

 

[izlez]

I want to know what type of insight you people think you're going to get from reporters asking the "hard" questions? And do you think it'll make Holland change how he does his job in any way? I can give you the answers to all the hard questions right now.


-"Cleary really sucks, why bring him back?"
-He's really a great leader in the locker room. He's done a lot in the past. We hope he can bounce back"


-"Quincey sucks, why bring him back"
-"He had his ups and downs, but we still feel like he can do a lot of good things for us"


-"Why keep the kids in GR over washed up players"
-"We have a development system and we feel like it works"


-"Why not use Smith on the PP?"
-"He's still developing and we feel like we had better options"



You get really groundbreaking stuff from "tough" sports interviews

 

[icKx]

Anyone who believes that all there is to being a GM is watching games while talking on the phone has played far too many video games.

There isn't anyone on this forum who could hold a candle to even the WORST GM in the NHL.

Gave up video games years ago.

I'd never claim to be a great politician or pro sports exec but I'll still give Congress and Ken Holland the Bob Slydell treatment.

 

[icKx]

This is one of those issues I can never get myself to get worked up about.

The Wings are an entertainment business and the media that reports on the Wings are essentially the same. Sports journalism is right up there with Entertainment Tonight. Actually, if I were pressed, I probably respect what some actors do more than athletes.

More transparency would be nice, and certainly a gesture of goodwill towards fans, but I'm struggling to come up with a reason why they are obligated to do so.

Tom Long will at least say if a film sucks.

I think this is a cop out though. ET and the Hollywood machine is a gossip industry. Their writers majored in marketing, not journalism.

 

[Winger98]

No, I haven't, but its undoubtedly not

I didn't know it, either, but I don't hang at A2Y, either.

 

[probertrules24]

So, is there anything about the Wings we haven't freaked out over yet this offseason?

The veterans, the kids, the future, the GM, the coach, free agents, trades, draft choices, contracts, salary cap, defense, goaltending, forwards, the media, the city... yeah I think we've just about covered it all.

The beatwriters report the news and give some general insight and analysis. I'm fine with that. Leave the namecalling and witchhunting and doomsday prophecies to the bloggers and message boards. I haven't seen anyone spreading 'propaganda' about Cleary and Quincey being good signings, but not everyone needs to act like the sky is falling because of it.

Karen Newman needs to sing in a new key and Al Sobotka needs the crew to clean the ice faster. I think that pretty much covers all complaints.

 

[icKx]

i'm really mad that the sports writer guy doesn't ask the sports people some hard sports questions

Journalism without tough questions is public relations.

PR is a waste of any fan's time.

 

[izlez]

There is no such thing as a tough sports question.


Any questions you guys have, the answer is "we felt like it gave us the best chance to win"

then Ken Holland goes on with his life

 

[Chip39]

I want to know what type of insight you people think you're going to get from reporters asking the "hard" questions? And do you think it'll make Holland change how he does his job in any way? I can give you the answers to all the hard questions right now.


-"Cleary really sucks, why bring him back?"
-He's really a great leader in the locker room. He's done a lot in the past. We hope he can bounce back"


-"Quincey sucks, why bring him back"
-"He had his ups and downs, but we still feel like he can do a lot of good things for us"


-"Why keep the kids in GR over washed up players"
-"We have a development system and we feel like it works"


-"Why not use Smith on the PP?"
-"He's still developing and we feel like we had better options"



You get really groundbreaking stuff from "tough" sports interviews

Nailed it. Reporters have just about zero positive impact on a sports team. They are already second guessing and stressing out about every decision being made because they are trying to win. Adding pressure from journalists whom are much less qualified to make those decisions is probably not going to help.

 

[Chip39]

Although I would totally be down with more discussion about the wings in the media yah just doesn't seem like a beat writers job. I would love to see/hear more discussion and if they wanted to push that kind of stuff at espn or local radio they totally could.

 

[Run the Jewels]

Thanks for posting. First off: HELLZ YES to this:

"For all of them to publish ‘Hey, cool, Cleary is back' at the same time with no real critical look at A) how bad he is, B) what it means for younger, better players, and C) whatever the **** Holland was talking about is borderline dereliction of duty as a journalist and supposed hockey analysis.

On the one hand you can't really criticize the beat writers, newspapers are going the way of the dodo so why not keep your gig with solid benefits for as long as possible? They are not really journalists in the Woodward and Bernstein sense, they are pretty much glorified unpaid members of the Red Wings public relations department.

However you have to believe there's a way for the right person to build a very successful news source that is fiercely independent and highly successful. There's one local example with MGoBlog. Now I doubt the University of Michigan is as willing to cut access as the Red Wings organization. So MGoBlog participates in press conferences and asks questions. They often go unanswered with general coachspeak but at least they can ask those questions the fanbase has and hope to get something worth reporting.

Kuklas Korner is obviously a fantastic resource and Malik is Rainman-like in his ability to re-purpose nearly every snippet of Red Wing ephemera, however he doesn't have the writing skills or quite frankly the critical disposition to be a top-notch news source.

So yeah, you can't really blame the deep diggers who grew up in a world of newspaper journalism that no longer exists and is quickly fading. With that being said there's a great opportunity for someone with the intelligence and writing skills to cover the Red Wing organization to create an awesome news source for wing nuts.

 

[Winger98]

I want to know what type of insight you people think you're going to get from reporters asking the "hard" questions? And do you think it'll make Holland change how he does his job in any way? I can give you the answers to all the hard questions right now.

You get really groundbreaking stuff from "tough" sports interviews

I never really got what people expected from "tougher" questions, either. We're not going to get some ground breaking response, and at worst Holland will mumble a bit more than normal. The questions can be a nice bit of show, but that's largely it.

I think what is missing is better analysis and some individuality among the writers and their takes. For all of the criticism of the article, I think it was fairly clear in pointing to the writers as the problem - none want to stand out above the other, they want to get along, so they all stay within the same lines. They have more access than we do, they should be specializing in analyzing this stuff, so step back, give it a look, and give readers an analysis on where they think the Cleary signing actually fits (or doesn't). Whether they think a specific kid staying in GR is actually beneficial or not. Whether the coaches are best using their players.

The "hard" questions aren't really necessary. You don't need a quote from Babcock about Quincey playing over 20 minutes a night and his being heavy to write that it's maybe not such a great idea and to support your criticism. But local media is lazy, and would be prefer to get along, apparently.

Nailed it. Reporters have just about zero positive impact on a sports team. They are already second guessing and stressing out about every decision being made because they are trying to win. Adding pressure from journalists whom are much less qualified to make those decisions is probably not going to help.

I don't think pressure from journalists is something anyone in the wings organization is afraid of. These guys work in a very public sphere, they know they are criticized for their actions, and that their moves are public. And having Khan or whoever occasionally write an article that questions a move isn't going to push them over the bring this way or that.

If we're talking about sports columnists becoming gossip writers about who is sleeping with who, who is drinking too much, etc., I'd agree more. But just being a bit critical or asking a "tough" question? They're all pros, and they can handle it.

 

[Winger98]

Thanks for posting. First off: HELLZ YES to this:

On the one hand you can't really criticize the beat writers, newspapers are going the way of the dodo so why not keep your gig with solid benefits for as long as possible? They are not really journalists in the Woodward and Bernstein sense, they are pretty much glorified unpaid members of the Red Wings public relations department.

However you have to believe there's a way for the right person to build a very successful news source that is fiercely independent and highly successful. There's one local example with MGoBlog. Now I doubt the University of Michigan is as willing to cut access as the Red Wings organization. So MGoBlog participates in press conferences and asks questions. They often go unanswered with general coachspeak but at least they can ask those questions the fanbase has and hope to get something worth reporting.

Kuklas Korner is obviously a fantastic resource and Malik is Rainman-like in his ability to re-purpose nearly every snippet of Red Wing ephemera, however he doesn't have the writing skills or quite frankly the critical disposition to be a top-notch news source.

So yeah, you can't really blame the deep diggers who grew up in a world of newspaper journalism that no longer exists and is quickly fading. With that being said there's a great opportunity for someone with the intelligence and writing skills to cover the Red Wing organization to create an awesome news source for wing nuts.

I think the article was fairly clear in having different sources saying the Wings organization is rarely that hard to deal with, though. The PR guy rubbed some people the wrong way, and the organization is a bit behind the times with electronic media, but Babcock and Holland were very approachable.

My take off the article was that it's more about the writers not wanting to rock their own boats, rather than rocking boats with the organization. If they all print the same thing, none of them stand out and none of them look any worse than the other.

 

[icKx]

I want to know what type of insight you people think you're going to get from reporters asking the "hard" questions? And do you think it'll make Holland change how he does his job in any way? I can give you the answers to all the hard questions right now.


-"Cleary really sucks, why bring him back?"
-He's really a great leader in the locker room. He's done a lot in the past. We hope he can bounce back"


-"Quincey sucks, why bring him back"
-"He had his ups and downs, but we still feel like he can do a lot of good things for us"


-"Why keep the kids in GR over washed up players"
-"We have a development system and we feel like it works"


-"Why not use Smith on the PP?"
-"He's still developing and we feel like we had better options"



You get really groundbreaking stuff from "tough" sports interviews

The meat of any interview is in the follow-up questions so of course you came up empty.

Being a reporter requires basic critical thinking skills.

 

[Henkka]

I think there is a big belief in some blogists world that if they ask those hard questions, the message goes to our braintrust and they will consider other views of things that way. And that creates a feeling for those blogists that they could affect on team decisions also in the future.

Just think about politics. Journalists will question political decisions all the time to "make a better world". Red Wings blogists with hard questions is a belief that they could make Red Wings better that way. Questioning our GM's actions.

 

[izlez]

The meat of any interview is in the follow-up questions so of course you came up empty.

Which will be answered with more coach-speak. And nothing will change and we will not have any more useful information and Holland/Babcock will move on to eating lunch


In one of Khan's most recent articles, he asks Cleary if he knows how bad everyone thinks he sucks...

Cleary is aware that his return has been met with harsh criticism by many fans.

"Everybody is entitled to their opinion," Cleary said. "You try not to let any of the negativity – or the positive comments – affect you. We live in the day of social media; anyone can say anything. You can't worry about what people think. You got to do what you do."

Does this change anything? Is this valuable information?

 

[Actual Thought*]

You seem to think the Wings are the only hockey team out there or that all media markets operate the way Detroit's does. As the article states, most other markets offer legitimate analysis and criticism of the local team. Detroit's media is the exception, in that it offers terrible critical insight into it's teams.

In Toronto they constantly trash their team. Their team fails a lot so they have plenty of ammo. Illitch has done an amazing job of building the Wings into the modern brand that they are. Do they limit access to those who trash them? Probably and rightfully so. The Wings are a top flight organization. This is completely and totally obvious to anyone who looks at them objectively. They certainly have earned the respect that they are given. Every shred of evidence says that they had an aging core and they lost the best player in the world. This is Holland's second go around for rebuilding on the fly. The first go around he navigated beautifully. This time around he is in the cap world where every team is the same and stupid deals get signed by cap floor teams. High end FAs are not all that common. Holland has proven that when it makes sense he pulls a move on a guy like Stuart or Rafalski. Sometimes he misses on guys like White but everyone misses. Players are human beings and they aren't always predictable. Was Holland supposed to know Helm would go down for 2 years? Was he supposed to know Pav and Z would both go down for most of the season? Given a normal injury rate last year's team would have finished higher. Should the media be trashing the team? No. Is the guy who wrote the article whining because the team didn't reward his criticism with increased access? Yes.
This forum is full of conjecture about Holland suddenly being hockey stupid, Babs hating Holland, Holland hating Babs, blah, blah..... The fact is that it is all speculation because the Wings control their message. It seems pretty obvious to me that Babs has stayed here 10 years. He regularly gushes about the Illitch "family first" way of treating their employees. It is also obvious to me that Babs wins. Tell me why again they should be trashed by the media?

 

[Vladdy84]

Which will be answered with more coach-speak. And nothing will change and we will not have any more useful information and Holland/Babcock will move on to eating lunch


In one of Khan's most recent articles, he asks Cleary if he knows how bad everyone thinks he sucks...




Does this change anything? Is this valuable information?

He's basically giving a middle finger to the fan base that pays his bloated undeserved contact.

 

[crashman]

In Toronto they constantly trash their team. Their team fails a lot so they have plenty of ammo. Illitch has done an amazing job of building the Wings into the modern brand that they are. Do they limit access to those who trash them? Probably and rightfully so. The Wings are a top flight organization. This is completely and totally obvious to anyone who looks at them objectively. They certainly have earned the respect that they are given. Every shred of evidence says that they had an aging core and they lost the best player in the world. This is Holland's second go around for rebuilding on the fly. The first go around he navigated beautifully. This time around he is in the cap world where every team is the same and stupid deals get signed by cap floor teams. High end FAs are not all that common. Holland has proven that when it makes sense he pulls a move on a guy like Stuart or Rafalski. Sometimes he misses on guys like White but everyone misses. Players are human beings and they aren't always predictable. Was Holland supposed to know Helm would go down for 2 years? Was he supposed to know Pav and Z would both go down for most of the season? Given a normal injury rate last year's team would have finished higher. Should the media be trashing the team? No. Is the guy who wrote the article whining because the team didn't reward his criticism with increased access? Yes.
This forum is full of conjecture about Holland suddenly being hockey stupid, Babs hating Holland, Holland hating Babs, blah, blah..... The fact is that it is all speculation because the Wings control their message. It seems pretty obvious to me that Babs has stayed here 10 years. He regularly gushes about the Illitch "family first" way of treating their employees. It is also obvious to me that Babs wins. Tell me why again they should be trashed by the media?

I don't know who's saying they should be trashed, but you seem to be ignoring the last 4 or so years. I think Holland should receive more criticism for how he handled his assets like Quincey (when he was waived), Hudler, Filppula and for the signings of Sammy, Colaiacovo, Tootoo and Cleary. You mention Ian White, but I don't even think that was a terrible signing, he worked out in his first season and we really needed a PMD at the time.

I'm disappointed that Holland wasn't able to retain Hossa or sign Suter, but I totally understand that those situations were out of his control.

 

[Dotter]

This is one of those issues I can never get myself to get worked up about.

The Wings are an entertainment business and the media that reports on the Wings are essentially the same. Sports journalism is right up there with Entertainment Tonight. Actually, if I were pressed, I probably respect what some actors do more than athletes.

More transparency would be nice, and certainly a gesture of goodwill towards fans, but I'm struggling to come up with a reason why they are obligated to do so.

I couldn't agree more. DRWs are a business, they have no obligation to reveal the inner secrets, decisions they make, or reason why they do things. They do things with a deliberate plan, and if fans don't like it, they have the right to root for a different team.

It's like expecting a popular restaurant to reveal all their secret recipes...

I just don't understand why people expect full transparency. I really don't.

 

[waltdetroit]

In Toronto they constantly trash their team. Their team fails a lot so they have plenty of ammo. Illitch has done an amazing job of building the Wings into the modern brand that they are. Do they limit access to those who trash them? Probably and rightfully so. The Wings are a top flight organization. This is completely and totally obvious to anyone who looks at them objectively. They certainly have earned the respect that they are given. Every shred of evidence says that they had an aging core and they lost the best player in the world. This is Holland's second go around for rebuilding on the fly. The first go around he navigated beautifully. This time around he is in the cap world where every team is the same and stupid deals get signed by cap floor teams. High end FAs are not all that common. Holland has proven that when it makes sense he pulls a move on a guy like Stuart or Rafalski. Sometimes he misses on guys like White but everyone misses. Players are human beings and they aren't always predictable. Was Holland supposed to know Helm would go down for 2 years? Was he supposed to know Pav and Z would both go down for most of the season? Given a normal injury rate last year's team would have finished higher. Should the media be trashing the team? No. Is the guy who wrote the article whining because the team didn't reward his criticism with increased access? Yes.
This forum is full of conjecture about Holland suddenly being hockey stupid, Babs hating Holland, Holland hating Babs, blah, blah..... The fact is that it is all speculation because the Wings control their message. It seems pretty obvious to me that Babs has stayed here 10 years. He regularly gushes about the Illitch "family first" way of treating their employees. It is also obvious to me that Babs wins. Tell me why again they should be trashed by the media?

Thanks for the thoughtful insight into all of the madness