2/27 GDT - Capitals @ Wings (7:00 PM) EST

[AtlantaHotWings 1,089]

Husso ?
 

Husso?

we don't need no Husso  

[Y19 2,488]

Feast for the offense!  Awesome stuff!

[kipwinger 8,675]

Not sure what was wrong with the Caps tonight. Looked like half their team was suffering from a coke hangover. Oh...wait...nevermind.

[Dabura 12,228]

We are, in fact, so back.

[13dangledangle 968]

Just now, Dabura said:

We are, in fact, so back.

You can tell we're back when there's 4 pages on the GDT and its before 10pm!  It's nice to see.  All of it, I'm here for all of it.  It feels good for the soul

[Scott R Lucidi 675]

1 minute ago, 13dangledangle said:

You can tell we're back when there's 4 pages on the GDT and its before 10pm!  It's nice to see.  All of it, I'm here for all of it.  It feels good for the soul

We just need FlashyG to hook us up with some new memes

[kipwinger 8,675]

I grew up watching Wings games with my grandpa and think about him often on nights like tonight. I wish he could have seen this game.

 

But not as much as I wish Tyler Bertuzzi could have seen it.

[13dangledangle 968]

2 minutes ago, Scott R Lucidi said:

We just need FlashyG to hook us up with some new memes

Oh I miss FlashyG's GDT's.  

[kipwinger 8,675]

Here's why I have zero respect for anyone in the hockey media not currently employed by Bally Sports Detroit: Despite having the 2nd best record in the league in January 1st, Detroit was consistently ranked in the 14-18 range in all the various power rankings this week. But next week everyone will be riding our bandwagon like they've recognized it all along.

[The 91 of Ryans 3,019]

Lalonde: "Seider getting xrays but we believe he's fine but 91 of Ryans is still shiddying he pants"

[Akakabuto 1,831]

Fell asleep after first period. But its nice to see GDTs where people are having fun

[Dabura 12,228]

5 hours ago, kipwinger said:

Here's why I have zero respect for anyone in the hockey media not currently employed by Bally Sports Detroit: Despite having the 2nd best record in the league in January 1st, Detroit was consistently ranked in the 14-18 range in all the various power rankings this week. But next week everyone will be riding our bandwagon like they've recognized it all along.

Yeah, I noticed that about the power rankings. Not surprising, but it's so stupid.

I'm not expecting the media to ride our bandwagon. The nerds can't show us too much love because a "bad team" winning means their whole shots- and chances-based value system isn't all it's cracked up to be. And the traditional dinosaur media can't show us too much love because, well, they've hated us for decades.

[kipwinger 8,675]

I was thinking about this last night and I'm not sure where to put it, so I'll put it here. But seeing how fundamentally sound we're playing right now makes us a better team in the moment, but it also bodes really really well for the development of our younger guys.

I'll give you one example, next game watch our line changes. We ALWAYS get pucks deep, get changed, and make the opposition come 200ft with our forecheckers fresh, in place, and ready to battle. It's like a machine. I watched it last night and it was like clockwork. Even Kane was content to flip the puck deep and get off the ice, he wasn't trying to skate through three defenders to make a one on one play (which rarely works and always leads to chances against). He just flips it deep when there's nothing available, gets off the ice, and lets Veleno, Copp, Fischer, Ras, etc. go to work.

So now think about that from a development point of view. If you're Kasper or Danielson and you want a center spot on this team you've got to be better than one of Larkin, Compher, Copp, Veleno, or Fischer and those guys don't f*ck up...ever. They make safe plays, they battle, they win faceoffs, and they don't take risks. That's the standard. Same goes for the wingers. Raymond and Debrincat are "offensive" but you don't see those guys putting the team in a bad spot to try and cheat for a goal (think Mantha, AA, and Bertuzzi here). So if Berggren wants to play in the top six as a scorer the standard is set.

In Detroit nobody really cares if you've got sick breakaway moves or whatever (unless you're Kane I guess). They care that you manage the puck and don't put the team in a bad spot so that you can be on ESPN the next day. I'm here for it.

[Troy McClure 347]

9 hours ago, Dabura said:

Yeah, I noticed that about the power rankings. Not surprising, but it's so stupid.

I'm not expecting the media to ride our bandwagon. The nerds can't show us too much love because a "bad team" winning means their whole shots- and chances-based value system isn't all it's cracked up to be. And the traditional dinosaur media can't show us too much love because, well, they've hated us for decades.

Or perhaps it us expierencing the collective delusion within the large, yet isolated, community of "Wings mania".

Surely the eastern bourgeoisie clubs will soon again acquire the only truly valuable assets the market can provide, and our trivial late surge may be rendered feckless.

I dub this collective delusion expierenced within the primal brain stem of the fanatics mind "Hyper Yzerman Positivity Error Syndrome" or the HYPES for short.

I have seen many such cases.

Edited February 28 by Troy McClure

[kipwinger 8,675]

I genuinely think that the hockey media has owned the narrative forever, and they don't know s***, and that's why nobody knows how to make sense of teams like the Wings. I was listening to a podcast the other day and Max Bultman (and other people from the Athletic) were debating something and Max offhandedly mentioned that maybe having a McDavid type player is actually bad for team building and those other dorks couldn't scoff hard enough. Like, how DARE he impune the notion that superstars aren't all they're cracked up to be. The entire calculus for hockey media is "You've got stars and you shoot alot, ipso facto you're a contender". Except  there are tons of examples of that not working. Worse, there are almost zero counter narratives in media. I give Jared Keeso a lot of credit for this. He's the only guy talking about hockey who dares say something like "maybe giving a s*** and not being a p*ssy matters more than being pretty". There are several episodes of "Shoresy" devoted to it. But his show is "fiction" so nobody runs with it.

I'd give anything to see hockey media address a few of these questions:

• If star power matters so much why do even the most legendary players (think Lidstrom) only win a few times in their careers?
• If statistical modeling can only tell us what we already know (Colorado is good) but not what we don't know (Vancouver is GOING to be better than you think) what value does it really have?
• If players matter so much why does a team like Vancouver go from terrible to exceptional from year to year with almost no change in personnel?
• If puck possesson matters so much why do GMs and coaches not just load up their teams with the best possession players they can get?
• If the draft lottery is such a game changer why haven't Edmonton and Toronto even won a conference title? Why doesn't Buffalo suck? Why is New Jersey regressing as they put more lottery picks into their lineups.

IMO these are all super interesting questions that I'd love to read articles about, but nobody working in the hockey media will even ask the questions. Instead we get "Who's the most stylish Maple Leaf".

[88Kaner 33]

This team is legit

[Dabura 12,228]

8 hours ago, kipwinger said:

I genuinely think that the hockey media has owned the narrative forever, and they don't know s***, and that's why nobody knows how to make sense of teams like the Wings. I was listening to a podcast the other day and Max Bultman (and other people from the Athletic) were debating something and Max offhandedly mentioned that maybe having a McDavid type player is actually bad for team building and those other dorks couldn't scoff hard enough. Like, how DARE he impune the notion that superstars aren't all they're cracked up to be. The entire calculus for hockey media is "You've got stars and you shoot alot, ipso facto you're a contender". Except  there are tons of examples of that not working. Worse, there are almost zero counter narratives in media. I give Jared Keeso a lot of credit for this. He's the only guy talking about hockey who dares say something like "maybe giving a s*** and not being a p*ssy matters more than being pretty". There are several episodes of "Shoresy" devoted to it. But his show is "fiction" so nobody runs with it.

I'd give anything to see hockey media address a few of these questions:

• If star power matters so much why do even the most legendary players (think Lidstrom) only win a few times in their careers?
• If statistical modeling can only tell us what we already know (Colorado is good) but not what we don't know (Vancouver is GOING to be better than you think) what value does it really have?
• If players matter so much why does a team like Vancouver go from terrible to exceptional from year to year with almost no change in personnel?
• If puck possesson matters so much why do GMs and coaches not just load up their teams with the best possession players they can get?
• If the draft lottery is such a game changer why haven't Edmonton and Toronto even won a conference title? Why doesn't Buffalo suck? Why is New Jersey regressing as they put more lottery picks into their lineups.

IMO these are all super interesting questions that I'd love to read articles about, but nobody working in the hockey media will even ask the questions. Instead we get "Who's the most stylish Maple Leaf".

Once you see the sheer intellectual laziness and dishonesty of their way of thinking, it's impossible to unsee - and you see it everywhere, from everyone, all the time.

Dan Rosen's a guy I generally don't mind. Inoffensive. Middle of the road. Pretty reasonable. Even this take of his I'm about to complain about isn't super-unreasonable - but I'm gonna complain about it, because I think it reflects the slow creep of the hockey journo brain rot that's turning people stupid.

Here:

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-fan-mailbag-for-february-28

Quote

Red Wings deep playoff run, yes or no? -- @The_Mexinadian

Not out of the question, but as of this point it has to be no.

The Detroit Red Wings are not yet one of the best teams in the Eastern Conference. There are questions in goal, on defense and with their overall team speed. Teams need to be better than their opponents in all three areas to survive a seven-game series. The Red Wings are not quite ready to go toe to toe with the likes of the Florida Panthers, Boston Bruins, New York Rangers, Carolina Hurricanes or Maple Leafs. Those are the five teams ahead of them in the Eastern Conference standings and Detroit is a combined 3-8-0 with a minus-7 goal differential against them. It's hard to see the Red Wings climbing into the top three in the Atlantic Division, which means they're going to play a division winner in the Eastern Conference First Round. That could be the Panthers, Bruins, Rangers or Hurricanes. Could they have a Seattle Kraken-like run last season, pulling an upset in the first round before losing in the second? Yes. Is that a deep playoff run? No.

So basically, to translate:

"Ya gotta be a Real Good Team to beat the Real Good Teams, because it's only the Real Good Teams that ever beat the Real Good Teams, and the Real Good Teams are teams like Boston and Toronto, teams that are killing it in all three zones, playing the Real Good Team Hockey that allows them to be Real Good Hockey Teams, which gives them a shot at winning the Cup, because ya gotta be a Real Good Team to win the Cup, and to do that, ya gotta be a Real Good Team that plays the Real Good Hockey. And, frankly, I'm just not seeing that from the Wings, who've got question marks all over, because they don't play the Real Good Hockey, and if ya don't play the Real Good Hockey, you're not a Real Good Hockey Team."

I am absolutely loving how everyone is pretending we don't see at least one massive upset in the playoffs every year.

Here's what you have to do to beat a team in a best-of-seven series: f*** that team's s*** up. Find their weaknesses and hammer those weaknesses harder than they hammer your weaknesses. Execution, execution, execution.

The Bruins have been playing like crap. They've lost one of the greatest matchup guys in the history of the game in Bergeron. They're soft, mentally and physically. But we're supposed to cower before them because they're A Good Hockey Team. And don't even get me started on Tronna.

[Dabura 12,228]

9 hours ago, Troy McClure said:

Or perhaps it us expierencing the collective delusion within the large, yet isolated, community of "Wings mania".

Surely the eastern bourgeoisie clubs will soon again acquire the only truly valuable assets the market can provide, and our trivial late surge may be rendered feckless.

I dub this collective delusion expierenced within the primal brain stem of the fanatics mind "Hyper Yzerman Positivity Error Syndrome" or the HYPES for short.

I have seen many such cases.

If Freud were alive today, he'd be an analyst at Sportsnet.

[kipwinger 8,675]

36 minutes ago, Dabura said:

Once you see the sheer intellectual laziness and dishonesty of their way of thinking, it's impossible to unsee - and you see it everywhere, from everyone, all the time.

Dan Rosen's a guy I generally don't mind. Inoffensive. Middle of the road. Pretty reasonable. Even this take of his I'm about to complain about isn't super-unreasonable - but I'm gonna complain about it, because I think it reflects the slow creep of the hockey journo brain rot that's turning people stupid.

Here:

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-fan-mailbag-for-february-28

So basically, to translate:

"Ya gotta be a Real Good Team to beat the Real Good Teams, because it's only the Real Good Teams that ever beat the Real Good Teams, and the Real Good Teams are teams like Boston and Toronto, teams that are killing it in all three zones, playing the Real Good Team Hockey that allows them to be Real Good Hockey Teams, which gives them a shot at winning the Cup, because ya gotta be a Real Good Team to win the Cup, and to do that, ya gotta be a Real Good Team that plays the Real Good Hockey. And, frankly, I'm just not seeing that from the Wings, who've got question marks all over, because they don't play the Real Good Hockey, and if ya don't play the Real Good Hockey, you're not a Real Good Hockey Team."

I am absolutely loving how everyone is pretending we don't see at least one massive upset in the playoffs every year.

Here's what you have to do to beat a team in a best-of-seven series: f*** that team's s*** up. Find their weaknesses and hammer those weaknesses harder than they hammer your weaknesses. Execution, execution, execution.

The Bruins have been playing like crap. They've lost one of the greatest matchup guys in the history of the game in Bergeron. They're soft, mentally and physically. But we're supposed to cower before them because they're A Good Hockey Team. And don't even get me started on Tronna.

Lemme guess, this guy had Edmonton-Boston meeting in the finals last year? I always love how authoritative these guys sounds without a hint of irony after they've been so consistently, massively, wrong year after year after year.