kipwinger

Helm needed that. Atta boy kid.

Did you expect a Florida team to have lifelong, homegrown, die hard fans of a sport played on ice? None of ice, hockey, or hockey fans naturally occurs in Florida. Bandwagon fans in Florida is a little more tolerable than they are in say...Chicago?

I wonder how long before we can put this "the only way to win in today's game is to draft and develop" argument to bed. Jason Garrison, Ben Bishop, Brendan Morrow, Anton Stralman, Matt Carle, Brian Boyle, Ryan Callahan, and Valtteri Filppula are all pretty significant contributors to this team and were drafted and developed elsewhere. Same is true of both teams in the Stanley Cup last year as well. Free agency and trades can add significantly to your team's success.

Are you mad that we got a powerplay? Your posts makes it sound like you're genuinely disappointed that something good happened to the Wings.

Touche. 1-0 Herald.

Lidstrom, Zetterberg and Datsyuk both came into the league around 175 lbs. and got up to 190-195 eventually. It's doable. I don't know if Jarnkrok will, but it's silly to think that Jarnkrok is doomed to be small because he is currently.

No doubt. I mean, it worked once before with a different coach, and different players, all of whom showed (over the course of their careers) that they were more offensively capable than the current coach and players in question. So why wouldn't it work this time? I can't imagine it's necessary to explain why just because something worked in the past under different circumstances doesn't mean it will necessarily work again. I don't think anybody would complain too much if your lines where Shanahan-Yzerman-Abby Federov-Helm-Hull/Robitaille/Kozlov Edit: Oh yeah, I forgot these forward lines would be supported by four Hall of Fame defensemen, and one (soon to be two) Hall of Fame goaltenders. I mean, those are totally comparable situations right?

No complaints from me tonight. Impressive victory against a decent team that we needed to beat. Atta boys.

Depends on who the top four d-man is. But I get your point. It's really risky trading a guy like Jurco at this age because you won't get a great return (unless packaged) and you don't know how he'll turn out. Reminds me a bit like the situation where the Islanders traded Nino Neiderreiter. Got very little and he's turning out to be a real good forward.

I mean, I don't think anybody other than Mantha (and probably Mrazek) is untouchable. But why trade Jurco? They've been saying for the last 3 or 4 drafts that they wanted to "get bigger and not lose skill". Now that they've finally got that coming to fruition, I don't see them moving it unless it's a slam dunk. I'd imagine (out of the prospects) any two of Backman, Jensen, or Ouellet plus Pulkkinen would be the ones to go first in a trade. They've got value. They can't all fit into the lineup along with everybody else. And they're on the smaller end of the prospects. Then again, a lot of that depends on who the coach is going to be next year because I get the feeling Babs and Blash wouldn't necessarily keep the same guys around given the choice. He's not going anywher unless the return is a slam dunk. Count on it. Why draft big if you're just going to trade the big players and keep the little ones?

I think they're in direct competition. But I don't think they've got the same skill set. Jurco was really drafted for his stick handling, speed, and play in tight around the net. Mantha's a pure sniper. Really the only thing similar about them is their size and speed. With regard to skill sets, Mantha is actually more like Pulkkinen. Only way bigger and faster, obviously. The competition will be good for them, but I don't know about pressure. They're both going to be part of the team for a long time to come. The guy who should feel pressure is Pulkkinen. The NHL is not a small guy's game anymore, and despite the fact that he's scoring goals he hasn't been given a look at the NHL level, nor has he really been spoken of too highly by Blashill or Babs. The refrain seems to be "can score goals, but the rest of his game isn't developed". He needs to carve out a spot for himself.

I'd like to see him and Jurco in Grand Rapids at the same time. You've got to believe the competition would be good for Jurco while at the same time giving them both a chance to shine. I imagine Jurco won't want to be outdone by a first year guy.

God I hope we don't have to rely on this team to score a bunch of goals tonight. I'm not ready for more disappointment quite yet. The last three games have been tough enough as it is.

NJ has got plenty of people capable of putting the puck in the net. We better be tight defensively tonight or else this might not go as smoothly as we'd all like.

Jesus Christ. Do you two think that Smith only got a minus last night because of a bad change by Kindl? He was on the ice for two goals against last night. He was a -1 because he got one back on the Cleary goal. Smith got caught pinching on the Stempniak goal. Ok, here's a link to last night's highlights. You'll notice that Kindl is on the ice for exactly two goals last night. His, and Tatar's. You'll also notice Smith on the ice for three goals, St. Louis', Cleary's, and Stempniaks'. So even if you want to blame the St. Louis goal on Kindl (which is dubious because the forwards were changing too and there were only 3 Red Wings on the ice when St. Louis received the pass (:30 on video)), Smith's still on the hook for the bad pinch that led to the 2 on 1 on the Stempniak goal (freeze the video as 1:11 to see Smith getting beat). I can do the same with the Buffalo game as well, Smith was on the ice and involved in both goals against that night too. In the last three games there have been 5 even strength goals against. Smith was on the ice for 4 of them, and has contributed an assist. Kindl was on the ice for one of them (an empty netter against Ottawa) and contributed 2 points toward wins. So even if you want to give one of Smith's minuses to Kindl for last night, you still have to admit Kindl's been better because the only other goal scored on him for three games was an empty netter at the end of the Ottawa game Is it really that hard for people to admit that for three games (that's all I'm talking about), Kindl has done his job well and Smith has performed his job less well? Is thef****** sky going to fall? It doesn't mean Kindl's a better player. He's just fulfilled his responsibilities better for three games. That's it. Why is that so hard? Link: http://espn.go.com/nhl/recap?gameId=400564091 Edit: Slow that video down and you'll notice that Kindl is off the ice, and Smith is on the ice before the pass to St. Louis out of the defensive zone is even made.

Because comments like this don't egg me on or anything.

Yer right. Kindl sux! Durr Hurr.

I'm curious why you think they weren't fine?

I'm pursuing this because because you (and everybody else) collectively shuddered at the mere thought of those two together. And we lost the three games that they were together. And we've got people in the GDT blaming them for the losses. But the TRUTH of the matter is that over three games they contributed more positives than negatives. And we could maybe have an accurate and substantive discussion about the team, defense, season etc. if more people acknowledged the truth, even if it shows they weren't right (in this particular instance). At a time when we needed Kindl and Lashoff to not suck, they didn't. Kudos. Instead, not a single person (apparently other than me) is willing to say that they did a good job during Quincey's absence (which, as I understand, will be over by next game). So it'll be more of the same. And the only discussions we'll have are about how bad "Kindl sux"and about how "Lashoff's a plug". Because that's fits the popular narrative. But that's not what happened this time.

First of all, it's not on me to go to ridiculous lengths to prove anything. You want to show why all four goals scored while Smith was on the ice (over the last three games) aren't his fault, by all means go ahead. He was on the ice for 3 goals against during the Buffalo game. Where those Kindl's fault too? You have no idea. You're just defending Smith because (for some reason) you don't like the thought that Kindl can, once in a while, play better than Smith does. He's doing it right now. Get over it. Secondly, I know Smith and Dekeyser play tougher minutes. But that doesn't make their mistakes less harmful. In fact, it makes them more harmful because when playing against better opponents (or in the defensive zone) your mistakes are MORE likely to end up in the back of the net. Being a better player means Smith gets more opportunity than Kindl or Lashoff. That means more opportunity to succeed AND to fail. For three games our second pair hasn't been succeeding. And that is demonstrably true.

I do agree that we both want him gone. What I don't get is why you're trying so hard to make them out to be worse than they have been this year. Last year they stunk. I agree. But they haven't been bad in their three games this season. In three games that pair has given up one goal (even strength) and contributed to one even strength goal (Lashoff's assist). During that same stretch Dekeyser's numbers were the same as Lashoff's and Smith was on the ice for 4 even strength goals against and assisted on one. I agree that Dekeyser and Smith play harder minutes etc. etc., but that doesn't make their screw ups less harmful. And they've done it more frequently the last three games. I just don't understand why you (and everybody else) can't admit that for three game Kindl and Lashoff have been fine. They haven't cost us a thing.

The stats I provided are not "good old +/-". For instance, in the last three games Smith is a -3. But that obscures the fact that he's been on the ice for 4 goals against. Conversely, Kindl is -1 and has been on the ice for 1 goal against. If you only look at +/- (which I wasn't) then the disparity looks better than it is. Over the last three games Smith got scored on at 4 times the rate Kindl did, not three. The only reason it looks better is because Smith's point came 5 on 5 and Kindl's 2 points came on the powerplay. But the fact of the matter is, Kindl's points to goals against ration is +1 while Smith's is -3 (over the last three games). Or, in other words. Kindl contributed more to a potential victory, and less to a potential defeat (over those three games). Lashoff was dead even. If there's blame to go around, it's not on them (this time). Smith is the better player. He just wasn't the better player over the last three games. And he has more responsibility, so he NEEDS to be the better player for our team to be successful (as do all players with bigger roles). Smith's four goals against didn't cost us momentum? Dare I say, more momentum? You're just trying to find inventive ways to blame them despite the fact that they've been objectively better for three games. They're not a great pairing. I know. But they haven't cost us s***. Edit: Lol. I've been selling myself short. Smith was actually on the ice for 4 goals against the last three games. He was on for two in the Buffalo game and he was on the ice for two last night.

Lol. Now now Harold, I was just poking fun at you a little bit. I've already explained (in last night's GDT) why the Kindl-Lashoff pairing has done nothing to contribute to the last three losses. My comment above was a light hearted attempt at acknowledging our disagreement. You seem to have WAY too much invested in Kindl and Lashoff not being good. Which is confusing. You should celebrate it. All the sooner Kindl will be gone.

I agree. But that's part of the problem isn't it? Making average guys "look" good. Does anybody remember when Ian White was Lidstrom's partner, and everybody kept commenting that White "looks" like a top pairing guy when playing next to Lids? It was true, he "looked" fine. Trouble was, Ian White ISN'T a top pairing defenseman. And when the rubber hits the road he's going to play like a 2nd or 3rd pairing guy instead of a top pairing guy because that's what he is. He didn't become better by playing with Lidstrom. He mistakes were just less harmful. That's the by-product of Babs' system. It can make Ericsson "look" like a number 2 defenseman. It can make Darren Helm "look" like a top six forward. And we all forget that ideally you don't want that. Babs' system can make underachievers competitive sure. But what happens when you run up against a team that's just as competitive, and has the right players in the right positions? You get spanked. Because an average player is an average player. Mind you, none if that is Babs' fault. He plays with what he's got. If KH wants average top four defense play, he should keep the top four he has now. If he wants above average play, he needs better defensemen.

I agree. I said the same thing about Kindl and Smith the other day to krsmith. I think they would both be much better under a different coach's system. Babs doesn't want guys who wheel and deal and both those guys have skill sets conducive to a run and gun style of play. Babs wants guys like Lids, Kronwall, and Rafalski who are all smart, heads up, defensemen who add offense through point shots and great passing. Not Kind or Smith's game.