The arbitration thing is going to be the big sticking point.  It was a dumb move by his camp if his intentions were to play in the KHL next year.

And I agree with him about ice-time, but his time would have came in Detroit to be a leader.  Going to play somewhere else isn’t in itself going to change you into a leader.

Posted by DrW from Royal Oak, MI on 07/11/09 at 09:15 AM ET

I think the league is right as far as the Hudler situation goes. If he didn’t want to play for the Red Wings next year after negotiations broke down he shouldn’t have opted for arbitrator. He should’ve just signed with the KHL team first. I understand he wants more ice time ,(makes sense,what player wouldn’t). But the leadership issue is kid of funny. The coach just dosen’t say “hey,you’re a leader now”. You have to go out on the ice and/or in the locker room or where ever and do the right thing and what best for the team (i.e. Yzerman). And you’ll become a leader. Teammates will notice. That’s how most captains in the NHL become captains. They just ain’t annointed. (Place Crosby crack here Hockeytown). Maybe he wants Lidstrom’s C, LOL.

Posted by Lindas1st on 07/11/09 at 11:10 AM ET

At Dinamo,” the 25-year-old Czech forward said, “I’ll get something that I was not getting with the Red Wings: a lot of playing time and the opportunity to become a leader.

It’s kind of ironic that Jiri is leaving for those reasons this year...a year in which he probably has his best chance ever for a legitimate shot at playing on at least the second line. But he is right in his “feeling” that he hasn’t had an honest opportunity in the past.

Every time Happy was put on the second line it seems he had just a few games to prove himself. If he faltered even the slightest bit, he was moved down to the third or even the fourth line.

I think those who have watched the little guy over the past few years have to admit he’s become a much more complete player. He backchecks. He goes to the net. And he isn’t afraid to get in anyone’s face. Right, Chrissy Pronger?

The North American league argues that Hudler, by opting to take Detroit to salary arbitration last week, obligated himself to enter into a new contract with the Red Wings for 2009-10 at a salary to be determined by the arbitrator.

That’s just not true. If the Wings reject the arbitrator’s decision, Happy will be a UFA. He’s under absolutely no obligation to remain a Wing in that circumstance. And, in all likelihood, that’s exactly what will happen. The Wings don’t have $3.0+M with which to sign Jiri. And they’re not going to trade away key components in order to clear that much cap room.

So if the League pushes this and wins, the result will be that the Wings will lose Jiri’s rights and he’ll be free to go to the KHL (just as any UFA is). If Jiri decides to come back to the NHL in two years, everyhing he’s said indicates the only place he wants to play is in Detroit.

This whole thing is just Lil’ Gary climbing up on his high horse (with a big ladder and two helpers) and acting like the little tyrant that he is. In the end, Jiri’s going to the KHL. And two summers from now, he’ll more than likely be a Red Wing again.

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 07/11/09 at 11:11 AM ET

That’s how most captains in the NHL become captains. They just ain’t annointed. (Place Crosby crack here Hockeytown).

Nah. That one’s just waaaay too easy.

Maybe he wants Lidstrom’s C, LOL

Actually, I think Happy’s talk of having the opportunity to become a leader revolves around the very point you make, Lindas1st. You need to have quality ice time in order to show you can be one of the leaders on the team.

If you’ve closely followed Happy’s stint with the Wings (which I’m guessing you haven’t), you’d know that he hasn’t had too many opportunities to real shine on the ice. Dave Lewis hated him. And Uncle Mike chose to “teach him” how to play a gritier game by withholding ice time. In the long run it worked, and Happy is no longer a defensive liability.

But, like many 24 year olds, he’s gotten impatient with the whole process. So he wants to go to the KHL in order to step directly into a role where he’s depended on more than he is in Detroit. Good for him for wanting to grow. We’ll see in two years whether or not his gamble paid off.

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 07/11/09 at 11:25 AM ET

And you’ll become a leader. Teammates will notice. That’s how most captains in the NHL become captains. They just ain’t annointed. (Place Crosby crack here Hockeytown).

Better choice of example: Vincent Lecavalier.

Given the C too early, as though it were a large pair of pants for him to grow into, lost it, and then later with experience became a real leader for the team.

Crosby and (to give another example) Toews may have been given the C too early in the opinions of some, but they are working on deserving it and haven’t had it taken away because they are unsuitable.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 07/11/09 at 11:32 AM ET

Point taken OTC. Maybe more ice time with top line players (Datsyuk and Zetterberg) would help develope his leadership skills. Baroque, I wasn’t saying Crosby became captain too soon. He’s been captain 2 years and both years the team went to the S.C. Finals.  Isn’t that what it’s all about? Results. I just knew when i wrote “...annointed “ Red Wing fans would make a crack. I don’t think age matters, I think it’s about how your teammates react to you and if they respect you.

Posted by Lindas1st on 07/11/09 at 11:45 AM ET

The sole argument from some people consisted entirely of “too young!  Needs to pay his dues!” though (I didn’t mean to point out that you were saying that).

Young players are probably less likely to be competent captains because they don’t usually have the presence and experience to be plausible leaders.  Just because a player is young doesn’t mean that he will be a poor captain because of that fact, though.  There is a lot more to it than just being older.

Either way, old or young, when a captain is chosen for PR reasons, it isn’t smart.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 07/11/09 at 12:26 PM ET

(Crosby)’s been captain 2 years and both years the team went to the S.C. Finals.  Isn’t that what it’s all about? Results.

I’m not sure Crosby is the reason the Pens went to the Finals...and he’s definitely not the reason they won this spring. There were lots of reasons the Pens have been so successful for two years now, including having Top-5 draft picks for, what was it, four years in a row. Crosby’s play was a factor in them getting there (although he sucked in the Finals), but I’m not sure he’s been that great a leader.

But, hey, that’s just a Wings fan’s perspective. We tend to compare every captain to The Captain. 

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 07/11/09 at 12:38 PM ET

I don’t understand why he keeps playing the same “more icetime” card in the mix..

Detroit just lost Hossa and Sammy, damnit!

Maybe when it comes the time he wants to come back (and he sure will) Leino and Abdelkader are grown into the group and he just lost a great window of opportunity to be where he wanted.

Posted by Guilherme from Brazil on 07/11/09 at 12:44 PM ET

OTC, he might not have been the reason they beat the Red Wings,(Talbot) but he was THE reason they beat the Capitols. Also, he was a big part of them beating the Flyers and the ‘Canes. So I believe (objectivly) he was a big reason they have won the Stanley Cup. It’s not about one series. I’m sure you know you can’t win the 4th series if you don’t get by the first 3.

Posted by Lindas1st on 07/11/09 at 02:13 PM ET

OTC,Baroque, or anyone, How do the people in Hockeytown feel when the MSHM celebrates Mark Messier as “The Greatest Captain/Leader in the history of everything”? ‘Cause I’m getting the feeling around here that title belongs to Stevie Y. Just wondering.

Posted by Lindas1st on 07/11/09 at 02:21 PM ET

Re:  Messier vs. Yzerman:

With respect to me, I roll my eyes and dismiss it.  Too much of talk of “greatest ______ ever!” is too subjective and depends on who someone grew up watching. I grew up watching Yzerman, so of course I rank him higher than Messier.  Besides, I expect old men to always choose other old men when they are making up “best ever” lists.  Messier had all the press and the exposure so he gets the attention.  I actually give him minuses for his attention-whoring after retirement and trading on his hockey career to remain in the public eye - I have a lot more admiration for those who are interested in working in a front office or coaching and are putting in the hours of work required to do that job, instead of jsut trading on past glories.  Yzerman is one, but I know that Robitaille is working in the front office with the Kings, and many other recently retired players are working at something other than the “job” of “former hockey player.” It’s gutsy because they open themselves up for the potential for failure, and they don’t have to do that.  They could just live off their name and reputation and that’s it.

(Yzerman himself was asked about being a great leader once, and said with a verbal shrug (paraphrasing): “If you’re the captain and your team loses, you’re a bad leader.  If you’re a captain and your team wins, you’re a good leader.  If you’re the captain and your team wins a Cup, you’re a great leader.” He didn’t seem to put a whole heck of a lot of stock in the idea of leadership above all else himself.)

It’s the same reason that I get annoyed at the frequent talk about how “hockey needs a North American who speaks English in order to gain attention in the US.” Just because the old white men in suits can’t conceive of fans connecting with a flamboyant Russian such as Alex Ovechkin, or a soft-spoken puck magician like Pavel Datsyuk, or a calm Swede like Nick Lidstrom, or a puck-blocking maniac like Anton Volchenkov, or any of a number of other players that have nothing in common with a fan ... just because they can’t imagine themselves being a fan of a non-English-speaker doesn’t mean that the fans themselves are equally narrow-minded.

Of course Pittsburgh fans like Crosby a ton - they should, he’s a very talented player.  But anyone who claims to be a Penguins fan and dismisses the incredible talent of Malkin just because he was born in Russia is a narrow-minded petty moron who should be publicly flogged for being so stupid.

Same way Detroit fans have no problem cheering for Swedes and Russians despite whatever Don Cherry thinks interests Red Wings fans.  Talent is talent, and it is attractive to fans despite the nationality of the player or the fan.

Old men stay with what is comfortable to them and are uncomfortable with change.
.
.
.
.
(By “old white men” I am specifying a mindset more than an actual demographic - any woman in a largely male-dominated field is extremely familiar with the fact that OWG’s or “old white guys” aren’t always that old, aren’t always white - and sometimes aren’t even guys.)

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 07/11/09 at 02:50 PM ET

Sorry that was a little long -

Essentially, I just don’t pay attention to the MSM opinions because since they don’t seem to think that a foreign player can connect with an English-speaking public and that women can’t be fans of the sport unless they are in it for the cute hockey players and the adorable pink sparkly tee-shirts with “I heart my team!!!” they clearly don’t know what they are talking about anyway, and their opinions aren’t worth the electrons used to display them on a computer monitor.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 07/11/09 at 03:01 PM ET

Old men stay with what is comfortable to them and are uncomfortable with change.

Hey, I resemble that remark. 

But the “truth” for me is that change is fine as long it isn’t simply for the sake of “change”. Look at the software you use on your computer. How many times have you had to upgrade your Flash plug-in simply because Adobe decided they needed to release a new version in order to keep the bucks rolling in? No real improvements took place. There was only “change” for the sake of change (as in ¢).

I’d like to think the smarter ones among the “young whipersnappers” out there would feel the same. I’d like to think that...but I know it’s rarely the case.

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 07/11/09 at 03:04 PM ET

Later, Jiri.

Posted by Bye on 07/11/09 at 03:22 PM ET

Baroque basically said everything, but I would also add that it is Yzerman not Marky Mark leading Team Canada. I think that speaks volumes about who hockey professionals think is actually a great leader.

The only person who can even hold a candle to The Captian is Joe Sakic.

And, yea, we’re very very biased in Detroit. Even King Lidas was questioned as a Captain after Stevie, even though that transition was both obvious and appropriate. There is a reason Yzerman’s jersey in the rafters has a C on it.

Posted by Osrt on 07/11/09 at 03:22 PM ET

Baroque, No need to apologize, I love talk hockey . I do agree with you about the MSHM’s archaic views.

Posted by Lindas1st on 07/11/09 at 03:26 PM ET

All in all, I agree.  Goodbye Jiri.

Posted by DrW from Royal Oak, MI on 07/11/09 at 03:37 PM ET

Do you think the success that the Red Wings had under Yzerman (as Captain) would not have happened or mabe just not as much success, had he not had the “C” on his sweater? I’m talking about the same exact roster, same players and coaching. The only difference someone else wears the “C” or maybe even three “A’s"I know it’s not about the letter . It’s about the man. Now ,I know I might be comitting blasphemy here , but I think thier success had more to do with personal then Yzerman’s leadership. Remember,he was captain in the late eighties and not much success then. Along came Fedorov ,Lidstrom , Bowman ect. and much success followed. I’m not trying to knock your guy, I’m just asking for your opinions and giving mind. Also, I will say that I think that Yzerman might be the most underrated HOF’er of the last 20-30 years. I know everybody in the MSHM like to say it’s Ron Francis, but with all that attention he gets in saying that , it just dispels it.

Posted by Lindas1st on 07/11/09 at 03:54 PM ET

It’s about the man.

The “C” probably added mystique and an extra aura of heroism, but his play on the ice made him The Captain and unquestioned emotional heart of the team. We had a lot of talent, including coaching, but it was his soul that drove the team and kept everyone on track. C or not, Scotty acknowledged Yzerman as the unquestioned core when he asked him to become a 2-way player in the system he wanted to implement. Everyone else had to follow suit.

And the blocked shots, the playing on one knee or no knees, the clutch shifts that would get everyone to step up...it was all simply too much.

With the possible exception of Joe Sakic, I don’t think there is any contemporary player who could have kept that 2002 team full of HOFers in check and driven toward the same goal. I don’t know if anyone else could have garnered enough respect to make those massive egos STFU and play for the team.

Posted by Osrt on 07/11/09 at 04:06 PM ET

It’s about the man. Now ,I know I might be comitting blasphemy here , but I think thier success had more to do with personal then Yzerman’s leadership. Remember,he was captain in the late eighties and not much success then. Along came Fedorov ,Lidstrom , Bowman ect. and much success followed. I’m not trying to knock your guy, I’m just asking for your opinions and giving mind.

I don’t think it’s blasphemy to recognize the essential truth that hockey is more of a team game than many others.  In baseball there is a series of one-on-one confrontations between the pitcher and the batter, in basketball one player can take over a game, in football the same (although possibly less so).  I can’t speak to soccer or some other team sports, but in hockey the interaction between players is so very important that matching defensmen into the best pairs and leaving forward lines together to develop a good chemistry is a major topic of fan conversation.  When a baseball manager puts an odd choice in the cleanup spot in a lineup it is a fan head-scratcher, but doesn’t prompt nearly the same level of frustration as when fans are yelling at the television to put a line back together because it was working fine for the last three games, why break it up now!

No captain can succeed without actual talent around him.  That’s one of the things that drives me crazy when someone dismisses a player by saying “he never won a Stanley Cup” or, in the NFL, “he never quarterbacked his team to a Super Bowl win.” No one guy can do it.

Without talent around him, Yzerman could have played his heart out and it wouldn’t have made any difference.  Same thing with Sakic - if Colorado hadn’t also had Roy and Forsberg, people wouldn’t consider him the calibre of leader that he is.  Go down the road a few years and see how people talk about Rick Nash as a leader if Columbus doesn’t have playoff success, or the way people already talk about Mats Sundin or Daniel Alfredsson or Jarome Iginla or Saku Koivu.

I think that a bad choice for captain can hurt a team and cost them wins (because if he allows teammates to slide, and sets a bad example himself, the coach’s job is that much more difficult), but choosing the right captain won’t guarantee more wins than if someone else was chosen.  You need to have a good team.

If Yzerman had never won a Cup, he would probably be recognized as a tremendous player and likely as a very good leader, and still be held in great affection and esteem by the fans - but he wouldn’t have the reputation as a great leader of men because the team never won the ultimate hockey prize.  I do think it dimishes his role if someone just dismisses his efforts as irrelevant because the team would have won even without him because they had so much talent - in the best teams, everyone is important because every role needs to be filled and filled well or the team will not succeed.  There are far too many ways for things to go wrong over the course of a season.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 07/11/09 at 04:54 PM ET

Baroque, Thanx, it great to have an insightful hockey conversation.

Posted by Lindas1st on 07/11/09 at 05:02 PM ET

No problem - my pleasure.

It can be difficult to find a place to talk hockey in July.  By now I think most hockey fans have already driven our friends nuts since the season has been over for at least a month (depending on the team). 

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 07/11/09 at 06:29 PM ET