The Best of Samuelsson

[egroen 384]

Eva, if you are trying to say Samuelsson has an accurate shot, just stop... we all have eyes; He does not and no stats are going to dissuade that.

Samy is an unbelievable value and he brings a lot to that table that Babcock preaches:

Shoot the puck

Backcheck and forecheck relentlessly

Go to the net

The third one he could still get better at (and he did in the playoffs), but he is a perfect soldier for Babcock. Unless he starts demanding Filppula money I do hope he is with the team for some time to come.

Samy makes things happen, he gets under opponents skin... he's a bit like a skating Holmstrom just causing general chaos and confusion. He drives me crazy sometimes, but I actually like him a lot.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

213 forwards have higher cap numbers that Mikael Samuelsson's $1.2m. That makes him paid like a #8 forward. He produces like a top-6 forward. He also plays strong defense; the kind that would make him a top-unit PKer on many teams and garnered him a few Selke votes last season.

For reference, Samuelsson took 249 shots on goal last season. According to NHL.com, he only had 64 'missed' shots. By comparison, Pavel Datsyuk had 264 shots on goal, and 97 'missed' shots. Johan Franzen had 70 'missed' shots and only 199 shots on goal. Samuelsson is doing a better job of getting the puck on net than either of those two scoring machines. You know who else he's doing a better job of getting the puck on net than?

Someone with 111 missed shots and 358 shots on goal; Henrik Zetterberg.

Yes, Samuelsson's shooting percentage is atrocious. Why? BECAUSE HE'S ON THE ******* POINT, AND HIS SHOTS GET THROUGH TO THE NET MOST OF THE TIME. IF HIS SHOTS WERE MISSING THE NET OR HITTING SHINPADS ALL THE DAMN TIME LIKE EVERYONE LOVES TO CLAIM, HIS SHOOTING PERCENTAGE WOULD BE BETTER.

Did you even read my post? I COULD CARE LESS ABOUT HIS SHOOTING PERCENTAGE. I COULD CARE LESS ABOUT MISSED SHOTS.

Once again Eva, not everything comes down to stats. Though while we're on the topic, I'm not even sure what constitutes a missed shot. If a player fires the puck in the zone, is that a missed shot? maybe they were aiming on net?

I watch games. I have eyes. And I see plenty of times where he takes an ill-advised shot, totally telegraphing it so the defenseman gets a stick on it or gets in front of it for a very easy block. Or he makes some nice moves to get in deep, then panics and shovels it back to the defenseman. Or takes an extremely low percentage shot with no Wings player anywhere near the net for a potential rebound, and the goalie freezes the puck.

As I tried to communicate in my last post, it's not that Sammy is bad. It's that there's a few relatively simple things he could do to improve his game, because he is a talented player. Just one with not so great decision-making.

[Dabura 12,232]

Now that we have Hossa to take his place on the second line, I have a feeling most of the complaints about him will be rendered moot this season.

[Opie 308]

Now that we have Hossa to take his place on the second line, I have a feeling most of the complaints about him will be rendered moot this season.

I wouldn't hold your breath!

[ben_usmc 253]

213 forwards have higher cap numbers that Mikael Samuelsson's $1.2m. That makes him paid like a #8 forward. He produces like a top-6 forward. He also plays strong defense; the kind that would make him a top-unit PKer on many teams and garnered him a few Selke votes last season.

For reference, Samuelsson took 249 shots on goal last season. According to NHL.com, he only had 64 'missed' shots. By comparison, Pavel Datsyuk had 264 shots on goal, and 97 'missed' shots. Johan Franzen had 70 'missed' shots and only 199 shots on goal. Samuelsson is doing a better job of getting the puck on net than either of those two scoring machines. You know who else he's doing a better job of getting the puck on net than?

Someone with 111 missed shots and 358 shots on goal; Henrik Zetterberg.

Yes, Samuelsson's shooting percentage is atrocious. Why? BECAUSE HE'S ON THE ******* POINT, AND HIS SHOTS GET THROUGH TO THE NET MOST OF THE TIME. IF HIS SHOTS WERE MISSING THE NET OR HITTING SHINPADS ALL THE DAMN TIME LIKE EVERYONE LOVES TO CLAIM, HIS SHOOTING PERCENTAGE WOULD BE BETTER.

Now, that is smacking someone with logic and fact. Nobody claims he is amazing but he gets the job done and is underpaid if anything. He gets the worst rap for no really good reason.

[ben_usmc 253]

Did you even read my post? I COULD CARE LESS ABOUT HIS SHOOTING PERCENTAGE. I COULD CARE LESS ABOUT MISSED SHOTS.

Once again Eva, not everything comes down to stats. Though while we're on the topic, I'm not even sure what constitutes a missed shot. If a player fires the puck in the zone, is that a missed shot? maybe they were aiming on net?

I watch games. I have eyes. And I see plenty of times where he takes an ill-advised shot, totally telegraphing it so the defenseman gets a stick on it or gets in front of it for a very easy block. Or he makes some nice moves to get in deep, then panics and shovels it back to the defenseman. Or takes an extremely low percentage shot with no Wings player anywhere near the net for a potential rebound, and the goalie freezes the puck.

As I tried to communicate in my last post, it's not that Sammy is bad. It's that there's a few relatively simple things he could do to improve his game, because he is a talented player. Just one with not so great decision-making.

Your right, but to dismiss everything he said isn't right either, his cash per production is worth him on the team alone. Maybe if he cost us defensively for his point production you would have a valid point, but you just don't like Sammy and probably no matter what he does you won't. Granted we all would prefer him on the 3rd line but he is a worthy player to SUB in if an injury occurs and I don't mind him on the team.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Your right, but to dismiss everything he said isn't right either, his cash per production is worth him on the team alone. Maybe if he cost us defensively for his point production you would have a valid point, but you just don't like Sammy and probably no matter what he does you won't. Granted we all would prefer him on the 3rd line but he is a worthy player to SUB in if an injury occurs and I don't mind him on the team.

where have I said he wasn't worth the money? where have I said that he costs us defensively? or that I don't want him on the team?

Eva's stats weren't talking about cash per point. It was drawing unfounded conclusions from several stats by making bad assumptions. Sure the stats are facts, but the conclusions drawn from them aren't.

I agree that for salary he is totally worth it. And he absolutely doesn't cost us defensively. He's a responsible two way player. I don't think I've ever said anything otherwise regarding those issues with Sammy.

This all started as an explanation as to why Sammy gets so much hate. I've been trying to explain that it's not because he's bad. He isn't. I think it's the opposite actually. It's frustrating sometimes to watch him because a player with a lot of talent makes some boneheaded plays that seem like would be relatively easy to correct or improve. He makes some poor decisions for a seasoned veteran.

EDIT: his most productive season with the Wings was when he was playing the fewest minutes at around 13:30 per game. hopefully with the addition of Hossa, Sammy's minutes will be cut back and this will be one of those cases where a player actually makes better use of the minutes they get because they're not being overextended.

Edited August 7, 2008 by haroldsnepsts

[Sepster 0]

For all of the people that just HATE on Sammy, you've obviously forgotten about such notable Red Wings as Boyd the Void, Stacey Roest, Brent Gilchrist, Darryl Laplante, Ray Whitney... those were guys who were absolute waste of roster spots.

Sammy is by no means a superstar but neither is he as painful to watch as those past Wings were.

[ben_usmc 253]

where have I said he wasn't worth the money? where have I said that he costs us defensively? or that I don't want him on the team?

Eva's stats weren't talking about cash per point. It was drawing unfounded conclusions from several stats by making bad assumptions. Sure the stats are facts, but the conclusions drawn from them aren't.

I agree that for salary he is totally worth it. And he absolutely doesn't cost us defensively. He's a responsible two way player. I don't think I've ever said anything otherwise regarding those issues with Sammy.

This all started as an explanation as to why Sammy gets so much hate. I've been trying to explain that it's not because he's bad. He isn't. I think it's the opposite actually. It's frustrating sometimes to watch him because a player with a lot of talent makes some boneheaded plays that seem like would be relatively easy to correct or improve. He makes some poor decisions for a seasoned veteran.

EDIT: his most productive season with the Wings was when he was playing the fewest minutes at around 13:30 per game. hopefully with the addition of Hossa, Sammy's minutes will be cut back and this will be one of those cases where a player actually makes better use of the minutes they get because they're not being overextended.

so your saying he's a bigger/older version of Hudler? No argument.

[Frozen-Man 144]

My argument is weak? I think I established my point pretty well.

I find it pretty funny how there are so many Samuelsson defenders out there when as little as 3 months ago he was hated upon. Nothing has changed, aside from the fact he has a Stanley Cup ring, but aside from it all, he's the EXACT SAME PLAYER. Yes, he won a Stanley Cup, but don't you think we could have won the cup if somebody like Mark Hartigan was in the lineup instead of him? Yes, he scored 5 goals in the playoffs... Well, I would most certainly hope so when you play half of the powerplay every game. I just don't get how Sammy suddenly becomes flawless after he's been the laughing stock of the team over the last 3 years, along with Lang and Lilja... Folks, he didn't play THAT great in the playoffs.

No reason to get hostile at me here either, I'm just not able to figure out why and how Samuelsson's status has changed so drastically. He went from overrated by virtually everybody to underrated by most... All of this overnight.

I have never disliked Samuelsson. I think for what he is paid he does quite well. Everyone is in love with Mule right now (and rightfully so) but Sammy had more points last season than Mule did (again I still think that Mule is better I'm just using it as an example to show that Sammy does produce), in fact he was 8th on the team in points but only 14th on the team in TOI per game. He was also 7th in points and 5th in goals for us in the playoffs but 11th in TOI per game. He does have a low shooting percentage and makes the occasional bad play but for the $1.2M that he costs there are not many that would be better and most teams would love to have him at that price.

[Frozen-Man 144]

Did you even read my post? I COULD CARE LESS ABOUT HIS SHOOTING PERCENTAGE. I COULD CARE LESS ABOUT MISSED SHOTS.

I guess I misunderstood you as well, I thought that EVA's post was a very cogent and accurate response to your previous post especially the part quoted below:

And of course, shot selection. Ovechkin takes the most shots in the league, but he actually gets them on net. I understand throwing the puck at the net, he's just not very good at actually getting there. There's also times where you need to fire it wide to make sure it gets in deep instead of hitting a defenseman in the shinpads and leading to a break the other way.

I assumed that the bold part above indicated at least some relevance to his shooting percentage. Especially in light of the fact that you put this part of Eva's post in bold to comment on:

"BECAUSE HE'S ON THE F****** POINT, AND HIS SHOTS GET THROUGH TO THE NET MOST OF THE TIME. IF HIS SHOTS WERE MISSING THE NET OR HITTING SHINPADS ALL THE DAMN TIME LIKE EVERYONE LOVES TO CLAIM, HIS SHOOTING PERCENTAGE WOULD BE BETTER."

I think that Eva's post is very relevant and gives a good indication of what Sammy does and does not do.

Edited August 7, 2008 by Frozen-Man

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

I guess I misunderstood you as well, I thought that EVA's post was a very cogent and accurate response to your previous post.

not when he draws false conclusions from statistics.

I just picked ovechkin because I think he had the most shots in the league. My point was about Sammy's sometimes totally telegraphed wrist shots that end up getting blocked, or his ill timed low percentage shots with no one around the net.

I assumed that the bold part above indicated at least some relevance to his shooting percentage. Especially in light of the fact that you put this part of Eva's post in bold to comment on:

BECAUSE HE'S ON THE F****** POINT, AND HIS SHOTS GET THROUGH TO THE NET MOST OF THE TIME. IF HIS SHOTS WERE MISSING THE NET OR HITTING SHINPADS ALL THE DAMN TIME LIKE EVERYONE LOVES TO CLAIM, HIS SHOOTING PERCENTAGE WOULD BE BETTER.

I think that Eva's post is very relevant and gives a good indication of what Sammy does and does not do.

Again, the bolded section is another example of faulty logic.

But I don't want to get bogged down in another statistical argument with or about Eva. For the third or fourth time, I think the reason Sammy frustrates people is because of unfulfilled potential, or maybe a better description is he has a couple boneheaded habits. Whatever you want to call it.

I know many people here take it to the extreme and he is a whipping boy, but it's not like we all voted and agreed upon the reason to bash him is is his shot selection. It's something that's there and can be seen watching the games.

Edited August 7, 2008 by haroldsnepsts

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

Eva, if you are trying to say Samuelsson has an accurate shot, just stop... we all have eyes; He does not and no stats are going to dissuade that.

Samy is an unbelievable value and he brings a lot to that table that Babcock preaches:

Shoot the puck

Backcheck and forecheck relentlessly

Go to the net

The third one he could still get better at (and he did in the playoffs), but he is a perfect soldier for Babcock. Unless he starts demanding Filppula money I do hope he is with the team for some time to come.

Samy makes things happen, he gets under opponents skin... he's a bit like a skating Holmstrom just causing general chaos and confusion. He drives me crazy sometimes, but I actually like him a lot.

Perfectly summed up short and simple, with both his good and bad traits. You and harold esp. with his last post have summed it up greatly about Samuelsson.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

Perfectly summed up short and simple, with both his good and bad traits. You and harold esp. with his last post have summed it up greatly about Samuelsson.

I can sum it up better simply by saying that "he's lazy and he sucks".

[Opie 308]

I can sum it up better simply by saying that "he's lazy and he sucks".

Hey now listen if you are going to use the LGW trademarked phrase you must use the © at least!

Edited August 8, 2008 by Opie

[The Noodle 39 14]

After this years playoffs and especially finals i'm off sammy's back. He's fine people. For what were paying him and the talent around him he's actually a nice addition and is a sleeper on our team. He had 13 points in the playoffs and was sweet in game 1 of the Finals!

[Superman54 91]

The jokes toward Sammy have been old for awhile, and everytime I have to read a bash post against him I just roll my eyes. It has really lost its touch..... I have nothing against the guy, never did, and I never even had expectations from him in the first place. The guy gets payed 1.4 million and still puts up productive points for his wage. That is good enough for me.