Old School Hockey Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 John Shannon ✔@JSportsnetDan Cleary on waivers today.12:02 PM - 7 Oct 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samifan Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Thank God Holmgren is not still the GM or the Flyers would take ANOTHER run at him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Thank God Holmgren is not still the GM or the Flyers would take ANOTHER run at him. If the reports of the "three year deal" in 2013 were correct, The Flyers would be in the final year of a $2.75M AAV contract for Cleary. Over the past two years, Cleary has played 69 games with 5 goals and 5 assists. #homercoaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingNut722 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Cleary's like Franzen...he's got no business here but he just won't leave.................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samifan Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Cleary's like Franzen...he's got no business here but he just won't leave....................Like George Costanza from Seinfeld on that episode where George was fired but barricades himself in his office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpikeDDS Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Like George Costanza from Seinfeld on that episode where George was fired but barricades himself in his office.Except that Cleary was actually invited back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 Cleary is said to have refused to report to the AHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingNut722 Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 Cleary is said to have refused to report to the AHL. Confirmed by the Detroit Free Press. The phrase "true colors" now comes to mind. Cleary was carried the last couple years by the team's loyalty to their promises, and in the few opportunities he was given on NHL ice, he did not produce. Now the Wings are even deeper and Cleary is pouting. He was a respectable player 5 years ago, enough to warrant the kind of consideration and loyalty that was given to him. Now he's just being a brat. Fine. Don't play hockey. It's only been your lifelong dream, which came to reality when you hoisted the Stanley Cup in 2008 (being the only player from Newfoundland to do so). But you go ahead, Dan, you hold your little crusade, and get yourself blackballed from every alumni event from this day forward. This is shameful..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropicalFruitGirl26 Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 Except that Cleary was actually invited back. I commented on this very thing in the shoutbox. Was thinking Cleary is understandably being stubborn because playing in Grand Rapids was not supposed to be in the plans when the Wings decided to re-sign him.I also said that perhaps the Wings could have avoided all this mess by simply moving on from Cleary to begin with. Granted, the Wings are within their rights to do what they have thus far (waiving, etc), but to me, all this was unnecessary.I am sure there was a body or two out there that would play for Detroit for what Cleary was going to make (maybe less!) and provide the same amount (likely better) of production......and if it was a young guy who was struggling but still has some upside, maybe THAT young guy takes the Grand Rapids assignment no problem, and the Wings continue about their business. No way Cleary wants to play in the AHL...regardless of whether he is NHL worthy anymore or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted October 10, 2015 Share Posted October 10, 2015 A good story....http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/mike-commodore-rips-mike-babcock-in-profanity-filled-twitter-rant-013915124.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpikeDDS Posted October 10, 2015 Share Posted October 10, 2015 @OccamsRazorHaving had Babs as coach for a decade, and being mostly a fan of his, I'll give you my thoughts:Mike Babcock is a very good coach. I think he may be the BEST active coach when he has a team with a lot of talent. Now you can say that's true of ANY coach, but you know that's not true. Some coaches were just better at getting guys to play better, even if they were already great. Bowman is the perfect example here. Babs is NOT Scotty Bowman.For one thing, Scotty knew how to discipline players but at the same time light fires under their butts to get them to do what he wanted them to do. He wasn't afraid to scratch Shanahan. BRENDAN SHANAHAN, for crying out loud! He scratched him on several occasions. You would have thought he was crazy...except that in just about every instance, when Shanny came back from that, he played lights out! Babs has never shown he has the ability to do both together. Second, I think Bowman was better at influencing get ya to change their game to fit the system he coached than Babs. Why do I say that? Look at how many second-tier Red Wing players that have left the team have flourished where they have gone. Filppula and Hudler come to mind. For whatever reason, Mike Babcock could not get these guys to play his way, and once they got out of there, they did well. There are other examples. I'm just not able to come up with another one at the moment.In contrast, look at what Bowman did with Yzerman and Federov. Yzerman resisted playing a more defensive game for years before FINALLY submitting himself to Bowman's system. He ALMOST got traded because he wouldn't. And Federov. Toward the end of his time here, Bowman even had him playing the point on the PP and even some D! He could get guys to do what they didn't want to do. Mike has had difficulty, and it may be because he is seen as such a hardass.Third, I think Commodore has some validity to his argument that Mike Babcock does tend to play favorites. There is no question that Mike likes veterans better than he does kids. He doesn't trust kids much. Mike Babcock was definitely influential in preventing Nyquist and Tatar from getting into the league quicker than they did. The only reason they did was because injury FORCED his hand. But he also has favorites and guys who he would put and keep in the doghouse. Commodore WAS the latter. It is hard for a fan like me to know how much of that was due to how he practiced vs. Mike's preconceived impression, but I won't totally dismiss the latter from the discussion.I look at Jakub Kindl this year. It won't surprise me if he has a much better year than he has in the past. Maybe it's partly because he is being pushed by the young kids, and he rightly sees that he is positioned at the first one to get booted in favor of a new D-man. But it is clear that he also sees a better potential opportunity under Blashill than he did under Babcock. I think in similar ways, albeit to a smaller degree, he feels the same way about Babs that Commodore does.That doesn't mean Commodore isn't an A-hole for posting what he did. He is. I'm just acknowledging that some of his criticism may be valid, and I'm a Babcock fan, even though I have come to believe that his moving on is a good thing. Some of these reasons are part of the reason I believe that. But make no mistake, Babs is a very good coach, and he will be good for the Leafs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted October 10, 2015 Share Posted October 10, 2015 @SpikeDDS Excellent post. I agree. Babs is no Bowman...i think he is a good coach but he has his work cut out for him in Tronno with that roster...but at least he doesn't have to deal with Kessel... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yave1964 Posted October 10, 2015 Share Posted October 10, 2015 @SpikeDDS What is wrong with playing favorites? I am being serious, I heard a story about Sparky Anderson years ago, how he would allow Rose and Bench and Perez and Morgan extra time in the batting cage and a slew of minor rules didn't count for them as they did for everyone else and a bench player, I believe Terry Crowley grumbling and it made the way through the clubhouse and finally back to Spark who called all the bench players together and told them, "you get to play under the same rules as the big boys, just as soon as you begin to play like them." end of problem. Babs had his favorites, so did Bowman the difference was Babcock coddled his stars as a rule while Bowman rode his harder than the lesser players. Lafleur and Federov for two who come to mind were always in his doghouse while lunch pail guys like Draper and Jimmy Roberts practically worship at Bowmans feet and it is returned. Bowman loved the lower lights who never quit moving and gave their all on every shift, and worked his stars to the bone. Commodore, well, he is not the last player to rip upon his last head coach in the league and there will be more to come. He did get buried in Detroit but he didn't do much when he played in Columbus either or frankly although he won a cup in Carolina he was not much of a player anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpikeDDS Posted October 10, 2015 Share Posted October 10, 2015 What is wrong with playing favorites? I am being serious, I heard a story about Sparky Anderson years ago, how he would allow Rose and Bench and Perez and Morgan extra time in the batting cage and a slew of minor rules didn't count for them as they did for everyone else and a bench player, I believe Terry Crowley grumbling and it made the way through the clubhouse and finally back to Spark who called all the bench players together and told them, "you get to play under the same rules as the big boys, just as soon as you begin to play like them." end of problem.Babs had his favorites, so did Bowman the difference was Babcock coddled his stars as a rule while Bowman rode his harder than the lesser players. Answer to the first question: Absolutely nothing, so long as it doesn't cloud your judgment on how good or bad players are. It's the same with putting the emphasis and trust on veterans and not playing the kids. In general, they are both good things, because in general vets are more reliable than young players, and there is comfort in using guys who have played well for you in the past. Although this has way more to do with Holland than it does with Cleary, that is EXACTLY why Cleary was given his deal. So long as you can remain objective in evaluating players, I have no problem with treating those who have served well well. There were times when I think Mike lost some of his objectivity. It was more with the vets vs. the kids than it was playing favorites, but he certainly did have his whipping boys, and Commodore was certainly not Mike's favorite player. I'm having difficulty thinking of a player who Mike Babcock wasn't FORCED to give more playing time due to injury, but rather took over more time from an established veteran under Mike because they flat-out earned it from playing better. I'm sure it happened, but it didn't happen very often. It was BECAUSE Bowman rode the top-line players like he did that others would get the opportunities that they got. Lapointe was a good example of a guy who rose through the ranks under Bowman due to his play. I suppose you could say Abdelkader, but again that happened more due to the attrition of the retirement of Holmstrom. It did happen somewhat because of Holmstrom sputtering out at the end, but it was WAY too late by the time it happened. I'm very interested in seeing if Kindl can continue his performance from this preseason and this first game. It may be a result of the change in coaching style more than anything else. Kindl clearly believes Babs didn't give him as fair a shot as he should have, or at minimum didn't treat him fairly. He seems to be an individual who has something to prove this year--that he belongs in the lineup more than the kids. And for the remainder of your statement, I think Bowman's genius was knowing WHICH of his stars he could ride hard to make better and which ones he couldn't. Brett Hull was a star that, although Brett wasn't here for too many years, Bowman actually talked with man-to-man, and not just head coach-to-player. But that was a rare exception. I think Stevie got a little of that, but only toward the end of his career. At the beginning of Bowman's tenure, he didn't enjoy that privilege. I think Larry Murphy also was more of a favorite, like Hull was, perhaps owning that "buddy" spot before Brett assumed it. I think the difference in riding second tier players is significant in separating the two. I think Blash may be more like Bowman in that regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.