Winging It in Motown: Detroit Red Wings and the Media

[icKx]

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

I guess there's no point in discussing this with someone who apparently thinks journalism is an impossible task.

 

[jaster]

This whole topic is rather funny. Outside of Khan and maybe one or two others, the Wings media sucks, sure, but I really couldn't care less. Other than facts, they have nothing else to offer me that isn't already covered by blogs and/or message boards anyway. And Khan gets the facts, while also offering further insights, if you know how to read him. What he provides is all I really want from the media (other than someone like Matt Wuest, who covers the prospects).

I guess there's no point in discussing this with someone who apparently thinks journalism is an impossible task.

What do you expect to get out of the hard questions being asked?

 

[bababooeyII]

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?

Show us the post where someone mentioned trashing the team? Being held accountable for your decisions and asking tough questions isn't "trashing the team". I don't know if Holland is now "hockey stupid" but we can agree that since 2008, Lidstrom made him appear "hockey smart", he and Bowman. Speaking of which if you need anymore ancillary evidence of how smart Bowman is and how he helped the Wings, look at what Chicago's done since he joined.

 

[jaster]

I love Scotty Bowman, but as an executive he is over-rated amongst Wings fans and gets way too much credit. Smart hockey guy, and maybe the best coach in NHL history, but he is not the primary reason the Wings were successful (post-coaching days) and not the primary reason the Hawks are successful. He's a consultant/advisor.

 

[Dotter]

This whole topic is rather funny. Outside of Khan and maybe one or two others, the Wings media sucks, sure, but I really couldn't care less. Other than facts, they have nothing else to offer me that isn't already covered by blogs and/or message boards anyway. And Khan gets the facts, while also offering further insights, if you know how to read him. What he provides is all I really want from the media (other than someone like Matt Wuest, who covers the prospects).

That's all a sports beat writer should be, and nothing more! If I want to read gossip, ranting, raving and whatever else, I will just visit a hockey forum or a blog with an agenda.

I agree with this post.

 

[Dotter]

Show us the post where someone mentioned trashing the team? Being held accountable for your decisions and asking tough questions isn't "trashing the team". I don't know if Holland is now "hockey stupid" but we can agree that since 2008, Lidstrom made him appear "hockey smart", he and Bowman. Speaking of which if you need anymore ancillary evidence of how smart Bowman is and how he helped the Wings, look at what Chicago's done since he joined.

You're pretty much proving his point in your own post. Lol

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

The thing that occurs to me is that in the desire for "tough questions" to be asked, what's the purpose? Here, when we say things like that, we really mean for Holland or somebody to reveal that they didn't have a good reason. But Holland's not going to answer that one. Probably not any of the so-called "tough questions".

So what do we really want reporters to do, if they can't expect to get answers to these questions? Honestly, I think we want them to pile on. We want to dogpile on the topic so that presumably the team can't ignore the concern. The problem there is simply that the team can ignore it, and they often do. We saw that with Cleary, where somebody actually did have the good grace to mention that it's an unpopular move. The organization and Cleary both just shrugged their shoulders and moved on. That's it. So much for confrontation.

Point is, I don't think this line of reasoning goes as far as we'd like it to. Changing things wouldn't be as easy as acting more aggressive toward the organization. It also has a lot to do with what these media outlets expect of their employees and what type of content they put forward. For whatever reason, Detroit is a blurb town. You don't get the opinion pieces, you don't get huge articles, and so on. You get the facts, and in most cases the facts are short and uninspiring and analytics-lite. But that's all a decision on the publisher end. As somebody pointed out, you'd think that if opinion articles would get them thousands more eyes, they'd do it.

But until that day, I think we need to realize that amid all our calling for a voice in the media to be our champion... it's us. All of the blogs are informed by the consensus we build in comments and posts all across the internet. When somebody mentioned to Cleary that his signing was unpopular, that was us being mentioned. The tough question got asked—we asked it. We just didn't like their answer. But we always knew that we wouldn't. So at the end of the day, we need to ditch this mainsteam media fetishism. We ask the questions ourselves. For ourselves.

 

[bababooeyII]

You're pretty much proving his point in your own post. Lol

LOL! You're missing the point of the whole thread which is that the Wings revoke access because they can't seem to take tough questions and expect the media to put out puff pieces or genuflect when KH and Co. walks into a room.

 

[bababooeyII]

The thing that occurs to me is that in the desire for "tough questions" to be asked, what's the purpose? Here, when we say things like that, we really mean for Holland or somebody to reveal that they didn't have a good reason. But Holland's not going to answer that one. Probably not any of the so-called "tough questions".

So what do we really want reporters to do, if they can't expect to get answers to these questions? Honestly, I think we want them to pile on. We want to dogpile on the topic so that presumably the team can't ignore the concern. The problem there is simply that the team can ignore it, and they often do. We saw that with Cleary, where somebody actually did have the good grace to mention that it's an unpopular move. The organization and Cleary both just shrugged their shoulders and moved on. That's it. So much for confrontation.

Point is, I don't think this line of reasoning goes as far as we'd like it to. Changing things wouldn't be as easy as acting more aggressive toward the organization. It also has a lot to do with what these media outlets expect of their employees and what type of content they put forward. For whatever reason, Detroit is a blurb town. You don't get the opinion pieces, you don't get huge articles, and so on. You get the facts, and in most cases the facts are short and uninspiring and analytics-lite. But that's all a decision on the publisher end. As somebody pointed out, you'd think that if opinion articles would get them thousands more eyes, they'd do it.

But until that day, I think we need to realize that amid all our calling for a voice in the media to be our champion... it's us. All of the blogs are informed by the consensus we build in comments and posts all across the internet. When somebody mentioned to Cleary that his signing was unpopular, that was us being mentioned. The tough question got asked—we asked it. We just didn't like their answer. But we always knew that we wouldn't. So at the end of the day, we need to ditch this mainsteam media fetishism. We ask the questions ourselves. For ourselves.

I don't expect GM's to run a team based on what or how the media and fans feel or write about, but they should be held accountable for their decisions and explain their rationale. Once that is done it is the fans and media's right to criticize the moves (or lack of) without any worry of repercussions. The line is drawn if that media member or fan blogger gets personal, which has not happened. If the Wings mgmt. cannot stand being held accountable to their loyal fan base, they should seek another line of work.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

I don't expect GM's to run a team based on what or how the media and fans feel or write about, but they should be held accountable for their decisions and explain their rationale.

Does any organization actually work this way, though? I think we're asking for something that nobody is prepared to give.

I mean, think about what Holland would say about Cleary. He'd say that he thinks Dan has something in the tank and that he can contribute. That's it. Maybe he'd say that he thinks Jurco could use a little more time.

But Holland has already said that, more or less. So what do you want from the organization? You don't just want them to explain their reasons, you want them to debate. But I don't think the organization agrees that it has to respond to that degree.

Like I said, this is not the solution people are making it out to be. I think really what people were fishing for here was the idea that a reporter would lead the charge against Holland. But in the face of their job security, it's a no-brainer that they'd politely decline. If you want something done right, you've got to do it yourself.

 

[Flowah]

Does any organization actually work this way, though? I think we're asking for something that nobody is prepared to give.

I mean, think about what Holland would say about Cleary. He'd say that he thinks Dan has something in the tank and that he can contribute. That's it. Maybe he'd say that he thinks Jurco could use a little more time.

That's when someone in the crowd trots out all the stats in existence in hockey and ask why Holland thinks Jurco needs more AHL time when he destroyed Cleary in every single category except heart and heaviness. Then he can't dance around it with his subjective feelings and intuitions, but needs to make an actual argument about maybe how the stats don't actually say what they say.

And then we can laugh and laugh and laugh and then cry.

 

[Vladdy84]

Why isn't there more discussion about the possibility that Babcock demanding Cleary back as leverage in contract negotiations.

 

[Run the Jewels]

Why isn't there more discussion about the possibility that Babcock demanding Cleary back as leverage in contract negotiations.

Yes, this is exactly right. Let's see here folks:

• There is a rumor that Babcock enlisted team members to push for the Cleary signing last year.
• That signing pushed Gus Nyquist down to the AHL, you know, the guy who was the Red Wings' MVP last season.
• Babcock is clearly in no hurry to sign a new deal.
• We lost our top GM candidate last offseason.
• Blashill was just paid a king's ransom to coach an AHL team.
• Cleary mysteriously is signed to a new deal after it was proven he has no place on an NHL roster.

Nope, nothing to see here people! I'm sure everything will work out just fine!

 

[opivy]

Yes, this is exactly right. Let's see here folks:

• There is a rumor that Babcock enlisted team members to push for the Cleary signing last year.
• That signing pushed Gus Nyquist down to the AHL, you know, the guy who was the Red Wings' MVP last season.
• Babcock is clearly in no hurry to sign a new deal.
• We lost our top GM candidate last offseason.
• Blashill was just paid a king's ransom to coach an AHL team.
• Cleary mysteriously is signed to a new deal after it was proven he has no place on an NHL roster.

Nope, nothing to see here people! I'm sure everything will work out just fine!

Mike Illitch, he's dying, he's singing Sinatras my way and everyone is lock step. That's my opinion anyhow.