Skip to content

Glendening agrees to three-year extension with Detroit

Apr 5, 2014, 9:40 AM EDT

COLUMBUS, OH - MARCH 25: Luke Glendening #41 of the Detroit Red Wings skates after the puck during the game against the Columbus Blue Jackets on March 25, 2014 at Nationwide Arena in Columbus, Ohio. Getty Images

The Detroit Red Wings have dealt with more than their fair share of injuries this season and its forced them to lean heavily on some of their younger players earlier than they might have planned. Rookie Luke Glendening is one example of that as the 24-year-old center has played in 51 games with Detroit in his rookie campaign.

He’s held his own though and now he’s been rewarded as Detroit announced this morning that they have signed him to a three-year extension.

Glendening is a bottom-six forward and doesn’t do much offensively. However, he does have 78 hits and 32 blocked shots this season and can hold his own on the draw. He was never drafted, but he developed with the University of Michigan and spent the last two seasons in the Detroit Red Wings’ minor-league system.

This contract is a chance for the Grand Rapids, Michigan native to stick with his hometown team.

  1. smarshall3789 - Apr 5, 2014 at 10:04 AM

    Love it great job this guy is a pest when you play against him!! He’s like Kessler hard nose and in your face

  2. pwshrugged - Apr 5, 2014 at 10:36 AM

    Absolute beast of a 4th-line center and PKer for the Wings – he plays with a lot of grit and tenacity and knows how to use his size, besides being good in the face-off circle. He hasn’t tallied a goal this year, but that’s not for lack of trying – he’s had lots of good opportunities paired with bad bounces or bad luck. He’ll never be a 20+ goal scorer, but he generates chances and can cause legitimate trouble for the other team every night. Babcock has enough confidence in him that he’s been starting the 4th line against the other team’s 1st line lately, even.

    Love seeing that he’ll be sticking around long-term.

  3. bbascom05 - Apr 5, 2014 at 10:46 AM

    There os only room for one Miller…sorry Miller. Lol

    • chibimike - Apr 5, 2014 at 11:32 AM

      Nope, it means the pylons (bertuzzi, cleary, and samuelsson) definitely won’t be here next season.

      • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 12:26 PM

        I wouldn’t keep my hopes up. That Holland brought some of these guys back in the first place, and the manner in which he has done so (with their cap hits and no movement clauses), is all too characteristic of him. No matter what Holland says about having to compete in the market just like any other manager and about how he can’t get hometown discounts, Holland’s management over the last 3 seasons has been getting progressively worse and has been pretty awful altogether.

    • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 12:28 PM

      Yep, just as their was only room for one Draper– those Maltby and McCarty chumps were superfluous!
      {irony}

  4. redwingsfan101 - Apr 5, 2014 at 12:40 PM

    You sound dumb rbbbaron. Both our best players and more have been injured for most the season but our management still found a group of guys that can put the wings in the playoffs. If it weren’t for Hollands scouting and getting good free agents this team would be last in the league. If you knew something about hockey you would know that

    • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 1:05 PM

      Holland’s scouting!? You think Holland was the guy responsible for all the scouting? If you only knew the first thing about how the team is managed.
      You are obviously the one who doesn’t know jack about what’s going on. Please please tell us about those great free agents that Holland has brought in during the last 3 seasons, and for the sake of intellectual honesty you can also tell us about the guys who he let walk.

      • mshantz22 - Apr 5, 2014 at 1:21 PM

        In all fairness, Holland has won 3 Stanley cups since 1998. Although he isn’t the guy scouting the players, Holland is the guy who has signed all of the scouts and personnel. Sure, he didn’t get Parise or Suter, but we wouldn’t be able to afford them now. Holland isn’t focusing on the now, but 3-5 seasons from now when Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Franzen and Kronwall are all close to retiring.

      • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 2:42 PM

        Since 1998 that’d be 2 cups and one of those was the 2002 “yankees of hockey” edition (i.e. not the product of managerial excellence, rather that of building off of previous organizational success and ownership willing to spend to the moon). The greatest success that Holland can personally lay claim to during the salary cap era has been bringing in Babcock, who is and has been far more responsible for the team’s performance than Holland. Holland, as the guy responsible for managing the cap and locking up free agents/organizing trades with other GMs, has had some hits in the salary era but unfortunately those are outnumbered by the misses. Babcock has worked wonders with the bums that Holland has been handing him in the last few years. Detroit fans can thank Jim Nill for the kids and the competitive play that they’re going to provide fans for new few years (unless Holland characteristically goes out and signs some more f#$%king bum free agents that deprive these younger guys of the chance to take more responsibility and develop). Too bad that both Yzerman and Nill left the organization…because Holland refuses to vacate the position.

      • robertltripp - Apr 5, 2014 at 6:08 PM

        If you evaluate a GM purely on whether or not he overspend a on flashy FA agents, your most assuredly on the wrong forum. The Islanders and Sabers are looking for some fans.

      • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 6:42 PM

        (deep sigh)
        Reading comprehension…

  5. redwingsfan101 - Apr 5, 2014 at 5:05 PM

    Then explain to my why the heck Jim nill wasn’t put as the GM instead of Holland? Cuz holland obviously knows what he’s doing and obviously ik that he doesn’t actually scout the players himself big guy but he definitely gets those guys in those positions because he knows a good scout from a bad one. The only thing I might agree wht is the fact that he may keep curtain players down in GR for to long but other than that he’s an amazing GM and probably the best in the last 15 years.

    • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 5:49 PM

      Nice attempt to disown your drivel while trying to save face at the same time. And yes, of course you “obviously” knew that Holland doesn’t do the scouting himself, that’s why you wrote “If it weren’t for Hollands scouting…” and then waited til I brought up Jim Nill in another post before you replied– and a reply which still doesn’t indicate any more knowledge than that of a casual Wings fan.
      Lol, if you concede that the kids were kept down in GR for too long, then your argument about how Holland has brought in great free agents is incoherent. So, wanna try and backtrack on that too now?

  6. redwingsfan101 - Apr 5, 2014 at 5:22 PM

    And stop looking at the bad signings and try to look at the good ones in the last 3 years like Alfie, Gustavson, glendending, and Weiss who still has potential to be a good second line center after he isn’t injured. And we also acquired legwand at a good time obviously but for a big cost.

    • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 5:50 PM

      If you think Weiss was a good signing…well I’ve got to hand to you. It takes a special kind of ignorant!

  7. redwingsfan101 - Apr 5, 2014 at 6:11 PM

    That’s why I said “has the potential” and not “will be a 2nd line center”. And if your gonna say that Gustavson, Alfie, and glendening had nothing to do if the wings making the playoffs this year your just out of your mind. If your honestly gonna tell me that holland has nothing to do with scouting then you are dumber than you sound and should learn a little more about hockey. The GM tells the scout where to scout so he is “scouting” in a way.

    • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 6:25 PM

      ” And if your gonna say that Gustavson, Alfie, and glendening had nothing to do if the wings making the playoffs this year your just out of your mind.”
      I didn’t say that. But nice strawman attempt.

      “If your honestly gonna tell me that holland has nothing to do with scouting…. The GM tells the scout where to scout so he is “scouting” in a way.”
      Lol. If you could only put together two sentences, just two (2), without contradicting yourself. Hilarity…

      Sorry man, but you’re really not worth anybody’s time.

  8. redwingsfan101 - Apr 5, 2014 at 6:21 PM

    It’s weird how hockey analyst call ken holland an amazing GM and you think that your smarter then them to say otherwise. Why is it that every other team can’t get players like we have in our system? your that ignorant to think that it’s all do to our scouts that we have the team we have today?

    • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 6:35 PM

      Wow, you are desperate for support aren’t you? Most of those analysts you speak of are former players who are paid to have something to say on tv. They are not managers of clubs themselves, nor do they have much insight into how the decisions are made. They are not the most critical thinkers among us. When is the last time you’ve heard one of these former players/coaches come out with biting criticism of a GM? Even if they didn’t think much of a coach or GM, you think they want to pick a fight in public?
      Most of them are just like you– they see success and sing praise for the figurehead, “it couldn’t have happened any other way”. You know, the kind of thinking that a monkey is capable of.

  9. redwingsfan101 - Apr 5, 2014 at 6:35 PM

    You dodged everything I asked about hockey and pointed out something that doesn’t even matter. How the heck doesn’t telling the scouts where to go have anything to with scouting? And you think the scouts don’t approach ken holland about the players they think would be good players to draft? I can guarantee ken holland shuts down so many suggested players it’s not even a joke. This process has a whole lot to do with scouting. But you think a GM has nothing to do with it? Talk about not knowing sports rbbbaron.

    • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 6:40 PM

      Lol, yeah I am dodging your questions, because all of them are so worth being addressed. Propping up a bunch strawman arguments isn’t terribly sophisticated nor worth anyone’s time here. In the meantime, keep spewing anything and everything that comes to mind if you think it’ll help you save face (even though the more your write the more you just reveal yourself for being a dolt desperate to save face)

  10. redwingsfan101 - Apr 5, 2014 at 6:42 PM

    Wow I cannot talk to a person as ignorant as you. Your ignoring my questions cuz you know I’m right. I’m sorry but you know absolutely nothing about hockey and how it’s run. Any person could criticize but it’s another think to know what your talking about. Instead of trying to support an opinion that isn’t even true you should try to admit you were obviously wrong.

    • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 6:55 PM

      “Any person could criticize but it’s another think to know what your talking about.”
      A statement I can actually agree with. Too bad you haven’t shown that it applies to you– all you’ve done is just typed up a furious smokescreen, ‘hmmm, maybe if I just write a lot then people will get the impression that I know what I’m talking about’ lol

      If I find myself some more time and you want an education, pass along some contact details where we communicate in a verbal and preferably public manner ;-)

  11. redwingsfan101 - Apr 5, 2014 at 6:45 PM

    No ones saving face except for you cuz everyone agrees with me that a GM has a little more to do with his team than just trading and signing free agents.

    • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 7:00 PM

      I’ve lost count of how many strawmen you’ve thrown out. It’s almost like you’re not capable of arguing in any other fashion…

  12. redwingsfan101 - Apr 5, 2014 at 7:03 PM

    Once again with the criticism… A true hockey fan that actually knows hockey would’ve criticized a little less and would’ve had a civil argument about hockey. But by not putting one thing about hockey in that last paragraph clearly shows that all you know is criticism and absolutely nothing about hockey. And please quote me again, it’s really helping your argument.

    • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 7:21 PM

      Lol, if you could be a little less loopy, we might actually be able to get somewhere. You start by trying to criticize me for not “putting one thing about hockey in that last paragraph”, only to write a paragraph that doesn’t have a whole lot to do about hockey. A word of advice: if you’re going to try and criticize someone for how they are just criticizing argumentation rather than discussing hockey, you might want to resist the urge to, say, finish off with a (feckless) shot at their method of argumentation.

      And oh, I love how you write that a real hockey fan, presumably like yourself, “would’ve had a civil argument about hockey”, when the first the first three words of your first post here are “You sound dumb”

      You’re pretty damn helpless

  13. redwingsfan101 - Apr 5, 2014 at 7:09 PM

    I’m arguing hockey, nothing else. Some reason you feel facts about hockey is a way of getting out of arguing when to me that is the only argument.

  14. redwingsfan101 - Apr 5, 2014 at 7:30 PM

    Either way, you stopped talking about hockey about 4-5 paragraphs ago and on that note I’m ending this convo because the actual hockey fan(me) won this argument.

    • rbbbaron - Apr 5, 2014 at 7:38 PM

      lol, judging by your insistence to get the last word in and declare yourself the winner, it seems you’re a little unsure of yourself. If you can’t read between the lines, then let me spell it out for you: I’m all for having a good, detailed discussion about hockey with someone who is capable of a substantive debate. In your case, it didn’t take me very long (i.e. the first line in your first post) to realize that there was no worthwhile discussion to be had here.

Featured video

Bettman hears the boos in Philly
Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. S. Crosby (1976)
  2. L. Stempniak (1849)
  3. D. Roy (1566)
  4. A. Rome (1424)
  5. R. O'Reilly (1421)
  1. C. Franson (1410)
  2. D. Booth (1299)
  3. R. Nash (1169)
  4. P. Subban (1134)
  5. M. Ribeiro (1063)