kipwinger

I think the "right shooting defenseman" thing has tended to get overblown over the last three years. Nothing about being a right shooter makes a guy better, or more deserving of a roster spot. It's a characteristic that, all things being equal, you'd like to have a balance of. For instance, Marchenko and Smith were a better pair last year than Smith and Zidlicky. In one instance having a righty worked, and in the other it didn't make much difference. If forced to choose, I would rather have seen Smith with another lefty (Ouellet?), or Zidlicky with another righty (Marchenko?), rather than those two together. The lefty righty thing is based on all other variables being equal. If you're trying to find a partner for a lefty, and you've got two good guys with similar skillsets, then pick a righty. But if one guy is a mismatch in every other way, but is right handed, don't give him the spot based primarily on that. Just my 2 cents.

I think saying "Jensen is fast...but nothing special" is selling him a bit short. Jensen has shown he's very effective in transition AND he almost never gets scored on. Those are pretty important characteristics for a defenseman to have IMO. If Jensen is fast, but nothing special, then what are Kindl and Smith? Fast but nothing specialer?

Well at least this thread didn't immediately devolve into sarcasm and boring cliches. Oh wait.

I don't know that it's always that simple. I mean, right now we've got at least a couple of centers in GR who are better than Andersson. A couple of years ago, Nyquist and Tatar were probably each better than two or three guys ahead of them on Detroit's roster. In general I agree with you, no organization is going to play worse players just for the hell of it. But if the margin of difference is small enough (as it seems to be with Jensen and Ouellet), and one of them has more favorable waiver eligibility than another, Holland has shown he'll send down a better player. Not every time, but some times.

I was actually going to say the same about the Pens, but I thought Montreal would be a bigger stretch and I only had three predictions. But I agree, they won't make it. Justin Faulk is a good one. He's got all the talent, but on that team?

I don't know that Jensen is more "offensive" to Ouellet's "defensive" style. Jensen is certainly a more dynamic player because his skating allows him to lead the breakout himself. But I actually think Ouellet has the better point shot, and is a better passer. Also, I think that Jensen is a very good defensive player on account of his recoverability, but Ouellet is probably more positionally sound. Which stands to reason when you consider that guys who aren't speedsters tend to rely on positioning. Stylistically, I'd say Jensen is like a poor man's Brian Campbell, while Ouellet is a poor man's Ryan Suter. Obviously neither of them are likely to be as good as the guys I just mentioned, but they're similar in style. And I think it's awfully hard to pigeonhole those styles as either "offensive" or "defensive".

Those are especially bold considering each guy has to not only play extremely well, but also remain healthy/get into the lineup on a regular basis. Well done.

His predictions are hardly "bold" as he claims. His predictions seem like the kinds of things someone with only a passing knowledge of the NHL would guess. "Kessel will score 50 goals"? That's not bold. Bold is suggesting that his point totals won't drastically INCREASE. Everybody thinks he'll score more. "Buffalo will be better, but fall just short of the playoffs". Really? How could they not be better than last year if they added a better coach, plus O'Reilly, Franson, Eichel, and Reinhart to the everyday roster. "Chicago will be fighting for a playoff spot". How bold. You think maybe that's because he lost Oduya, Sharp, Bickell, Saad, and Richards in one offseason? None of that stuff is bold. It's obvious and entirely lacks a nuanced understanding of the game.

Wow. Pretty diverse opinions on the Wings this year. Last week Kevin Allen predicted we would be a Cup contender. This week, Frank Seravalli says we won't make the playoffs. Lol. Bold prediction indeed. http://www.tsn.ca/30-bold-predictions-for-the-nhl-season-1.371841

By his own standards, that first goal was kinda "meh". But the second one is unreal. Look how little he has to shoot at. The goalie is actually in decent position and the defenseman isn't completely blocking the shooting lane, just mostly blocking it.

AA reminds me of Kesler. Said it before, saying it again.

Wait until the kid actually gets strong. He's really good now, and he's noticeably smaller than everyone else on the ice. A years worth of pro training and he will be even better.

So nice to finally be able to root against Babcock.

Right. The problem with trying to interpret Nyquist's production up to this point is that both years diverge pretty sharply from the norm. So trying to interpret them individually, or sticking them together, is a dangerous game. That first year is about as unorthodox as it gets. I'd be VERY surprised if Nyquist ever did anything like it again. 78% even strength goal scoring with a shooting percentage of 18% suggests anything but "normal". However, you're probably right that his power play numbers from a year ago are outliers as well. At least based on his career up to this point (in GR about 30-40% of his goals came on the PP). It's not really easy to pigeonhole him right now because both of his years have been wonky (in totally different ways). So I think it would be wrong to conclude (as I, and others, have) that he's destined to be a PP specialist. But I don't think it's crazy to hypothesize such a thing, and see what the numbers say going forward.

Maybe they (correctly) thought that nobody listens to, or care about, the radio anymore? Edit: Unless you don't call it "radio" and do call it "podcast". Then it's a hit.

I wasn't implying Datsyuk would leave a year early. Sorry if it came across that way. I think he'll leave at the end of his contract.

The two guys I think of off the top of my head are Kyle Turris and Claude Giroux. He's a little bigger than Giroux, but otherwise I like those comparisons. He's fast, responsible, and sees the ice extremely well. He's a good shooter, and a great passer. Plus he thinks really quickly. I watched him do that little "toe drag/use the defenseman as a screen" move the other night. It's not exactly groundbreaking, but for a 19 year old to have the presence of mind to do that makes me think he processes the game at a truly high level.

Did someone say "goalie battle"?

I was responding to Rick's comment about how we're going to fit all our young kids over the next two years. I legitimately see all of those things happening in the next 2-3 years. I don't believe Datsyuk will sign another deal. I think Richards will be done after this year. I think Quincey will be done after this year. I don't see Miller or Andersson having long term futures, Andersson will likely be waived this season and Miller's contract is up at the end of this year. I genuinely believe that barring injuries one of Kindl or Smith will be traded THIS year (recall, Smith was almost traded last year as part of the deal for Phaneuf). The only real stretches in my previous post are Helm (who I think will be allowed to walk at the end of his contract a la Filppula) and one of Nyquist or Pulkkinen (which was my preference, and not a likely Holland move for sure).

Richards will be gone, Datsyuk will retire, Quincey gone, Franzen will retire, Miller will move on, Smith/Kindl/Both will be moved, Andersson will be waived, Helm (may) be traded or allowed to walk. We'll be fine. I'd even be amenable to letting Nyquist and Pulkkinen battle for the next year or so, and then move the one you don't want to keep. Some others might throw Tatar in that group too. Obviously I wouldn't, because I think he's WAY better than the other two.

If Nyquist's preseason is any indication, he's still got a lot to learn about scoring at even strength. He does fine off the rush, and in broken coverage. But he's not really great at establishing zone time or creating offense off the cycle. Probably because in those situations he tends to get overwhelmed easily...since he's kinda weak. I think as he strengthens up and learns to play in traffic he'll be fine. But for the time being the lion's share of his scoring will be on the PP and off the rush, because that's where perimeter players do their damage.

I don't disagree with your assessment of his talent. He is THAT good. Which is why I'd rather have him at the position of greatest importance (and organizational need). As a top six winger he'd just be one amongst many (Tatar, Nyquist, Mantha, Svechnikov, Pulkkinen, Bertuzzi). We're much less stacked at center going forward (Larkin, Sheahan...Nosek?). Plus, it's his natural position. Which everybody knows I'm a stickler for. I don't see the point of turning one of our top center prospects into a winger, and then needing to change one of our top winger prospects (Svechnikov) into a center.

This is why I don't agree with those that think AA should be on the wing. This kid has game breaking ability at center. He reminds me of a young Kessler. This is why I don't agree with those that think AA should be on the wing. This kid has game breaking ability at center. He reminds me of a young Kessler.

Dylark getting lots of looks. They must be having a hard time what they want to do with him.

Stamkos is close. He's the only other person in the ballpark as far as I'm concerned.