kipwinger

McGuire reported the Nash thing if I recall correctly. And it was speculated that it included Filppula. But nothing explicit ever came out. But there was a rumor that actually mentioned Nyquist and Tatar, and if I'm remembering right, Bob McKenzie was the originator of that one. Edit: Here's the source of the Bouwmeester thing. Just like this newest Meyers rumor, it's someone saying that someone else said something. Or, in other words, it's bulls***. https://twitter.com/Hope_Smoke/status/456178678875975682

I don't believe this for a single second. It seem eerily familiar to the time that "Bob McKenzie" reported that Holland offered Nyquist AND Tatar for Jay Bouwmeester. Which was, and is, total bulls***.

Did you guys and gals know that Pierre McGuire has one of Scotty Bowman's assistant coaches in Pittsburgh?

Is it just me, or does Tony Romo have beady little rat eyes?

No I don't. Nothing in his career suggests otherwise, including his "super good" season last year where he put up...wait for it...nearly identical production (with more minutes) than he's putting up this year (with less). And, if the EVIDENCE I've provided over and over and over to discredit your asinine opinion are any indication, if he was forced to start in the defensive zone as much as those guys he'd almost certainly score MUCH LESS. Of course, I came to that conclusion using fancy stats that you admittedly don't understand. Clearly not as good a way to draw conclusions as the reliable old eyeball test. My eyeball tests tells me that Luke Glendening is on the cusp of a offensive breakout. WOO HOO! It's an opinion. It can't be baseless or inaccurate...cuz it's subjective!

First of all, I understand analytics just fine. Don't be insulting just because you're frustrated. You've never, EVER, heard me make a case by relying on "the eyeball test". Wanna know why? Because I understand stats. Secondly, your proof that he's "good" is a link to older, less relevant, stats from a season in which our other defensemen were decimated by injury? Stats that are not at all consistent with the seasons before or after them? If I was the kind of guy who understand stats (and what do you know, I am) I'd say that those are probably an outlier. Third, your "preference" doesn't matter at all when trying to objectively make a case for a guy. So far Brendan Smith is EXACTLY where he should be. Which is fifth on our depth chart.

That wasn't your original argument. You're changing your tune. You said he was better than Ericsson AND Quincey. He's not. At all.

1. Nobody said he was getting paid like a first pair guy. Nobody said he was single handedly costing us games. Nobody said he's dragging us down. I said he was a third pairing defenseman with upside. Someone else said he was better than two of our top four defenseman. The evidence doesn't back that up. 2. Ok I'll bite. What's the case for him being good?

Just for funsies I looked up Brendan's "fancy stats" once you adjust for zone starts (taking away his sheltering), and it's not pretty. Here's a taste... Zone start adjusted Corsi and Fenwick: Ericsson...57 and 84 respectively. Quincey...62 and 110 respectively. Smith...39 and 64 respectively. Ouch. Looks like "fancy stats" won't be your refuge after all. Sooo should I keep going with this or did you guys want to just eat your crow now? Note: As with the zone starts, you've got to follow the link and look up each player respectively. Have fun. http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/players.php

Jesus Christ...since you two brought it up Corsi stats (5 on 5)... http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/ratings.php?disp=1&db=201415&sit=5v5&pos=defense&minutes=50&teamid=11&type=individual&sort=icorsi&sortdir=DESC Fenwick (5 on 5)... http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/ratings.php?disp=1&db=201415&sit=5v5&pos=defense&minutes=50&teamid=11&type=individual&sort=ifenwick&sortdir=DESC Offensive Zone Starts (5 on 5) : http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=1560 Ericsson: 31% Kronwall: 32% Dekeyser 32% Quincey: 34% Smith: 40% Note: On the zone starts, you have to follow the link and then look up each player individually since they don't have them all in the same spot. Fancy enough for you, or no? Let me guess, you guys were probably talking about some other fancy stats or something right? How much more absurd does this need to get? Brendan Smith is NOT a top defenseman on this team. Get over it.

How is dumping three of your top six forward and one of your top four defenders not a proper rebuild? Moving Kessel, Kadri, Santorelli, and Gardiner is a significant tear down. You don't literally have to get rid of EVERYONE in order to consider it a rebuild.

Nah. He's too slow. It doesn't fit with our team dynamic. Plus, between Dats, Z, Kronwall, Ericsson, Helm, Abby, Miller, Quincey, etc. we've got plenty of playoff experience and leadership.

I've provided his stats compared to our other defensemen over and over and over again. Even Krsmith17 will acknowledge that much, which is why he says "I know, I know...stats". If you want to see them, look them up.

Nah. Screw stats, they don't matter. His opinion is that Smith is better than two of our top four defensemen. It doesn't matter if evidence doesn't support this, it's his opinion; so how can it be dumb?

Lol. You're right, Smith is a stud who's just not been given the opportunity to succeed because he's been carrying the water for scrubs. Screw stats and facts. You win.

I'm predicting a blowout. The Pens are a paper tiger. They'll try to play wide open with us and we'll bury them. Teams need to figure out, the way to be Detroit is to slow them down, not speed them up. Hence, Barry Trotz' Capitals gave us fits and Nashville got stomped.

Stafford is a UFA though. If he leaves at the end of the season, do people still think Winnipeg wins this trade?

I just assume he'll be waived.

Ideally, I'd do... Kronwall-E Franson-Dekeyser Quincey/Smith-Marchenko Quincey/Smith But I don't see Holland, or Babs, scratching Quincey or Smith. And I don't like the two together if you scratch Marchenko. So it's wise to trade either Smith or Quincey in the package for Franson. Quincey is the better player, so I'd rather keep him out of the two. But I would be amenable to either.

You say "I know, I know...stats" as if they're completely superfluous. They aren't. They indicate his current level of play. This is EXACTLY my issue with you and Smith. You constantly state as fact things that aren't currently true, but MAY be true one day. You say... 1. Smith's a two way player...and leave out "despite not producing offense and not being great defensively". 2. Smith's a top four player...and leave out "despite not earning top four minutes". 3. Smith should be on the powerplay...and leave out "despite never earning powerplay time. You consistently equate his potential with his current play. They aren't the same. Until he consistently scores, he's not a scoring threat. Until he beats out Kindl and Dekeyser for 2nd powerplay time he's not a power play threat. Until he's better than Kyle Quincey, he's not a top four defender on this team.

I don't think so at all. If I were them I'd have a five pronged strategy for success... 1. Select organizational philosophy similar to Anaheim, San Jose, or Boston. 2. Find coach who can play that game. 3. Build around Phaneuf, JVR, Panik, Winnik, Reilly, Clarkson, Bozak and move Kessel, Lupul (if possible), Kadri, Santorelli, Gardiner for futures. 4. Draft big centers as early as possible. 5. Buy stop gaps in UFA until centers are ready. Estimated time to competitiveness? Five years.

Franson and Smith would be a laugh a minute defensively. Plus, their strengths are exactly the same. It would be like playing Datsyuk with Datsyuk. Both Smith and Franson can't lead the breakout at the same time. Also, Babcock and Holland have explicitly said they want a right hander for the top four. So I think they're probably ok with breaking up that pair.