kipwinger

I agree. He's a better player. But since he's been gone Lashoff has done absolutely nothing to cost us points. True, he's done absolutely nothing to contribute either. But that's not really expected out of your 7th defenseman. I'm just sick of everybody scapegoating bottom pair defensemen and grinders when things aren't their fault. By all mean, crucify them if they're screwing up, but lets be objective about it. Over the last three games Brendan Smith has been our worst defenseman. Clearly. Verifiably. Demonstrably. Yet nobody wants to say so because for whatever reason Brendan gets a pass and Kindl (and Lashoff) suck. When it's their fault, so say. When it's somebody else's, we should all have the balls to say that too.

Well don't misunderstand me. I'm the President of his fan club only inasmuch as I want him to do well enough to get traded. He's not a terrible third pairing defenseman but he gets paid too much and I really like some of those kids. Yes. He's still got minor league options. If Kindl plays good enough for LGW to call him "solid" he'll be on another team next year. Catch-22.

And now, for funsies let's see how the first and second pairs have looked in the three games we lost (that Quincey was out). Kronwall: 0 goals, 0 assists, +/- 0: On the ice for one goal against, and one goal for. Ericsson: 0 goals, 0 assists, +/- 0: On the ice for one goal against, and one goal for. Dekeyser: 0 goals, 1 assist, +/- 0: On the ice for one goal against and one goal for. Smith: 0 goals, 1 assist, -3: On the ice for four goals against and one goal for. Conclusion: Losing games is not entirely anybody's fault. However, if we feel absolutely inclined to blame any particular defensive pairing it's got to be the second pair. Kindl and Lashoff have been fine. They're not relied on for much, and they haven't disappointed. Conversely, the second pair has more responsibility (ostensibly because they're better players) and they've s*** the bed for three games. Empirical stats don't back up that assessment. Even if they're getting hemmed into our zone, it hasn't cost us a thing. So who cares? Our second pair is getting scored on at even strength. Not the third. Not a single one of the last three losses has been on their shoulders. That's all I'm saying.

Ah yes, the Kindl-Lashoff pair. What a big problem they are. Let's unpack this a little further. Quincey has been out, and that pair has been together, for three games. We lost all of them. Surely they're to blame right? Lashoff: 0 goals, 0 assists, +/- 0. On the ice for 1 goal against, and one goal for. Kindl: 1 goal (powerplay), 1 assist, +/- -1. On the ice for 1 goal against, and no goals for. (Edit: Kindl's goal and assist were on the PP and aren't reflected in the goals for and against I've posted here) Wow. They're absolutely killing us. That or they're doing almost EXACTLY what a third pair should, holding their own. But why don't we scapegoat them instead. It's easier.

I don't think that anyone REALLY believes it's meaningless. Just that it shouldn't become and end in-and-of itself. Which it kinda did last year with regard to the Legwand-Jarnkrok trade. Or at least you could make a good argument that it did.

Harold, you must have been in the mood to argue last night or something. This argument is days old, no need to drag it up. Conversely, last night at 9:53 while you were typing this post, I was watching Jakub Kindl score a goal and add an assist in what was undoubtedly his best game of the season. Without Quincey. :-)

Lol. Sure. And in the future I'll just debate hockey with myself since between the two of us I'm the only one who thought to look up disputed stats on the official NHL website rather than relying on some tertiary source and then sticking with it (obstinately) after the veracity of the stats was called into question. And since it's my job to make sure you've got correct information before spewing your point of view forth, here's a helpful tip for future arguments: Don't use unofficial data if you don't want to be wrong. Everybody knows that. Now you do to.

I had to turn the game off a little early last night. Do my eyes deceive me or did Jakub Kindl nab a goal and assist last night? I hope he keeps that up for about 5 more games so we can trade his ass. Anybody not on board the "Kindl 4 Prez" bandwagon right now doesn't love this team. Simple as that.

What a save MONSTER!

Whelp, Dano just earned his next 9 games and million dollar bonus. Babs will never scratch him again haha.

How hilarious if Kindl and Cleary are the goal scorers lol.

Thank god for that.

Might want to use something a little more reliable than whatever website that is. Here's the NHL's stats. http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.htm?gameType=2&position=D&season=20132014&sort=points&status=A&team=DET&viewName=summary Kronwall: 23 even strength points Smith: 18 even strength points Dekeyser: 18 even strength points And since Dekeyser played fewer even strength minutes, what do you think that does to your silly stat? I know it's hard to admit you're wrong. It is for everybody. But Smith didn't score the most 5 on 5 points per minute, per game, per year, decade, century, or millenia. He just didn't. You keep trying to make a point that can't be made. And sadly you've reverted to using made up stats and faulty websites as evidence. Pathetic. Here's a 100% factually true statement. Brendan Smith didn't lead our defense in any scoring category. None. Not one. Get over it.

Stale powerplay is stale.

Are Smith and Kindl have a turnover competition?

Atta boy Kindl. Way to turn it over. Not like the Rangers are eating our lunch right now or anything.

Awesome.

Atta boy Brendan. Don't worry about giving the puck up to Nash. He's not having a good season or anything.

Man do I feel sorry for Dan Cleary tonight. If he even breathes the wrong way LGW is going to explode. To say he's under a microscope is the understatement of the season so far.

First of all, I disagree that Yandle isn't good defensively. You've used plus/minus as your only evidence of such and then covered up for it by saying "I don't put stock in it"...right after you put stock in it. If he's bad defensively for his -23 season then he's a stud defensively for his +16 season a few years earlier. It's a bad stat. What I do know is that Dave Tippet is one of the best coaches in the league and values defensively responsible players. If Yandle is playing 26 minutes a night in Tippets system there's no way he's a liability defensively. The second part, points per game, is a little early to tell based on a ten game sample size. But it's safe to say that either of them (Green or Yandle) are considerable upgrades offensively over anybody on our blue line so it's not really a point worth contending. For all intents and purposes they're similar players in most ways. And it will probably not shock you to know that I'd trade Brendan Smith for Mike Green (provided he would sign an extension immediately) as well. I will acknowledge that in my original scenario, trading Smith and Helm for Yandle is probably a little bit of an overpayment. But keep in mind I was "acquiring" Semin too and needed the cap space. All in all I would have no problem losing Helm, Smith, a 1st, and Pulkkinen to obtain Yandle (Green a little less based on injury history) and Semin. Especially since I'd be able to keep all my defensive prospects, young forwards, and Mrazek. I get that you wouldn't. I'm ok with disagreeing on this one.

Green costs more and isn't under contract. Plus he's plays fewer minutes, is injured constantly, and isn't any better defensively. We're miles apart on this d man thing lol.

I mean, I know it sounds completely crazy when you write it that way. But it's actually not as strange as it sounds when you think about it. Z and Franzen were given implied "lifetime contract". It was pretty clearly understood by both the players and GM that those contracts were for the rest of their careers. So no need for the NTC.

This is where you're losing me. Keith Yandle is an upgrade over almost every defenseman in the league. Let alone the Red Wings. You keep saying things like this and I'm lost. Yandle plays 82 games a season, every season. He's averaging 26 minutes of ice time per night, and is scoring almost a point per game. Also, he's in his prime and has earned the trust of a defense first coach in a defense first system. He's one of the best defensemen in the entire league. Why do you keep saying he won't be "much of an upgrade" over Brendan Smith? I know that you like Smith and all, but to say that a guy this good (Yandle) won't be much of an upgrade seems to suggest that Brendan Smith will himself be an all star defenseman. Something he has shown absolutely no indication that he's capable of thus far in his career. When Yandle was the same age as Smith is now he put of 53 points and made the All Star team. It's not an age thing.

And how do we even know that? I just recall this being a rumor. I don't recall this being an actual statement by him. I have a hard time believing the actual hockey "press". Let alone the rumor mill.

Ok, fair enough. I'm not trying to argue with you or anything. If you think that's the difference it's hard to disagree, especially since we haven't seen it. Maybe that is absolutely the missing piece to the puzzle. I have no idea.