kipwinger

I noticed both of these things too. Passing was horrid last night, just absolutely half assed. Which is exactly the same set of adverbs I would use to describe Pavel's play for at least the last two games. The one guy on the team capable of taking over a game all by himself is notoriously absent right now.

Isn't he a good bit heavier too? Edit: nevermind.

Well, we all know that there's tough, and then there's Ford tough. I'd say the Wings don't have a problem with toughness. But there's definitely a lack of Ford toughness. Does anybody know if they measure towing capacity at training camp? I bet it was way down this year.

"I don't care how fast a skater you are, if you don't play this game with a big heart and a big bag of knuckles in front of the net, you don't got dinky-do." -Donnie Shulzhoffer Sorry, I had to.

Well that was a stinker. I don't want to sit here and pick it apart because there's enough of that going around for everyone. However, I do want to say that I hope I never hear Babcock say "I don't dictate the playing time, the players dictate their playing time by how well they perform". When I see Cleary and Quincey sitting and Kindl and Eaves playing in their spots I'll start believing that load of b.s. Still go a ways to go before we can call this a hockey team, but I'm not ready to give up yet. But a little accountability and consistency by the coaching staff would go a long way. He wasn't really a factor, but he worked hard and his hustle almost made a few things happen. Give him consistent linemates and a week or two to practice and he'd probably contribute.

Ok, in post #10 I said Suter is a good defenseman, but not a great one. And in post #19 I said Weber is going to look worse because he went from playing with a good defenseman to a worse one. I didn't mention Josi's name, but it was implied. I've never said Suter wasn't good. I just said he wasn't as good as his hype, and that he wasn't worth his new contract.

I don't think I've ever noticed you around here, but it seems like you've got a lot of posts so welcome. Obviously you've got a lot to say on the subject of Ryan "Sutter" and Shea Weber given that you've entered this thread and decided to post. Yet, I find myself wanting more. I feel as though your comments thus far are only the tip of the iceberg. Rhapsodize if you will on your opinion of "Sutter's" contract. Was it worth it? Is it too much? Is "Sutter" a shadow of his former self or is it the new environment in Minnesota? It's obvious that "your" wanting to say more on the "Sutter" vs. Weber topic, so why not break us off a piece of knowledge? Is it because "your" afraid that your opinions are just "realy", "realy", "realy" good and we won't understand them? I mean, wtf?!?! Think of it this way, we're your padawans, and you are our hockey Yoda. I know we don't seem like much, just sandy haired kids fresh off an ice planet, with nothing but the clothes on our backs and the stars in our eyes. But if you give us a chance, just one chance, we'll prove that with just a little of your guidance we can blow up the Death Star. C'mon Yoda, whaddya say?

No, I said the following: Suter is pretty good, just not as good as his hype. Josi (Suter's replacement) is worse than Suter was, so Weber has to do more on his own and therefore looks worse. You don't have to agree, but that should clarify my logic.

I wouldn't do it if the guy is Suter and the asking price is 10 million a year or whatever. Suter isn't as good as anyone you just mentioned, not even close really. In his prime Lidstrom was worth that because he played two way defense and was exceptional in both regards. Suter is pretty good defensively and alright offensively, he's not elite in either aspect. He's getting overpaid. 6 to 6.5 per year for Suter is about right. But in a weak class, with a lack of quality d-men around the league (as you pointed out) he got paid like the second coming of Ray Bourque. I don't understand these GMs and their mentality that because a guy is the best available FA at his position in a given year, that it automatically means he should get paid like the best player at his position league wide. Lots of teams will win the Stanley Cup without the highest payroll. And lots of teams will win the Stanley Cup without Ryan Suter, no matter what his asking price.

I mean, I don't want to get too down on Cleary, the guy isn't scoring for s***, but he's been good on the PK and whatnot. I just think that Eaves is better (right now) offensively and considering they're trying to spark the bottom six offense I think he makes sense.

I like Bert on that third line, should be a force on the cycle. But I'd like Eaves over Cleary, given that Eaves has got a pretty good shot.

Have they released the roster for tonight's game? I'm curious what the forward lines will look like with Tatar in the mix.

Haha, I could imagine my girlfriend losing her mind if I had a red light and a horn. She's already at her wits end with the amount of time, energy, and resources I devote to hockey. I think a horn and light might send her packin'.

That's a perfectly reasonable position and I agree. I don't even know where the "drunk" criticism comes from. Senile makes sense because he's old, but I've never heard drunk.

I agree. I have the greatest respect for Illitch for building and managing a billion dollar empire from scratch. I also respect his ability to manage him public image consistently in his favor. Those are serious accomplishments.

I agree, many of the things that Illitch has done have benefited the city. He pursued projects which made him rich AND which tangentially helped the city. I never followed the logic that you have to show some sort of reverence to Illitch because he's done so much for Detroit, and by "done so much" we mean "built himself a casino". I'm glad he doesn't mind spending money on his sports teams, I love watching them win. But he's as susceptible to ribbing as anyone else and perhaps more so, when he does things like announce a new arena with all it's fanfare, buy up all the property around the new arena which will skyrocket in value after the arena is built, and then ask the public to pay for the arena. What a charitable soul!

Presumably by "what he's done for the city of Detroit" you mean not paying any taxes, rents, etc. while at the same time asking actual taxpayers to heavily subsidize his "redevelopment projects"? If so, then yes, he's done a lot for the city of Detroit haha. But yes, he has spent a lot of money to make the Tigers a contender thank God. I wouldn't know what to do if I couldn't go straight from watching the Wings dominate to watching the Tigers do the same.

Yeah, I don't disagree. However, I also don't want to get this thread derailed with Franzen talk because it tends to devolve pretty quickly. I honestly think there should be a "Franzen" thread pinned to the top of the forum in perpetuity so that it would stay out of all the other threads. So back to the topic at hand, Suter's letdown isn't a surprise given that he was never as good as he was made out to be. And Weber's letdown isn't as surprise given that he now has to shoulder more of the defensive burden as Nashville failed to replace an overhyped Suter with anyone even as good as he was.

Franzen was never as good as his hype in 2008 or 2009, but is EXACTLY as good as he's characterized now. The problem that people have with Franzen now is that they are still expecting him to live up to some myth that they built for him back then. Things like letting Hossa walk, and Franzen's various spurts of superstardom haven't helped anything. But in reality he's a good complimentary scorer with a big body and soft hands, who can be vary dangerous when exploiting mismatches. He's still that. But he'll never be Rick Nash, and after 2008 a lot of people wrongly believed that was his developmental trajectory.

Agreed, but the answer is not to call up some unproven kid. The answer is to scratch Cleary instead of Eaves or Miller and let those guys step up. It's not a big leap to expect those guys to elevate their games, they've done it before. It's a huge stretch to expect a kid to come in from the AHL, play on the PK, play on the PP, work hard, finish checks, add a little offense, and play third line minutes...and to be better than Cleary while doing it. That's what Cleary's current duties are...Eaves or Miller could reasonably be expected to do that...nobody on GR's roster could.

Some players are, no doubt, and some are unrecognized as better than their poor reputation. But in my experience most players who have any degree of above average success, ride on that success further than they should, and serious deficiencies in their game are explained away or else ignored entirely.

I don't think that this is a comparison worth making right now, it's extremely unlikely that Cleary will be bumped for a kid. The question to ask is whether or not Eaves or Miller is playing well enough to play Cleary out of a spot. Personally, I'd say they both are. That's sort of how the depth chart works. Once Cleary's been worked out of his third line spot then the discussion could turn to whether or not a kid could play better on the fourth line than Cleary, but for now it's not a conversation worth having.

He's better defensively than Weber? Maybe. Or maybe he played back because he just wasn't as good offensively as Weber. I don't really know, and I don't really think comparing the two yields any meaningful results. Obviously, Weber will look worse with Suter out, anytime you go from playing with a pretty good defender to a worse one, your play will look worse. That makes sense, but that doesn't make Suter elite. He isn't. I hear what you're saying, and I'm not trying to sit here and put Weber on a pedestal because I honestly don't think most hockey players are as good as their hype. All I'm trying to do is knock Suter off the pedestal that a weak UFA class put him on. Fair enough, I can agree with that. As I said in my first post. Neither of them are as bad as they look right now. I just wanted to explore the idea that Suter isn't as good as he's ever looked before.

I understand what you're saying and it makes sense, but I don't think it's premature to pass any judgements, it's just premature to form conclusions. It's not unrealistic to expect "elite" players to play like it when they move from one set of line mates to another, or one system to another. Maybe a slight slump is anticipated, but certainly there's every expectation that a star will continue to be a star once he's been moved. It's not unreasonable to expect Suter to play like a number one defender if that's what he really is, and for any noticeable lapses in defense to come from the half assed d-corps they put around him. That would be fair. But he hasn't looked that good, on his own merit, thus far. Certainly not like the elite top partner guy he's getting paid to be.

Suter, for all intents and purposes, plays the EXACT same type of game as Brent Seabrook, and isn't noticeably better in any area than Seabrook. Is Brent Seabrook worth 10 million dollars? Of course not. The only reason anybody thinks Suter is this good is because the UFA class was so thin last year. Prior to that nobody talked about Suter as if he were one of the top 10-20 defensemen in the world. Edit: His agent, however, is certainly one of the top 10-20 in the world.