kipwinger

Nyquist-Z-Mantha Tatar-AA-Svech Frk-Larkin-Abby Sheahan-Neilsen-Helm Glendening, Nosek DK-Jensen Ouellet-Green Kronwall/Ericsson-Sproul Kronwall/Ericsson, Hronek Mrazek Howard

Two years ago, when Dekeyser got similar ice time, and powerplay time as Trouba, he scored 31 points. THIS is precisely my point. Feeding a guy minutes their skill set doesn't suggest they've earned will increase their numbers, but WON'T make your team better. Ian White had a career year in Detroit because he got tons of minutes and played with Lidstrom, but that didn't make him a better player or the Wings a better team. It was only good for Ian White. We still had to suffer through a middling defenseman playing minutes WAY above his head. Jacob Trouba hasn't proven he's a top defenseman, so I'm opposed to giving up the assets or salary of a top defenseman for him.

That's because Myers only played 11 games. If he's healthy, all those 5 on 5 and powerplay minutes go to him, and Trouba's numbers fall (just like they did a year ago). It's really not that hard to figure out why I don't think he's as good as everyone else does. He hasn't earned any ice time, his numbers this year were inflated because of an injury to someone else, and they weren't even that impressive to begin with when you consider he had entirely favorable conditions in which to put them up. I used Hamilton as an example of a guy who scored early and often at a young age, something Trouba's fans seem to think is hard to do (despite tons of guys doing it).

I didn't say he was offensively inept. I said he's a good 2-3 defenseman, which his numbers indicate. You seem to be arguing that if you give him 25 minutes a night AND a ton of powerplay time, that he'll score more (something that's true of every single player in the league). But there's a reason why his team has been unwilling to give those kinds of minutes to Trouba (unless forced to by Myers injury). And I suspect that the reason why is because they don't think he's as capable as people like you do. So why spend the assets on him before he proves otherwise? If the plays out his contract in Winnipeg, earns the ice time, and puts up points I'd be happy to sign him. I'm just not convinced of this vast potential that everyone else seems to really believe in.

Your stats above indicate that Hamilton is a much better point producer over his career. Which is my point. I'm not giving up big assets, or big money, for a defenseman that doesn't score well. I don't give a s*** how well he kills penalties lol. Most #1 defenemen DON'T kill penalties, and for good reason. You have to ask yourself WHY Trouba doesn't get powerplay time. Could it be that he's NOT that good offensively? Probably. Otherwise you seem to be arguing that a guy with all this skill is not seeing it utilized, presumably because his coach is A) an idiot, or B) wants to lose. Both are absurd. His coach seems to get pretty good offense out of the rest of his team. As I've said already, what makes you think that Trouba is going to dramatically change his game after coming to our offensively inept team? The likelihood is he'll put up WORSE numbers, which only further calls into question the rationale for giving up assets and/or signing him to a big contract. Let him prove he can do it in Winnipeg and then sign him as an FA I say. That's because you're looking at total TOI per game, which includes PK time. Also, Myers only played 11 games this year due to injury. Last season he played more at even strength AND on the powerplay than Trouba did. Trouba's ice time goes up when you factor in PK time. Again, "top" defensemen don't kill penalties very often. When his team needs offense, the minutes haven't gone to Trouba (except this year because Myers wasn't available), they've gone to Myers.

Well a contract dispute, this early in his career, isn't exactly reassuring to me either. But we'll chalk that up to youthful exuberance lol. What I do know is that when Winnipeg needed another big minute righty to play on their blueline they didn't give those minutes to Trouba (a guy already on the team), they traded for Myers. THEN they didn't give Trouba the (rumored) big contract he though he deserved, and he copped an attitude about it. So I'm not the only person not convinced of his potential apparently.

Well, to begin with, roughly 50 defenseman had better years (offensively) than he did. And most of them have a track record of doing so. Who cares if some guys had a down year? In order to have a "down year" you have to have had a series of "up" years. Something Trouba has never, ever, done despite the fact that plenty of "top defenseman" have done so at the same stages of their careers that Trouba is now. I'd be all for it if we were talking about a guy like Hamilton, who scored 40, 40, and 50 points the last 3 seasons on two different teams. That's a safe bet and one I'd be willing to part with assets for.

My point is that for whatever reasons he hasn't proven anything yet with his play. So why gamble on the guy? He's young. If he proves he's a high end player then sign him as an FA. If not, then you haven't lost anything, aside from a bunch of high end assets for a guy who may, or more likely may not, turn into the thing everyone agrees we really need.

You're talking about a matter of months in their age here. And at least they did break out. He still hasn't, if indeed he can. I'm not suggesting that guys can't grow. I'm suggesting that a guy who's consistently played 60ish games, with offensive numbers that haven't really impressed, probably isn't worth gambling on. He's MUCH more likely to continue to be slightly above average than he is to have a "break out" season on our s***ty team. Why not wait, see if he does break out, and then sign him in FA at his actual worth after he's PROVEN he can be a high end guy?

Right, but so far in his (admittedly young) career he typically only plays about 60 odd games a year. Also plenty of true #1 defensemen did perform at consistently higher levels than Trouba has, at the same stange of their careers. Subban did. Josi did. Hamilton did. Doughty did. Karlsson did. Ekman-Larsson did. You're acting like nobody ever performs at a high level when they're young. But plenty of guys do. Top defensemen do. And he hasn't. So I'm not sure why you think age is the reason. Pretty much ALL of the top defensemen in the league have done something that Trouba hasn't, yet folks still argue that he's probably going to be like them. I just don't see it. To me he seems more similar to Phaneuf, Fowler, Vlasic, or Bouwmeester. Certainly his career thus far has been more like theirs than it has been like a top guy. What makes you think he's going to blossom into a top defenseman after coming to our offensively inept team?

I'm not trying to "bring him down at all". He's a solid 2-3 defenseman. Just like Dekeyser is. I wouldn't even be opposed to signing him as an FA. But I'm opposed to giving up a package befitting a future #1 defenseman when he's not going to be one. Everyone keeps saying that he's got "potential" to be a top defenseman. He doesn't. Kronwall, who pretty much all of LGW (other than me) believes wasn't ever a true #1 defeneman dramatically outperformed Trouba over his first 250-ish games. Dion Phaneuf, who pretty much all of the hockey world thinks isn't a true #1 Defenseman dramatically outperformed Trouba over his first 250-ish games. Same with Shattenkirk. I'm just not sure why everyone thinks that a guy who's developed at a slower rate than those guys will turn out better? The answer, of course, is that many folks REALLY LIKE Trouba, and so they want it to be true. But it's not. He'll likely never put up the kind of offense that would qualify him as a legit #1, which is what everyone is saying he "has the potential" to be. Trouba just had a "career" year, and he scored 33 points. On one of the league's top offensive teams. He got plenty of minutes, at 5 on 5, AND on the powerplay, and he benefited from Tyler Myers being injured all season. So there was nothing to stop him from scoring more, other than his own ability, and he only put up middling offensive numbers. True #1 defenseman put up 40+ points consistently. Trouba hasn't been able to do that despite having very favorable conditions to do so. I have no idea why people think he will on our team.

Wow, you missed the point entirely. I wasn't comparing Smith to Trouba, and I plainly said that Trouba was better. I was talking about how people around here fail to see the flaws in Trouba's game, much like they did with Smith, and always have excuses ready for why he isn't where they think he's capable of being. But the truth is that neither of them are as good some fans want them to be.

Jacob Trouba is like a better version of Brendan Smith. No matter how much he underperforms the wildly out of proportion expectations of his acolytes, they'll always have an excuse handy. Then one day, he'll be 28 years old, and not that much different of a player than he is now, and suddenly everyone will say "well he never really panned out". Trouba isn't a #1 defenseman. He's not going to develop into one either. He's a perfectly good defenseman, but if you want a top guy (and everyone seems to) then it's not going to be him. His offense just isn't' good enough.

I'd like Sutter. But no thanks on Lombardi.

I think it's problematic that the league can even "let" them play in the first place. Shows just how uneven the relationship is. Like I said above, it would be a good time for the players to conduct a work action. Show the owners that they don't "let" players do anything unless it's addressed in the CBA or a personal contract. I'm a union guy, but they need to show their teeth once in a while. Like I said, I get the that owners invest a lot in these players. I also get that the players aren't merely assets. Clearly both sides are going to have to figure out an Olympic option in the next CBA.

Lol. Haven't been downtown lately huh? Gentrification is in full effect, even in Detroit.

I completely agree with the part about players not being just "assets" and I've said so elsewhere. I've actually argued (mostly on twitter) that this would be a really good opportunity for the NHLPA to conduct a work action because A) They need to show the owners they they can hurt them too (for the next CBA negotiations), and B) because pretty much everyone would be sympathetic to the players on this one. I'm of the opinion that in any industry both workers AND owners have the right, and responsibility, to protect their own interests. Employment is an implicit agreement between two equal parties. Which is why I HATE it when people say the owners "own" a players contract. As far as costs, I was mostly talking about the potential costs of injuries to star players as well as the opportunity cost of having your building sitting empty for 3 weeks. At the very least owners have to spend the assets to find things to fill their arenas during that time, and given that it's only a year out, that may be difficult and/or expensive. I do realize that it doesn't "cost" them anything in terms of spending money to send players to the Olympics. But aside from intangible things like "growing the game" or "increasing their profile" there really isn't any incentive for them to do it. The potential that a Crosby getting hurt probably out weigh the benefit of him playing considering there really is no benefit from the owners perspective. Like I said, they're just protecting their (sizeable) investment, which i think it totally reasonable. Just like I think it would be totally reasonable for the players to negotiate an "olympic clause" in the next CBA if it really means that much to them. And none of this is to say that I won't be totally bummed about them not playing. I will. I absolutely love the Olympic hockey tourney.

I 100% agree with you. I just recognize (as you did above) that for league owners hockey IS a business, and they've invested lots of money into players and want to get something out of it. It may be in the NHL's interest to see the game grow, but it's not their BUSINESS to see the game grow. Their business is putting asses in seats at the Joe, or the Verizon center, or whatever. And allowing players to play, and assuming the risks and costs associated with that, isn't something they're likely to do without some incentive. Currently there really isn't one, or at least a tangible one, so it's something they're unwilling to do. Which is disappointing, but I think reasonable. I mean, a big part of the reason Alex Ovechkin is a bigger star (and draw) than Ilya Kovalchuk is precisely because the NHL has invested a ton of money into making him a star both through investment in his development but also through intense (and expensive) marketing. As far as the bolded, I agree that this is their thinking, but I'm not sure it's going to pay off. The hockey tourney is the premier event at the winter games. Lots of people buy tickets to see the best tourney on earth. Lots of people buy Team USA sweaters, but even more would buy Team USA Austen Matthews sweaters. And advertisers and networks are (IMO) much more likely to buy in at a higher price if it's a best on best tourney and not a rehash of the World Juniors. We'll see if their gamble pays off. It obviously has ramifications on how they'll approach negotiations with the NBA, PGA, pro tennis, etc. for the Summer games.

Dude, quit it. This is getting eerie.

They used the wrong word. Traditions, by their very nature, can't be outdated because you keep doing them for symbolic purposes. Perhaps they should have said "irrelevant". Throwing octopi on this ice isn't outdated, it happens every year. But it's totally irrelevant given that it takes more than 8 wins to get a Cup nowadays. It's just something people do because they've always done it, but it has no relevance to modern hockey at all. I guess maybe it's symbolic of "Detroit-ness". But so are Atwater beer and coneydogs, why not throw them on the ice? And if we're dead set on the number 8 I think we should switch to hot dog buns. Firstly, because it's cheaper. Secondly, because hot dog buns have just as much relevance to hockey as octopi do. Which is to say, zero relevance. Whoa! I think you're on to something. The traditional large pizza has EIGHT slices! And seventy years ago it took EIGHT wins to hoist the Cup. Is the universe trying to tell us something? This is cosmically significant!

Well, I'm not super old or anything, but I have been around the block once or twice. Every so often PETA complains about something that A) nobody seems bothered by, or B) nobody cares enough to do something about. And it's entirely meaningless. It's literally just a bunch of suburban liberal dips***s crusading. Which is fine. I think it's good for people to care about stuff. Even idiots. But then all the traditionalist goofballs on the other side act like their livelihoods are being attacked because a handful of misguided and ineffectual goobers have stated their opposition to something that's never going to change. The traditionists freak out, because change scares them only slightly less than different points of view, and they act all "from my cold dead hands"-ish about something that they spend 99.99% of their time not paying attention to. If PETA tries to set a farmers' cows loose, they should go to jail. Likewise, if Red Wings fan start sacrificing live octopi before games, they should also go to jail. Otherwise, both groups should go find something more productive to do with their time.

To be clear, I think that both the tradition as well as those PETA folks are EQUALLY dumb. And I'm good on taking a guess. There's not really any good reason why the convergence of dead animals and arbitrary (and outdated) numbers should have anything more than a fleeting, bemused, affect on my life. But feel free, obviously you're really passionate about those things. I suggest pickled pig's feet and the number 11. And please, please, please, take pictures of whatever you get into.

How about whoever guesses the correct number gets that number of dead chicken livers thrown on them? It'll be cool, maybe even start a tradition. I mean, get it? There's this relevant number (the correct guess) so we find some decaying animal matter (in this case chicken liver) that comes in the same number, and we throw it. It'll be a hoot and also wildly symbolic.

I mostly agree. I mean, you do need a good puck moving defense to generate offense and we don't really have that. But yeah, we obviously have very capable wingers who can finish off plays. With a competent powerplay and quality centers Tatar probably scores close to 30 this year, AA and Mantha and maybe Nyquist are all over 20. That's not too shabby. If you look at all the really top flight offensive teams they usually have around 4 or 5 guys who score over 20 goals. And having quality play making centers is a big part of that. Z was able to elevate the play of his wingers this year, but otherwise we didn't really have a center that could do it, and that's PART of the reason everyone's numbers were way down.

Lol. Both the tradition, and being irritated by it, are idiotic if you think about it for more than about 2 seconds.