kipwinger

Let's say for the sake of argument that Jiri Hudler had scored 50-60 pts. (instead of 37 pts) and was the same -7 on defense. This would bring him in line with what everyone really thinks that he'll turn out to be. Does that make any difference in the San Jose series? Does it stop them from dominating possession and endlessly cycling the puck? Do we go on to win that one, beat Vancouver, and play Boston for the Cup? Does he somehow match up better against quality forwards? Does our goals against go down? Now replace Hudler with Wolski, Zherdev, Tim Connolly, etc.? Do we win with any of these guys? Against the good teams? If not, maybe the problem isn't that we don't score enough. What do you all think?

I'm with you for the most part, I don't think that he's going to light it up offensively. But I dont' think it's unrealistic to think he could average ten more points per year for the next four or five years. And that's nothing on his linemates, I think just by increasing your shooting by 50% you'd figure on ten extra points a season, given how few shots he takes.

None of us have our own idea? Today he finally got around to coming to the conclusion that James Wisniewski was the best option for a UFA d-man, something I made clear was my position two weeks ago in my thread "James Wisniewski". Now he's wondering which UFA top six forward we should sign. Wonder if my own idea on that could be found in my two week old thread entitled "Brooks Laich"? We don't have our own ideas or we've reached solid conclusions two weeks before he does in most cases, and then we're on to the next topic? Let the readers decide.

What was it you said to that guy the other day?...oh yeah..."I weep for you and your hurt feelings". Probably time to head back over to the other Michigan sports boards and get reassured you pathetic like gunsel.

Yeah I agree, but Pavel didn't shoot like that at 27 either. People don't really remember that about him, but for years everybody's been saying Pavel needs to shoot more. I'm not saying that Filpulla will ever be as good as Datsyuk, but I do think he'll continue to take more shots, and take over a bigger role in the scoring as well. He's got all the skills, with him it's just a mental thing, but I think he'll get there.

He had one point less than his career high and played in ten less games due to injury. Recovery time matters as well so factor that in. And he had 8 pts. in 11 playoff games. I think he's getting better. I don't think he's going to turn into some sort of an offensive superstar at any point. But I don't think 50 pts. is unrealistic for him. That plus his D skills for 3 million? I'd keep him around forever. Everybody wants him to be a superstar...I don't get it.

If this Jaromir Jagr rumor is true and the Wings sign him, I'm going to lose my s***.

Yeah that looks about right, and to be really honest any of them are probably as good defensively as anybody else. For instance, I don't think Datsyuk is a better defensive forward than Z, Z gets the harder matchups and skates better, but Datsyuk has that take-away stat that is so insane impressive. Plus, he's Pavel ******* Datsyuk. Side note, that Couture kid for SJ impressed the hell out of me with his defense in the playoffs. Back to the topic at hand though, Filpulla is a hell of a defender, he's only getting better offensively, and he's 27. I'm obviously a fan.

Michael Peca won it twice, and he was neither extremely skilled or extremely aggressive. Something like that is pretty rare though, and I think you're right that Filpulla's style is too subtle to get noticed. Maybe Peca only did because he was a Captain, I don't know. I definitely think Filpulla's good enough to be considered that high, but given everthing else I don't think he will be. I also that that there are many other guys in the league who could boast the same thing as Filpulla and wind up never getting the attention either (I'm looking at you David Legwand and Steve Sullivan).

Wish I could give this more than one +. I can't understand why everybody thinks he's not able to be the second line center.

The only current players I've paid to see were Datsyuk, Verlander, Ovechkin. Plus, just about any of the greats are worth it by themselves.

not really sure what you're getting at with this? That he's past it and shouldn't be signed? I agree. I've already said so.

Look I'm not arguing in favor of the guy or saying he still has it and we should sign him, but at one point in time he had a cannon of a shot and scored a bunch of power play goals, can we at least agree on that or do you want to nit pick it a little more?

Point man on the power play rather (lots of power play goals is the essence), and you're right, he is terrible defensively. I don't know where I got that from.

I actually thought about this before, it's a really interesting idea because he does have tons of offense, decent enough defense, huge shot, PP quarterback, fights, hits. etc. My two biggest concerns are his injury history (lesser concern), and the fact that by all accounts he's a huge douchebag and his prima dona attitude is a locker room distraction. Probably better to stick with Wiz.

I see what you're saying here, but it's extremely likely that he WOULD have a career year somewhere else. Any team he would go to would likely not have the front line scoring depth that we do and so he would therefore play more minutes and with better players than he does on our team. However, that doesn't mean that we aren't better off after any potential trade. Think Leino. Did Leino look WAY better after leaving Detroit? Yes. Are we a better team without him? Yes. Not arguing for or against keeping Hudler (I have never liked him though). But if he goes somewhere else, he's going to score a lot more. That in no way, validates or invalidates any potential trade. Depending on the moves we make, just clearing his cap space for nothing, regardless of how well he plays somewhere else, might end up being the best thing we could have done with him. What does this have to do with Drury? Who the hell knows. Everything equal, I'll keep Hudler I guess.

Wouldn't it be great if Blueadams was really some highly contentious free agent trying to create some buzz for himself and promote a better contract by writing posts which manage to both shamelessly pander to everyone on topics we all agree on, as well as repackage and resell the bad ones, purely out of self-congratulatory and narcissistic egoism? "Yeah, sure, I don't have a problem starting the season regularly playing three or four guys with little to no NHL experience and Joey McDonald as backup, but I DEFINITELY WOULDN'T pass up this opportunity to steal Tim Connolly at 4 million a year. Hell, at that price you can't afford to NOT sign Tim Connolly,...Of course Lidstrom's coming back, and who knows maybe the Captain will take a discount because he's such a helluva team guy." (Note to Blueadams: Before you get all pissy, I know you didn't ever mention Tim Connolly, just using him as a comedic example)

Now that's a statistical breakdown boys.

Good stat work on the penalty question guys. Seems like that question is effectively laid to rest.

We are currently ranked 4th in "Goals per Game" in the playoffs. Ahead of the team that beat us, ahead of the two teams in the finals, and one behind Tampa Bay, who advanced to the Conference finals. Suppose the reason we had more goals per game and couldn't score timely goals against the Sharks was because they played better TEAM DEFENSE, and shut us down? All five guys on the ice have to play D everybody, not just the two defenseman. That's why we "back check" , "forecheck", pick up our in zone "defensive assignments", etc.

And in both of the years we lost to the Sharks we had more goals per game. Suppose the reason we can have more goals per game and lose two years in a row is because they play better team defense and shut us down when it matters? Suppose they scored more because they had the puck more and cycled for larger peroids of time? Suppose they had the puck more because their defense forced more turnovers? Also, I don't want anyone to think that we should ONLY spend on defenseman, or that the defense is the ONLY problem. I'm saying whatever forward we sign needs to be defensively responsible. In a perfect world, like D and Z. The original post was in response to some of the names I'm seeing thrown around on this forumn. Zherdev? Connolly? You're talking about guys that are double digit minus in their careers. Scoring is nice, but a team full of Brett Hull's wouldn't be too hard to beat would it?

Agreed, plus/minus matters a lot but it's not a stand alone stat. You need to look at it in conjunction with other stats for it to mean much.

There were only twenty eight players with over 30 goals this year, and only five over 40. Few or none of them are UFA's, with any realistic possibility of leaving their current teams, and if they do, you're going to pay a fortune.

Because forwards have to play defense too. Because between 2008 when we won a cup and 2009 when we didn't our goals against increased by almost 100, so 50 extra points don't really matter. Because both teams playing in the cup finals right now were in the top five in "Goals for" AND had the lowest "Goals against" in the league. Because if you pick up forwards that don't play defense you may score more, but everyone scores more on you as well. Don't get me wrong, I think we need to sign a forward. But he better play good defense (unlike everyone I mentioned already) or he's not worth having. I'll take a 15-20 goal scorer who plays stud defense over Wolski, Zherdev, Connolly, or Hudler for that matter.

That's exactly what I'm talking about, and exactly the wrong way to look at things. Which is the reason why Scotty Bowman preached forechecking, backchecking, and defensive responsibility. The team that possesses the puck most is not the one with the better offense, it's the one who's better at taking it away from the other team. On good teams the forwards have to play defense as much as the defenseman do. And as Konnan just mentioned, the d-men are usually the launch pad for the offense as well.