kipwinger

Babs teams are never easy to play against. They "compete" as hard as anyone. But I've always maintained that unless he's got superstar talent (which he doesn't in TO) his teams will pretty much always lose close games because his system doesn't allow for guys to play a structured game AND makes plays consistently (unless they're Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Lidstrom) like. They'll always lose more close ones than they'll win because nobody on that team is good enough to do both, and nobody else is empowered to make a play at the risk of abandoning the structure.

I watched Montreal and Toronto last night. Montreal is bad. They're pretty fast, but very weak. No grit to their game at all. Price was often the difference between leading the game and being tied, or behind. That said, Toronto struggled mightily (and lost) to a pretty bad team. So there's always that for a silver lining. Lucic has scored 20+ goals in 3 of his 7 pro seasons. So it's not even like he regularly scores that much. He occasionally does. Otherwise he's just a dumb tub of s*** that takes bad penalties and doesn't play defense.

Maybe. But I'm not sure he's any better than the guys who he'd replace as a top line winger. If it were me, I'd bump everyone up one line and fill in from the third. For instance: Nyquist-Z-Abby Tatar-Richards-Jurco/Franzen Pulkkinen-Sheahan-Jurco/Franzen In this scenario Nyquist gets the spot on the top line. And it's doubtful that Larkin is better than Nyquist (at this point). And Jurco fills the empty spot created upon Nyquist's promotion (rather than be a healthy scratch as he is now).

That's mostly true. Datsyuk has never really played significant time on the wing. He did for like 5 games one season under Babs and it didn't really pan out. But otherwise I agree with you. They "could" do it. But so can the natural wingers, of which we have a million. So why not leave the wingers as wingers and the centers as centers? What value added is Larkin on the wing over Pulkkinen, Jurco, Mantha, or Bertuzzi?

George Malik ‏@georgemalik 24s25 seconds ago Wow wow wee woo, Cleary on waivers? Stunned. Shocked.

I should have been more clear. Barring injury to a center. I never, ever, want to see Larkin (or Athanasiou) play on the wing when we've got really good wingers sitting on the bench or in the AHL. Need a top six winger? Give Mantha or Bertuzzi a call. Need a center? Larkin and AA are your guys.

I'd rather see Dylark in the AHL until he can take over full time for Richards next season. Or barring injury. Also, I'd like to see Pulkkinen on the bench, Nyquist in his spot, and Jurco with Tatar and Richards, but that's just me.

100% agree with this.

There isn't a problem. I was just explaining that while righties are important, they aren't the be all and end all of defensive strategy, though you might think so given how they've been spoken about in Detroit for the last 3 years. That's all. I don't doubt that it's an important characteristic to have, but not to the point it's been described in by Red Wings fans and sports writers. I've heard people arguing in favor of really s***ty defensemen, based almost entirely on the fact that they were righties. Which is silly, but it has happened in the not too distant past. That was all I was getting at. A s*** defenseman is a s*** defenseman, a good one a good one, regardless of their handedness. I really wasn't trying to get too in depth with it.

I predict he'll be sent down as soon as A) he struggles, B) Datsyuk is healthy.

I know. None of that was my point though. My point was that because Detroit hasn't had a right shooter in a while, and they REALLY wanted one, it's all anybody could talk about. It became a paradigm through which fans viewed our defense and as a result many have begun to fetishize the idea of right shooting defensemen. Often times, it's used as a sort of trump card when people debate players. "Well I know player X is better, but player Y shoots right". Which is absurd...of course. That was my whole point.

Yeesh. Bold indeed. These are the kinds of predictions I like. Risky, but not entirely out of the realm of possibility. That said, I don't agree with any of them lol.

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.