kliq

Personally I think that if we did switch the two players, and two other things aligned, then we would be in just as good of a position. For the record, I am not talking about the perception of the fans, I am talking about the quality on the ice. Those two things I am referring to are a coaching change, and the dumping of a select few contracts to give us cap flexibility. As far as young forwards go, I think that Matthews/Larkin/Rasmussen/Mantha/AA/Svechnikov are just as good as the Leafs young crop of forwards. I give TO the advantage on D simply because of Reily (we have nobody at that level), and I give us the advantage in goal as I think a healthy Howard is better then Andersson. Now obviously we dont have Matthews so none of this really matter, but I heard a group of people talking about this the other day and I was curious what others here on the board thought.

I just pasted both, no reason to have two Mrazek convo's in two separate threads. Ok, so you agree last year Mrazek played like crap. 2 years ago, (ie. 2015/16 season), Mrazek did have better stats on the entire year, but like I said he fell apart after his birthday. Just look at his stats pre/post all star game: Pre all star game - GAA of 2.02 and - Save % of 93.2 Post all star game - GAA of 2.86 and - Save % of 89.9 He played poorly in the second half, and Jimmy had to come in and at the end to help them go on a run to make the playoffs. In the NHL its not how hot you start, its how you finish and Mrazek didnt finish great. Howard didnt play great that year either, but that's why Mrazek got the starting job the following year 2016/17. In 2016/17 they gave him a chance to get the job back, and he was one of the worst goalies in the NHL, he was literally awful. Add that to the attitude issues (if true) and I can see why they gave up on him. For the record chaps, I want Mrazek to play well, and I am pulling for him, but at some point the responsibility needs to be on the player, as you can't just blame management/coaching every time a player does poorly and for some reason when it comes to Mrazek people will pull out ever excuse in the book. There are certain players that I agree were not given a chance (ie. Jurco comes to mind) but IMO Mrazek was not one of them. Goalies don't need to be "handed the job" or "named starter", its quite simple, you want to start, outplay the other guy, Mrazek can still do that. Limited starts do not mean you can't play well, there are countless goalies who play just fine in spot start. I hope he steals the job back, its better for all of us if he does, but my issue is when people say he is entitled it. Nobody is owed anything in sports. With that being said, if we are offered anything for Jimmy next year at the deadline, trade him. Unless we win the lottery and sign JT we are not going anywhere in the next couple years and the more assets the better.

So what has the last 2 years been? He has played 104 games in the last 2 seasons, please explain to me how that is not an opportunity to show what he has? We're not talking 20 games a year, he averaging 52 games a year in the past 2 years.

What else can we as fans assess a player on outside of his performance? The guy was given 2 years to show what he could do and he failed, plain and simple. I dont have any personal issues with Mrazek, I would love it if he was able to steal the job back from Jimmy, but I am a believer that as a player (especially a goalie) you need to take advantage of the opportunities you are given. He was able to do it back in 2014 in limited starts, so other then regression or other teams learning the playbook on him, what why can't he do it now. I dont buy the "he cant get into a rhythm" narrative. If Mrazek does leave, I wish him the best and if does win a vezina/cup etc. I would be happy for him. But you can't hold on to guys who play like crap because of the fluke chance that they MIGHT get better later. Do I wish he was playing more this year...yes. Is he owed anything..no.

I don’t think so, this was a well written post. Nothing over the top, no name calling.

This is the most twisted interpretation of events I think I have ever seen on here. You make it sound like Mrazek is owed start, and Holland/Blashill not handing them over to him is "treating him like s***". Guy unexpectedly stole the reigns from Howard in 2014/15, he played great. In 2015/16 he was given the role and outstarted Howard 54-37, but had a late season collapse starting January 2016. EVen with that collopse he was still given the role back in the playoffs. In 2016/17 he out started Jimmy 50-26 and had one of the worst season in the entire NHL. His numbers were garbage compared to the rest of the league AND compared to Jimmy. Summer 2017 - Mrazek is left exposed in the expansion draft and Tomas Nosek is chosen over him. If this doesn't show how little he is regarded in the NHL right now, I'm not sure what does. This season Jimmy is healthy and after 2 years of what appears to be a failed experiment with him, Jimmy got the job back because he has outplayed him for 2 straight years. If the Wings leaked all the rumors about him in the summer, I'll give you that one. But otherwise Mrazek has been given all the opportunity in the world, kid isn't owed anything. As far as retaining salary goes, that one is simple. Teams are ALWAYS more willing to retain salary on an expiring contract. We did the same thing with Vanek last year. Don't twist this into a vet/loyalty thing.

You realize if Mrazek does go, it’s likely as a backup or third stringer. I highly doubt he steals the job from talbot.

You saw who the source was right? It’s the equivalent of the national enquirer.

Sorry man, I would have responded by I've never gone.

It would be entertaining lol

I'm actually not a fan of his. I dont like him, I dont dislike him. What I am saying about him is unbiased and completely based on his accomplishments. The stats don't lie, he is far and away the best offensive defenseman of this generation, and he is on pace to be one of the best of all time. Hence, a generational player. Not sure what your bias is, rather then just telling me he's not, and that he's a "top 10 guy", do you actually have an argument to support what you are saying. I posted mine above. Here is another one. In the last 5 years Karlsson has 312 points. Burns is second at 277 (35 points less), and Hedman is 3rd with 230 (82 points less). The guy is an outlier. You can only be compared to your piers when assessing a player, and Karlsson is far and away better then every other D-man in hockey offensively. Also, the guy is only 27. When its all said and done, he is going to rank near the top of the top scoring d-men of all time, and easily the top guy of this generation. http://www.quanthockey.com/nhl/seasons/last-5-nhl-seasons-defensemen-stats.html

Mrazek has 1 year left, Howard had about 3 at that time. Completely different situation as retaining salary will not effect anything moving forward. Im pretty sure they did the same thing with vanek last year. No bias.

Agreed, but if Larkin can develop into a 1C, then really as long as Rasmussen develops into a top 2C we should be fine. Cholowski on the other hand is crucial to our club moving forward as there is nobody else in our system with his upside.

The games I have been to (3) have been sold out/close to sold out. You have to remember, these are based on tickets sold, not people coming to the building. Alot of seats are sold to corporation and just never used. still counts as a ticket sold.

Ya, and they play the game against other professional athletes. What's your point? When you have a roster that is mediocre/average, having bad coaching can be the difference between being crap, and being respectable.

Does anyone know where we can see the statistic "blowing a lead in final 2min". We have to rank 1st by a mile.

I thought we were discussing Karlsson vs OEL, not sure what Burns and Josi have to do with anything. I'm guessing your issue with Karlsson is that he doesnt hit enough since you keeping talking about it. When you score like him, you can get away with it. I'm not over-hyping anything, I'm just not going to validate your delusions. In the past 6 seasons, he has won 2 Norris Trophy's, and been a finalist 4 times (and lets not forget he missed half of 2012/13 with an injury) In points he has ranked: 2017 - 3rd (5 points less then Burns) 2016 - 1st 2015 - 1st 2014 - 1st 2013 - missed half of the season with an injury 2012 - 1st If you want to bring up Burns, I don't buy Burns is better offensively. He had more points 1 time (not counting year he was hurt).

This is just wrong. Plenty of elite goal scorers go on droughts. The difference is they usually have other elite talent around them to make up for it and distract from their slump. Also, most elite goal scorers are playing with other elite player which increases their probability of scoring. That's not "an excuse" just fact. Our guys should be playing better, no question. But to ignore the fact that we are a team filled with 2nd/3rd pairing D-men and top 6/9 forwards is ignoring reality. We need elite players. Do yourself favor, when Blashill comes on...press mute lol.

To be fair, the weather right now is absolutely awful. Not saying that if it was good weather the arena would be full, but a struggling team + blizzard = empty.

How long does it take to get out?

I park on the street for free, specifically on Cass. Its like 2 min farther then the overpriced parking garage.

You can play the "meh Karlsson has more assists, OEL has more goals" narrative all you want to attempt to make them sound as if they are equals, but they are not even in the same league. Karlsson is a generational player, OEL is a very good player who could end up being elite. Since the 2013/2014 season Karlsson has 311 Points (75 goals/236 assists) Since the 2013/2014 season OEL has 199 Points (77 goals/122 assists) So while technically yes OEL scored 2 more goals in that time frame, Karlsson has 114 more assists. To say "There is no real difference between them as a player." is just so wrong.

Wrong https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/plan/why-you-should-have-a-separate-portfolio-for-each-investment-goal/articleshow/49427116.cms

I wouldn't exactly call "hockeyfeed.com" or "detroitssportsrag.com" reliable sources.

100% Disagree. Many teams over the years have had great rosters, but under-performed on the ice. The Rangers all through the 2000's are the perfect example.