DRW Free Agents / Salary Thread

[wings7 62]

Hindsight is always 20/20.

I'm not going to "blame" Holland for making a UFA signing that at the time seemed like a a great signing that 90% of us would have made.

Was it a bad signing....of course it was in retrospect.

What?

That makes no sense.

That's his job. To be better at finding UFAs than a silly message board.

His job isn't to always be right, but to be right more than wrong and that hasn't been the case.

His job is to help us win cups and lately we aren't even close.

[Richdg 267]

Stafford would be a good fit. 6-1/210, RHed shot and has proven he can score 25-30 goals per season. At 29 he isn't old either. Yes the last couple of years in Buff he wasn't very good-something about the team around him.... But in Winn he was on a 27/28 goal pace over a full season. He is a better offensive player than Abby is. He is also a UFA and would cost us nothing to bring in. We have the cap room. Ideally we would bring him in for 3 or 4 years which would bridge the gap for our other young forwards to develop: Mantha, Larkin, AA, Nosek, Nastiasak, etc....

[amato 3,210]

Stafford would be a good fit. 6-1/210, RHed shot and has proven he can score 25-30 goals per season. At 29 he isn't old either. Yes the last couple of years in Buff he wasn't very good-something about the team around him.... But in Winn he was on a 27/28 goal pace over a full season. He is a better offensive player than Abby is. He is also a UFA and would cost us nothing to bring in. We have the cap room. Ideally we would bring him in for 3 or 4 years which would bridge the gap for our other young forwards to develop: Mantha, Larkin, AA, Nosek, Nastiasak, etc....

now that I think about it, stafford does seem like a very red wings type of signing. He shouldn't command too much money with his recent down seasons.

Are there any rumors of him staying in winn though? I'm sure he'd be a good fit there too.

[number9 3,297]

Stafford is like Dan Cleary in his prime. So I assume both Holland and Babcock want him.

[kliq 3,763]

What?

That makes no sense.

That's his job. To be better at finding UFAs than a silly message board.

His job isn't to always be right, but to be right more than wrong and that hasn't been the case.

His job is to help us win cups and lately we aren't even close.

No it makes sense, you just dont agree with me because it goes against your original point.

Message board aside (I agree that is irrelevant), Weiss was a good signing on paper as he filled a pressing need in a 2nd line center. Sometimes a person does everything right, but things go wrong.

What happened was extremely fluky, I know people will talk about Weiss's injury on Florida but that was a wrist injury, the injury on Detroit was completely unrelated. There is no way Holland could have saw that coming. The same injury could happen to Tyler Seguin tomorrow, does that mean we should all "blame" Nill for the Seguin trade....of course not. Its hockey, fluke injuries happen. Now if Holland gave a long term deal high cap hit to a 37 year old and an injury like that happened, I would agree with you. If the player had a reoccurring injury, I would agree with you. This is neither of those.

I also disagree in Holland being wrong more then he is right. The guy has done an amazing job in drafting, which in today's NHL is the most important aspect of being a GM. Not to mention, when your biggest mistakes are signing Tootoo, Sammy etc. your a pretty damn good GM!

We're re-building, accept it. Most re-building teams dont even make the playoffs, we took the champs to game 7 two years ago and took the possible champs to game 7 this year. We are not as bad as people are making us out to be, and we are in a time where our roster cant have 10 HOF players on it.

[Mikeal 60]

No it makes sense, you just dont agree with me because it goes against your original point.

Message board aside (I agree that is irrelevant), Weiss was a good signing on paper as he filled a pressing need in a 2nd line center. Sometimes a person does everything right, but things go wrong.

What happened was extremely fluky, I know people will talk about Weiss's injury on Florida but that was a wrist injury, the injury on Detroit was completely unrelated. There is no way Holland could have saw that coming. The same injury could happen to Tyler Seguin tomorrow, does that mean we should all "blame" Nill for the Seguin trade....of course not. Its hockey, fluke injuries happen. Now if Holland gave a long term deal high cap hit to a 37 year old and an injury like that happened, I would agree with you. If the player had a reoccurring injury, I would agree with you. This is neither of those.

I also disagree in Holland being wrong more then he is right. The guy has done an amazing job in drafting, which in today's NHL is the most important aspect of being a GM. Not to mention, when your biggest mistakes are signing Tootoo, Sammy etc. your a pretty damn good GM!

We're re-building, accept it. Most re-building teams dont even make the playoffs, we took the champs to game 7 two years ago and took the possible champs to game 7 this year. We are not as bad as people are making us out to be, and we are in a time where our roster cant have 10 HOF players on it.

Thanks Kliq. Everyone keeps accepting us to sign people like we are still a skill team that can win on skill, when in fact we have been a heart and soul work team since 2010. Babcock has been asking for what he needs to win, because it is unrealistic to expect Holland to sign enough talent to make us a skill team again in the course of a couple years.

I'm happy with there we are, and where we are going. I also think Babcock adapts extremely well to the players he is dealt. Keeping him is a good idea and if we turn the corner back into a skill team he is good at that too. Most people fire coaches when they go from being one type of team to another because most coaches only know how to do the one thing they have made a name doing...

[kipwinger 8,675]

Thanks Kliq. Everyone keeps accepting us to sign people like we are still a skill team that can win on skill, when in fact we have been a heart and soul work team since 2010. Babcock has been asking for what he needs to win, because it is unrealistic to expect Holland to sign enough talent to make us a skill team again in the course of a couple years.

I'm happy with there we are, and where we are going. I also think Babcock adapts extremely well to the players he is dealt. Keeping him is a good idea and if we turn the corner back into a skill team he is good at that too. Most people fire coaches when they go from being one type of team to another because most coaches only know how to do the one thing they have made a name doing...

All of our best players (aside from Abby) are skill players. The fact that Babcock chooses to play Luke Glendening and Drew Miller 15+ minutes a night doesn't make us a "heart and soul work team". It just means that our coach's system gets more out of grinders than it does out of 25+ goal scorers. But that doesn't negate the fact that our skill players are out best players.

If he had a team full of guys like Brandon Dubinsky, David Backes, and Andrew Ladd then I'd agree with you. But we don't. We've got more skill than most teams. It's just not being utilized effectively.

Edit: And this isn't even really a knock on Babs. He does a fantastic job of getting more out of guys like Abby, Helm, Glendening, Sheahan, Miller, etc. than most coaches could. I only posit that given the current makeup of our team, it's more important to get more out of guys like Tats, Nyquist, Jurco, Pulkkinen, and Weiss. Because those guys have game breaking skill sets. At his very best, Luke Glendening or Justin Abdelkader probably can't dominate a playoff series. Nyquist could though (just look at Tyler Johnson). I'd rather Glendening, Helm, or Abby be invisible than Nyquist or Tatar. And Babs' system doesn't seem to be able to do that.

Edited May 7, 2015 by kipwinger

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

I'm not sold on stafford ... The way this team gets better is having it's younger players step it up and forget putting pulkkinen on the bottom 6 ... He needs to play top 6 and I'd prefer it personally if he doesn't play the point on the powerplay ... Needs to play closer to get his quick release off

If we could add a legitimate top 6 guy who can score and be physical that would be ideal but I don't see anything great on the market and I don't know if anyone will trade us one without a hight cost

I don't wanna see us trade any of athanasiou mantha larkin holmstrom bertuzzi

And as for the d if we could add a Phaneuf that would be ideal and then I'd wanna see marchenko/ouellet up and see them split the games and then getting some more in when the injuries are bound to happen ... So 50-55 games per?

The kids gotta start getting some games in , or else we'll be really in for it when we have 3-4 rookies in the lineup at the same time ... Jensen will be ready for games as well and I'm still hoping ryan sproul can turn out to be the ppl guy were looking for after 1 more yr in the ahl

[Mikeal 60]

All of our best players (aside from Abby) are skill players. The fact that Babcock chooses to play Luke Glendening and Drew Miller 15+ minutes a night doesn't make us a "heart and soul work team". It just means that our coach's system gets more out of grinders than it does out of 25+ goal scorers. But that doesn't negate the fact that our skill players are out best players.

If he had a team full of guys like Brandon Dubinsky, David Backes, and Andrew Ladd then I'd agree with you. But we don't. We've got more skill than most teams. It's just not being utilized effectively.

Edit: And this isn't even really a knock on Babs. He does a fantastic job of getting more out of guys like Abby, Helm, Glendening, Sheahan, Miller, etc. than most coaches could. I only posit that given the current makeup of our team, it's more important to get more out of guys like Tats, Nyquist, Jurco, Pulkkinen, and Weiss. Because those guys have game breaking skill sets. At his very best, Luke Glendening or Justin Abdelkader probably can't dominate a playoff series. Nyquist could though (just look at Tyler Johnson). I'd rather Glendening, Helm, or Abby be invisible than Nyquist or Tatar. And Babs' system doesn't seem to be able to do that.

I don't see what you see. Anytime Helm and Abby are playing in the top 6 you can't call this a skill roster.

Tats showed up for 1-2 games in the playoffs playing against the other teams 3rd/4th line. Nyquist mostly disappeared, Jurco had a horrible year, and Pulkkinen didn't really translate to the NHL even with all the power play time he was given. Weiss is in the coaches dog house so I won't touch that one. He made some mistakes and Babs never let him have a chance to recover.

I don't see how playing people who can't get it done against 3rd and 4th lines in the top 6 is going to make things better.

[kipwinger 8,675]

I don't see what you see. Anytime Helm and Abby are playing in the top 6 you can't call this a skill roster.

Tats showed up for 1-2 games in the playoffs playing against the other teams 3rd/4th line. Nyquist mostly disappeared, Jurco had a horrible year, and Pulkkinen didn't really translate to the NHL even with all the power play time he was given. Weiss is in the coaches dog house so I won't touch that one. He made some mistakes and Babs never let him have a chance to recover.

I don't see how playing people who can't get it done against 3rd and 4th lines in the top 6 is going to make things better.

I know you don't. My point, is that part of the problem is that the Red Wings are trying to make a team full of guys drafted on skill into a team full of blue collar "hard working types". Rather than finding a coach, or playing a system, which compliments and develops their predominant skillset.

This team has a much higher likelihood of success if Tatar, Nyquist, Pulkkinen, and Jurco reach their ceilings than if Glendening, Helm, Abby, Ferraro, or Miller do. Why? Because the ceiling is higher. Babs is excellent at developing grinders and physical guys. He's not been as good at developing skill players.

The answer shouldn't be "change the whole roster to fit Mike Babcock's system", the answer should be "find a coach that can maximize the potential of this roster".

You're putting the cart before the horse. Babcock's system would be lethal in Winnepeg or Columbus but the roster on those teams is conducive to his style. John Cooper, Alain Vigneault, or Peter Laviolette's systems would be better for the current Wings. So, maybe we should find someone like that eh?

[Mikeal 60]

I know you don't. My point, is that part of the problem is that the Red Wings are trying to make a team full of guys drafted on skill into a team full of blue collar "hard working types". Rather than finding a coach, or playing a system, which compliments and develops their predominant skillset.

This team has a much higher likelihood of success if Tatar, Nyquist, Pulkkinen, and Jurco reach their ceilings than if Glendening, Helm, Abby, Ferraro, or Miller do. Why? Because the ceiling is higher. Babs is excellent at developing grinders and physical guys. He's not been as good at developing skill players.

The answer shouldn't be "change the whole roster to fit Mike Babcock's system", the answer should be "find a coach that can maximize the potential of this roster".

You're putting the cart before the horse. Babcock's system would be lethal in Winnepeg or Columbus but the roster on those teams is conducive to his style. John Cooper, Alain Vigneault, or Peter Laviolette's systems would be better for the current Wings. So, maybe we should find someone like that eh?

I think it could work like your saying if we had a couple of defense men that could move the puck better. I'm not confident this team could play that style and win. I think it might turn into some run and gun blow outs. Do you think of Babs as coaching this way in 07/08/08? I don't remember it that way.

[Buppy 1,720]

I don't see what you see. Anytime Helm and Abby are playing in the top 6 you can't call this a skill roster.

Tats showed up for 1-2 games in the playoffs playing against the other teams 3rd/4th line. Nyquist mostly disappeared, Jurco had a horrible year, and Pulkkinen didn't really translate to the NHL even with all the power play time he was given. Weiss is in the coaches dog house so I won't touch that one. He made some mistakes and Babs never let him have a chance to recover.

I don't see how playing people who can't get it done against 3rd and 4th lines in the top 6 is going to make things better.

Abby is as skilled (more really) as Holmstrom ever was. Helm was only in the top 6 because Franzen was hurt. Maybe he might get up there to give us the luxury of a more skilled 3rd line, but that doesn't make us less of a skill team.

All of our best players (aside from Abby) are skill players. The fact that Babcock chooses to play Luke Glendening and Drew Miller 15+ minutes a night doesn't make us a "heart and soul work team". It just means that our coach's system gets more out of grinders than it does out of 25+ goal scorers. But that doesn't negate the fact that our skill players are out best players.

If he had a team full of guys like Brandon Dubinsky, David Backes, and Andrew Ladd then I'd agree with you. But we don't. We've got more skill than most teams. It's just not being utilized effectively.

Edit: And this isn't even really a knock on Babs. He does a fantastic job of getting more out of guys like Abby, Helm, Glendening, Sheahan, Miller, etc. than most coaches could. I only posit that given the current makeup of our team, it's more important to get more out of guys like Tats, Nyquist, Jurco, Pulkkinen, and Weiss. Because those guys have game breaking skill sets. At his very best, Luke Glendening or Justin Abdelkader probably can't dominate a playoff series. Nyquist could though (just look at Tyler Johnson). I'd rather Glendening, Helm, or Abby be invisible than Nyquist or Tatar. And Babs' system doesn't seem to be able to do that. ...

I know you don't. My point, is that part of the problem is that the Red Wings are trying to make a team full of guys drafted on skill into a team full of blue collar "hard working types". Rather than finding a coach, or playing a system, which compliments and develops their predominant skillset.

This team has a much higher likelihood of success if Tatar, Nyquist, Pulkkinen, and Jurco reach their ceilings than if Glendening, Helm, Abby, Ferraro, or Miller do. Why? Because the ceiling is higher. Babs is excellent at developing grinders and physical guys. He's not been as good at developing skill players.

The answer shouldn't be "change the whole roster to fit Mike Babcock's system", the answer should be "find a coach that can maximize the potential of this roster".

You're putting the cart before the horse. Babcock's system would be lethal in Winnepeg or Columbus but the roster on those teams is conducive to his style. John Cooper, Alain Vigneault, or Peter Laviolette's systems would be better for the current Wings. So, maybe we should find someone like that eh?

The only reason Miller and Glendening were getting that much time was because they were on the PK ~4 min/game. The matchup against Johnson maybe accounted for a couple more. But honestly, if Nyquist or Tatar couldn't do much in the ~110 minutes they each played in the series, should you really expect another 15-20 min to make any difference. Nyquist and Tatar both came close to 30g, and over 50p. Not sure any other coach or system would have done any better.

You always talk about Babcock's system like it's designed to stifle our offense, and it just isn't true. In his first 7 years here, the team led the league in shots 3 times, 2nd 3 more times and 5th once (after Rafi retired). Led in scoring once, 2nd twice, 3rd once, 7th once (after Rafi retired). The other two years were 10th (after losing Shanny) and 14th (injury plagued 09-10).

It's only in the last 3 years that we've fallen out of the ranks of the better offensive teams. Almost as if something about the team changed following the 11-12 season...

[kipwinger 8,675]

Abby is as skilled (more really) as Holmstrom ever was. Helm was only in the top 6 because Franzen was hurt. Maybe he might get up there to give us the luxury of a more skilled 3rd line, but that doesn't make us less of a skill team.

The only reason Miller and Glendening were getting that much time was because they were on the PK ~4 min/game. The matchup against Johnson maybe accounted for a couple more. But honestly, if Nyquist or Tatar couldn't do much in the ~110 minutes they each played in the series, should you really expect another 15-20 min to make any difference. Nyquist and Tatar both came close to 30g, and over 50p. Not sure any other coach or system would have done any better.

You always talk about Babcock's system like it's designed to stifle our offense, and it just isn't true. In his first 7 years here, the team led the league in shots 3 times, 2nd 3 more times and 5th once (after Rafi retired). Led in scoring once, 2nd twice, 3rd once, 7th once (after Rafi retired). The other two years were 10th (after losing Shanny) and 14th (injury plagued 09-10).

It's only in the last 3 years that we've fallen out of the ranks of the better offensive teams. Almost as if something about the team changed following the 11-12 season...

Nah, I don't think his system is designed to stifle offense. I think its designed to limit shots, no matter what that does to offense. And that's why we haven't been able to score since 2010 Edited May 8, 2015 by kipwinger

[Richdg 267]

Babcock is defense first coach. There is a reason for the saying "defense wins championships". because it is true. If the other team doesn't score you have greatly increased your chances to win. His focis is winning game 2-1 or 1-0. Go back the this past Olympics. Team full of the worlds best players and they played a puck control defense first system.

This was also Bowman's system. The left wing lock is all about reducing scoring. he threatened to tradeStevie Y if he didn't start to play d. Federov was the same way. Which is why he went from 120 point seasons to 80 point seasons.

Now if you are playing a defensive system to win, wouldn't you want to play the best defensive forwards? yes. Why have Z and Dat been stars for so long? Yes they score, but they are great defensively.

Now look at our prospects and their development. What part of the game takes the longest to develop? defense. What have most on this site complianed about? Our prospects "overripening" in the minors. What are they learning to do? It isn't offense, it is D. That is Babs/Hollands plan. Play good D or don't play here. IE Hudler and many others.

[number9 3,297]

Babcock is defense first coach. There is a reason for the saying "defense wins championships". because it is true. If the other team doesn't score you have greatly increased your chances to win. His focis is winning game 2-1 or 1-0. Go back the this past Olympics. Team full of the worlds best players and they played a puck control defense first system.

This was also Bowman's system. The left wing lock is all about reducing scoring. he threatened to tradeStevie Y if he didn't start to play d. Federov was the same way. Which is why he went from 120 point seasons to 80 point seasons.

Now if you are playing a defensive system to win, wouldn't you want to play the best defensive forwards? yes. Why have Z and Dat been stars for so long? Yes they score, but they are great defensively.

Now look at our prospects and their development. What part of the game takes the longest to develop? defense. What have most on this site complianed about? Our prospects "overripening" in the minors. What are they learning to do? It isn't offense, it is D. That is Babs/Hollands plan. Play good D or don't play here. IE Hudler and many others.

First time I've ever agreed with you (no sarcasm)

[Richdg 267]

First time I've ever agreed with you (no sarcasm)

Jesus must be returning! LOL

[jimmyemeryhunter 2,747]

Babcock is defense first coach. There is a reason for the saying "defense wins championships". because it is true. If the other team doesn't score you have greatly increased your chances to win. His focis is winning game 2-1 or 1-0. Go back the this past Olympics. Team full of the worlds best players and they played a puck control defense first system.

This was also Bowman's system. The left wing lock is all about reducing scoring. he threatened to tradeStevie Y if he didn't start to play d. Federov was the same way. Which is why he went from 120 point seasons to 80 point seasons.

Now if you are playing a defensive system to win, wouldn't you want to play the best defensive forwards? yes. Why have Z and Dat been stars for so long? Yes they score, but they are great defensively.

Now look at our prospects and their development. What part of the game takes the longest to develop? defense. What have most on this site complianed about? Our prospects "overripening" in the minors. What are they learning to do? It isn't offense, it is D. That is Babs/Hollands plan. Play good D or don't play here. IE Hudler and many others.

Well said.

[Buppy 1,720]

Nah, I don't think his system is designed to stifle offense. I think its designed to limit shots, no matter what that does to offense. And that's why we haven't been able to score since 2010

10-11 season we were one of the highest scoring and shooting teams in the league. 11-12 we dipped a little but were still decent. When Lidstrom left we took a nose dive, gpg starting to rebound now, though shots are still down.

7 years of Babcock and being at or near the top of the league in offense. We lose one of the best possession players of our era (maybe any era), and our offense drops 1/2 a goal per game. Shots for go down. Shots against go up. And you think it's the coach.

Yeah...

Babs may be a "defense first" coach, but for most of his career his teams have been near the top in shots for. Sure doesn't seem like his philosophy limits offense at all. Even 03-04 Ducks, despite not much offensive talent, were 4th in the league in shots.

[kipwinger 8,675]

10-11 season we were one of the highest scoring and shooting teams in the league. 11-12 we dipped a little but were still decent. When Lidstrom left we took a nose dive, gpg starting to rebound now, though shots are still down.

7 years of Babcock and being at or near the top of the league in offense. We lose one of the best possession players of our era (maybe any era), and our offense drops 1/2 a goal per game. Shots for go down. Shots against go up. And you think it's the coach.

Yeah...

Babs may be a "defense first" coach, but for most of his career his teams have been near the top in shots for. Sure doesn't seem like his philosophy limits offense at all. Even 03-04 Ducks, despite not much offensive talent, were 4th in the league in shots.

We were one of the best "offensive" teams in the league this year too. But to say that completely ignores the fact that we were abysmal at even strength. Our teams have scored a lot in the past because we had otherworldly talent, and our team consistently gets more power plays than any other team in the league. Which in itself is a testiment to Babs" system as well as his assistants. But our even strength scoring track record has been mediocre to bad.

Edit: In in the interest of fairness I'm just going to put the numbers here. Which aren't as bad as I thought, but still aren't great. This is even strength scoring for Detroit (and Anaheim) during Babcock's tenure. I realize it's a bit of a truism to say his teams aren't offensive, because he's obviously not an offensive coach, but the majority of the game is played at even strength. If you're not good there, you probably aren't going to have tons of success in the playoffs when penalties dry up.

2003: Detroit-1st, Anaheim-22

2004: Detroit-1st, Anaheim 24th

2006: Detroit-1st

2007: Detroit-8th

2008: Detroit-8th

2009: Detroit-1st

2010: Detroit 22nd

2011: Detroit 4th

2012: Detroit 3rd

2013: Detroit 27

2014: Detroit 13th

2015: Detroit 25

It appears as though any team with prime Dats, Z, Lidstrom, (with help from) Shanny, Hossa, Hull, Robitaille, and Yzerman were going to do a lot of scoring. So 2003-2009 make sense. And Babs' system didn't stifle that one bit when he took over. However, his track record without that kind of talent (both with Anaheim, and with aging Dats,Z,Lids) isn't very good (as you'd expect). Which is relevant because he doesn't currently have that kind of talent. In all, I'd say I've overblown how bad his teams have been offensively, but I think you've probably given him more credit than he deserves for getting offense out of team that was already tops in the league when he got here.

Edited May 8, 2015 by kipwinger

[Buppy 1,720]

...

It appears as though any team with prime Dats, Z, Lidstrom, (with help from) Shanny, Hossa, Hull, Robitaille, and Yzerman were going to do a lot of scoring. So 2003-2009 make sense. And Babs' system didn't stifle that one bit when he took over. However, his track record without that kind of talent (both with Anaheim, and with aging Dats,Z,Lids) isn't very good (as you'd expect). Which is relevant because he doesn't currently have that kind of talent. In all, I'd say I've overblown how bad his teams have been offensively, but I think you've probably given him more credit than he deserves for getting offense out of team that was already tops in the league when he got here.

I wasn't trying to say that he made us one of the top offensive teams, just that he didn't hurt. It was our players that did it, and our players are the reason we aren't as good now. So I wouldn't expect anything much different with a new coach.

[kipwinger 8,675]

I wasn't trying to say that he made us one of the top offensive teams, just that he didn't hurt. It was our players that did it, and our players are the reason we aren't as good now. So I wouldn't expect anything much different with a new coach.

I don't know though. I mean, Laviollete unquestionably made Nashville a more offensive team, with essentially the same personnel. And Washington is much more defensive under Trotz.

Look at the Vigneault/Tortorella swap, same deal. I do think the coach's system play a huge role in the determining the upper limits of your teams' productivity. I don't think it's a stretch to think a new coach could get more offense out of our current roster. The big question, to me, is whether or not that would be a good thing or not. I contend that it would, because our young skill players have the highest ceilings on the team, and the most room for growth. Or, put another way, I think we're more likely to have success if Tatar, Nyquist, or Pulkkinen can consistently play at their upper limits, than if Abby, Sheahan, or Helm consistently play at theirs. And I've never thought that Babcock was the guy to develop skill players like that.

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

I don't know though. I mean, Laviollete unquestionably made Nashville a more offensive team, with essentially the same personnel. And Washington is much more defensive under Trotz.

Look at the Vigneault/Tortorella swap, same deal. I do think the coach's system play a huge role in the determining the upper limits of your teams' productivity. I don't think it's a stretch to think a new coach could get more offense out of our current roster. The big question, to me, is whether or not that would be a good thing or not. I contend that it would, because our young skill players have the highest ceilings on the team, and the most room for growth. Or, put another way, I think we're more likely to have success if Tatar, Nyquist, or Pulkkinen can consistently play at their upper limits, than if Abby, Sheahan, or Helm consistently play at theirs. And I've never thought that Babcock was the guy to develop skill players like that.

Trotz didn't have Forsberg or Ribeiro. Their two leading scorers by far this year.

Forsberg was in the system but obviously not the player he is now.

[amato 3,210]

Trotz didn't have Forsberg or Ribeiro. Their two leading scorers by far this year.

Forsberg was in the system but obviously not the player he is now.

I'm sure having James Neal helped too.. even if he is a giant ******

[kipwinger 8,675]

Trotz didn't have Forsberg or Ribeiro. Their two leading scorers by far this year.

Forsberg was in the system but obviously not the player he is now.

Which is exactly my point. One of those guys is a rookie, and the other is a 35 year old goofball who's career was in the toilet prior to coming to Nashville. Yet both produced significantly better than expected this year. Why? Either because Forsberg is some otherworldly rookie who's a superstar in the making (he's not) and Ribiero experienced some sort of personal renaissance (he didn't). Or because Peter Laviolette's style of hockey maximizes the scoring potential of the guys who play in it.

Conversely, the Red Wings had a healthy Dats and Z all season AND got career years out of Nyquist, Tatar, Helm, and Abby and we were a worse scoring team (even strength) than they were a year ago.

I'm sure having James Neal helped too.. even if he is a giant ******

Nashville got less production out of Neal than they got out of Hornqvist the year before under Trotz, but the teams overall production rose under Laviolette. They got signficantly less when you factor in Spaling's production as well.

But I agree, he is a giant ******.

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

I think our 5-on-5 troubles are due to the defensive transition game. We don't have Lidstrom to make that great pass and get us into the offensive zone. After struggling with that for a few years we turned more and more to the dump in, which forced board battles. I think that was a good change for Babs to make given the situation. We score on the PP because we don't have to worry about zone entries.

I'm not sure that a new coach would change this situation. I would like get rid of 2 aspects that I think are part of our strategy. 1. When one of our players goes on an offensive rush it seems that quite often everybody behind him changes. I realize that this is one of the "safe" times to get off, but it often leaves the player without support and negates the offensive chance. 2. We often regroup in our zone before a rush. I know this is sometimes necessary to get a change and is a safe way to maintain possession after failed transition play, but I think we let the other team set up and lock up the neutral zone too much.

As for defensive vs. offensive minded coaches. I think if our forwards didn't have to play as much defence our Dmen would would just be exposed. I definitely feel that we draft for two-way players and I don't get Kip's square peg into a round hole argument. I also don't feel that we force players to play physical as we're not especially physical in style. Our reliance on the dump-in does force more board battles, but that's partly we have Abby and Helm on the top lines.