kipwinger

LTDR. Yawn. Let me paraphrase: Something, something, Veleno not being good enough to play center in the SHL is actually really good for him. Also, fans know the lineups better than the teams who make them. Now Larkin is a legit 1C huh? On multiple different occasions you've said he better suited to be a 2C on a contender. Which is it?

Cool bro. The team said he was the 3C, I don't really care about some website.

As a 19 year old rookie, Dylan Larkin wasn't good enough at center to crack a playoff caliber NHL roster over top three centers Pavel Daysuk, Henrik Zetterberg, and Brad Richards. As a result he played one season on the wing. As a 21 year old 2nd year pro, Joe Veleno isn't good enough a center to crack the top six of the worse team in the SHL despite being behind several other centers who have never played a single NHL game. And so he was moved to the wing. Only @KRsmith would act like these two things are similar.

Larkin didn't score more on the wing. His career high NHL season was at center. Larkin didn't evolve into a center lol. He was always a center, played wing one season to ease his transition to the NHL as a 19 year old and never played there again. Veleno, on the other hand, is a 21 year old (in a few days) second year pro who needs to be moved to the wing in order to crack the top six of the worse team in the SHL. And only then did he start scoring at anything close to a reasonable rate. Those are the facts. Your argument about Cholowski IS based solely on his production. You're just saying differently now because it's convenient. How do I know? Because NOTHING about his underlying usage, possession metrics, or anything else suggests that he's "offensive" and yet you keep saying it. I'd love to hear you argue that Cholowski is an "offensive defenseman" without using his mediocre stats, if you really believe that your whole point of view doesn't depend on them. Not according to Malmo's lineups that are posted publicly on twitter before every single game. I went through them all yesterday after KRsmith corrected me when I called him the 2nd line center. There is not a single instance in which he was listed as the 2nd line center. He was the 3rd line center. You're wrong (as I was). After being moved to the wing he did indeed play on the top line for a while, but as of yesterday's game he was listed as the 2nd line RW.

Why would the coach pick Veleno to play on the wing if he's so good at center? And why, if he's so good at center, does he score more on the wing? And why, if he has all the attributes of a good center, wasn't he higher than a 3rd line center? And knock if off with the "try watching the player and not the stats" crap. Literally your ENTIRE argument for Cholowski is based on his stats. You only don't care about stats when they paint a different picture of Veleno than the one you're trying to sell. Veleno isn't even a top six center on a terrible team in the 3rd or 4th best league professional league in the world. He's a 21 year old, 2nd year pro, and he can't crack the top six as a center on a really bad team. It's probably about time you just faced facts, he's probably going to play on the wing in the NHL if he wants to be in the top six.

I’ll take your word for it. So Veleno hasn’t played higher than 3rd line at center on a terrible team that’s missing its number 1 center (Handemark)? And almost all of his points came after he was moved to wing. And you think that means he’s “better suited” at center? Okay man.

He didn’t get promoted. He’s a second line winger. He started as a second line center.

My point is that Joe Veleno is nearly 21 years old and can’t score in the SHL unless he’s moved to an easier position. Larkin,on the other hand, was moved to the wing for one season to ease his transition to the NHL as a 19 year old. The NHL. The hardest league in the world. Veleno will be 21 yo in a week and he can’t stick at center on one of the worst teams in the SHL. If he’s such a good center why can’t he play there on one of the worst teams in the 3rd or 4th best hockey league in the world?

Larkin played wing the whole year. His offense didn’t explode. Veleno, on the other hand, wasn’t scoring well at all and then he moved to the wing and then he started scoring.

I’m sure you do. Why do you suppose his offense exploded after he got moved to the wing?

I've been saying for a while that I think he'd be good in the "Bertuzzi" type role, being the complimentary winger to a shooter. I think Veleno would be good opposite Zadina and a higher end center. A line of Zadina and Veleno flanking Kent Johnson or Matt Benier would look pretty good as a 2nd line.

Veleno scores again today. 5 goals in his last 8 games. His offense has really picked up since they moved him to the wing.

First, if one of them "forces their way on the team" you wouldn't need to trade anybody because the taxi squad means you can just sit the odd man out. Second, I wasn't saying Biega was good, I was saying Biega is less bad (last year) than Cholo or Lindstom. I've already provided the evidence to support that. IF I have to pick one of Staal, Biega, Cholo, or Lindstrom based on what they did a year ago then it's Biega. If someone outperforms him then great, but Cholo certainly didn't a year ago despite being gived PP time and the most sheltered minutes on the team.

Biega is the safe choice if Cholo or Lindstrom show that they haven't improved at all since last year. Again, he's not helping you but he's not hurting you nearly as bad. I'd give those youngsters their chances, but if they suck then Biega plays until Seider is done in the SHL. To some extent every player on the Wings is chasing the play (aside from Mantha and Larkin). Nobody has very good possession numbers. But what separates Cholo from all the other defensemen is how much more often he starts in the offensive zone (58%). He leads the team in o-zone starts and his shot share is 46%. Compare that with someone like Nemeth whose shot share is an nearly-as-bad 49% but who is buried in the defensive zone 60% of the time. So the Wings actually generate MORE offense under Nemeth (despite having to go 200ft to do so) than under Cholowski who is already right there. The same is true for Hronek (40% o-zone starts, 47% shot share). So yes, the whole team sucks but Cholowski plays the easiest minutes on the team and sucks worse at keeping the puck pointed in the right direction. He is (by far) the most egregious example of this on the team. The next closest player in terms of o-zone starts is Mantha. He starts in the o-zone a lot, but keeps the shot share in the Wings favor pretty significantly (56%).

I'd play neither since they're both actively hurting you. Lindstrom's possession metrics are worse than Cholo's. But neither are contributing to offense. Both are actively helping the other team's offense actually, because they both suck. I'd MUCH rather see Stecher and Merrill get those minutes unless Cholowski can demonstrate that he's fixed his defensive issues when he inevitably gets a few games in the lineup. Cholo doesn't contribute to team offense. His personal stats are better than a Nemeth (for instance) so it seems like he does but actually the Red Wings shoot at the other team's goal LESS often with Cholo on the ice. So while HIS offensive numbers improve, the team's offense is worse, when he's playing. Not exactly "offensive" when the team spends significantly less ice time in the ozone when Cholo is playing than when is isn't, despite the fact that he starts there more than any player on the team. I would agree that he has skills that should help him contribute offensively. He's a great skater with a good shot. But those don't do you any good if the other team has the puck whenever you're on the ice.

It's all about goal differential (actually shot differential these days). I don't know Ehn's metrics, but whether or not he scores much, if he doesn't get scored on very often then he's not hurting you as bad as a guy who scores a lot but gets scored on way more. In theory it's better to have a guy who scored 1 goal all year and gave up 20 than a guy who scored 15 goals but gave up 40. Both guys aren't adding anything to your wins, but one guys is hurting you worse than the other. And don't just take my word for it. There was a reason why Mike Hoffman, Duclair, and AA were all the last to get contracts and they were all dramatically underpaid relative to their expectations. Edit: As far as Cholo goes, he led the team last year (among regulars) in offensive zone starts (58%) so he is HEAVILY sheltered already and his shot metrics are an abysmal 46%. So despite him being given more opportunity to "generate offense" than anyone else on the team the Red Wings actually get badly outshot when he's on the ice. Or, to put it another way, when Cholo is on the ice more offense is generated for the other team than for Detroit despite the fact that the other team has to go 200 ft. to get a shot and Cholo starts right next to their net nearly 60% of the time.

I watched the scrimmage. "Helped off" is a stretch. Bertuzzi skated along beside Svech because he initiated the contact that caused the injury IIRC. Bert was just being a good teammate. Svech didn't need assistance, he was basically fine. Not clear that it was even his arm, could have been a shoulder. Svech was just bent a little over keeping his arm tucked up under him as he skated off so everyone assumed arm.

Didn't Athanasiou teach us that irrespective of how many goals you score, if you give up more then it's a net negative for the team? To the extent that Cholo has offensive ability it is overshadowed by how often he gets scored on. Blashill has stated as much. No team (that's trying to be good) is going to throw a defensive liability on the ice game after game just because he scores a point every 3 or 4 games. Sure you can mitigate his shortcomings and accentuate his strengths by sheltering him at even strength and gifting him powerplay time, but he's still got to take a regular shift and he's shown that when he does he gets scored on disproportionate to how often he generates offense. When Cholo learns how to limit the chances against him he'll earn a spot, and get an opportunity to score, and that's how it should be. Otherwise he's just a defenseman version of AA, and those guys suck.

TBH I'm amazed that they didn't put a giant f*cking Little Caesar on the side.

They don’t play with jam.

That third line. Woof.

Dubois already has a better ppg average than Mantha and he’s 22. CBJ would likely want a similarly productive player (Mantha) to help them now, but we would have to sweeten the pot because Dubois is younger, plays a harder position, and their organizational center depth sucks. I’d be happy to do it for a guy who scored a point per game in last years playoffs going head to head against Austin Matthews and Brayden Point. This kid is VERY good.

Apparently Pierre Luc Dubois wants out of Columbus despite just signing a two year deal. This guy is a beast. Wings should move heaven and earth to land him. To Detroit: Dubois To Columbus: Mantha, Veleno/Rasmussen, 2nd

If I were a team up against the Cap I'd do the exact same thing. It's a shortened season. Why not let Lundqvist or Kucherov or whomever sit out for (basically) half a season to fix some nagging injury rather than lose a bunch of assets?

I hate to break it to you bleeding hearts, but I don't "care" about the actors who made Breaking Bad either. Love the show, totally entertained by it, but I don't "like" Brian Cranston or Aaron Paul. It's just entertainment. You could switch the rosters of the 90s Red Wings and the 90s Avalanche man for man and I wouldn't give a f*ck as long as the Joe Sakic led Red Wings won just as often as they did in reality.