• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Drake_Marcus

Updates from today's practice

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Article from Bruce MacLeod's Blog:

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Meech looks like only change

The Red Wings are on the ice now prepping for Thursday's home opener (I'm not going to call it a North American home opener ... just can't) and it looks like the only lineup change will be Derek Meech in for Brett Lebda on the blue line. Patrick Eaves is practicing as the 13th forward.

Holmstrom-Datsyuk-Franzen

Bertuzzi-Zetterberg-Cleary

Leino-Filppula-Williams

Draper-Abdelkader-Maltby (Eaves working in)

Lidstrom-Rafalski

Kronwall-Stuart

Ericsson-Meech (Lebda working in)

Osgood

Howard

Nothing changes as far as line combinations either. Scratching Lebda is understandable after his slow start. He had an especially difficult Game 1 in terms of turnovers and being caught taking chances. Hopefully his start to this season won't be as slow as his start to last season was. The Brett Lebda in the final quarter of last season is the one that the Red Wings need now.

Also, Darren Helm is on the ice, skating on his own. He's not taking part in drills. The forward is still recovering from a training camp injury to the joint between his right shoulder and collar bone.

So in summary:

--> Meech will play in Lebda's spot (as previously reported)

--> Eaves will not be playing

--> The forward lines are staying the same

--> Helm's still recovering from his injury (as expected-- with the way he plays he shouldn't come back until he's 100%)

I'm not terribly surprised that Babs is sticking with his original line combos. He's intent on breaking Dats and Z up to maximize scoring depth and he's probably thinking that the early injuries to Z's line helped stall their chemistry. I do expect that he'll try mixing things up tomorrow if the boys continue to look like they did in Sweden.

I'll throw the lines out here that I'd like to see Babs try (these lines include Helm since he's coming back soon)...

Eurotwins Split:

Franzen-Datsyuk-Leino (Franzen playing the net crasher/screen, Leino playing on the boards and retrieving the puck)

Bertuzzi-Zetterberg-Cleary (let them work together a bit more to make up for lost time)

Williams-Filppula-Holmstrom (keep Holmer on the 1st PP, but reduce his overall minutes)

Draper-Helm-Eaves/Maltby

Lidstrom-Kronwall (give Kroner a chance to try and learn more from Lidstrom's defense, keep Lids-Raffy on the 1st PP)

Rafalski-Ericsson (the top two pairings would see an even split of playing time)

Stuart-Meech (I'm not a huge fan of putting two rookies on the last pairing, plus this saves Stuart for more PK time)

Eurotwins ACTIVATE!:

Zetterberg-Datsyuk-Cleary

Franzen-Filppula-Leino

Bertuzzi-Williams-Holmstrom (the "defensive disaster" line)

Draper-Helm-Eaves/Maltby

Edit: (Torri) Spelling

Edited by Drake_Marcus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[overreact mode]

if the Wings don't win against the Hawks, Babs need to put together these lines or be fired!

Zetterberg-Datsyuk-Cleary

Franzen-Filppula-Leino

Bertuzzi-Helm/Abdelkader-Williams

Holmstrom-Draper-Eaves/Maltby

[/overreact mode]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool. Datsyuk will still have Holmstromeningitis (patent pending) when they play tomorrow. Great news. Can't wait to see Datsyuk trying to maneuver through 2 forwards and 1 defenseman while Holmstrom tries to catch up with the play. That's always fun to watch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cool. Datsyuk will still have Holmstromeningitis (patent pending) when they play tomorrow. Great news. Can't wait to see Datsyuk trying to maneuver through 2 forwards and 1 defenseman while Holmstrom tries to catch up with the play. That's always fun to watch.

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cool. Datsyuk will still have Holmstromeningitis (patent pending) when they play tomorrow. Great news. Can't wait to see Datsyuk trying to maneuver through 2 forwards and 1 defenseman while Holmstrom tries to catch up with the play. That's always fun to watch.

Patents apply to novel designs. You're thinking of a trade mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd really like to see Eaves in the lineup. Given that we've lost the first two games, it shouldn't be out of the question to put him in.

Soon, I hope.

Edited by Zetts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really. I'm a mechanical engineer (I also have a degree in physics). Sorry.

Maybe you can come up with a Physics Law that defines the correlation between Holmstrom's declining abilities and the inverse rise, exponentially of course, of Jake Ryan's hatred for him.

I do agree with the Darren Helm part, though. The kid is, or at least tries, to be a serious force on the ice. Anything less that 100% would just be setting him up for more hurt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd really like to see Eaves in the lineup. Given that we've lost the first two games, it shouldn't be out of the question to put him in.

Soon, I hope.

I disagree - I think that our 4th line hasn't been the problem, and he certainly doesn't belong on a scoring line (at this stage at least).

Maybe you can come up with a Physics Law that defines the correlation between Holmstrom's declining abilities and the inverse rise, exponentially of course, of Jake Ryan's hatred for him.

I do agree with the Darren Helm part, though. The kid is, or at least tries, to be a serious force on the ice. Anything less that 100% would just be setting him up for more hurt.

I'm not sure that has anything to do with physics, just like most of his posts have little regard for rhetoric or reason. I look forward to getting Helm back, but I think that everyone is in for a rude awakening if they expect him to do the same amount of hitting during the regular season as he did in the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eurotwins ACTIVATE!:

Zetterberg-Datsyuk-Cleary

Franzen-Filppula-Leino

Bertuzzi-Williams-Holmstrom (the "defensive disaster" line)

Draper-Helm-Eaves/Maltby

Very nice, I do think Babs needs to try something new. After losing 2 games to the blues he uses the same lines again, real smart Babs.

Edited by cjm502

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really. I'm a mechanical engineer (I also have a degree in physics). Sorry.

Then you're not really qualified to tell me my decisions on player personnel in hockey are incorrect either, right? !!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe you can come up with a Physics Law that defines the correlation between Holmstrom's declining abilities and the inverse rise, exponentially of course, of Jake Ryan's hatred for him.

I do agree with the Darren Helm part, though. The kid is, or at least tries, to be a serious force on the ice. Anything less that 100% would just be setting him up for more hurt.

:P Let's see... this is a bit weird looking because 95% of the mathematical symbols aren't on my keyboard.

Let:

x = Jake Ryan's hate for Holmstrom

y(t) = Holmstrom's hockey skill as a function of t

t = time in years

oo be the closest approximation to the symbol for infinity that I can make on my keyboard

Note: y(t) is a function determined based on a quantitative analysis of Holmer's year by year offensive production, using exel to plot a graph of pts vs year (where his rookie year is 1, his second year is 2, etc) then fitting a function of best fit to it (use a polynomial, with the degree chosen through trial and error) would produce an acceptable function for our purposes. But based on the fact that his production must eventually decline as time increases (by logic), we can simply use a limit to avoid having to find the actual function. The result of this limit is based on logical deduction.

lim y(t) = 0 (logically, a 100+ year old Holmstrom wouldn't produce points in the NHL)

t->oo

x = [y(t)]^-1

lim x = lim [y(t)]^-1

t->oo t->oo

lim x = oo

t->oo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest CaliWingsNut
Then you're not really qualified to tell me my decisions on player personnel in hockey are incorrect either, right? !!!!

Wow... You just don't like being proven wrong.

BTW, he's correct, it's not a patent issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:P Let's see... this is a bit weird looking because 95% of the mathematical symbols aren't on my keyboard.

Let:

x = Jake Ryan's hate for Holmstrom

y(t) = Holmstrom's hockey skill as a function of t

t = time in years

oo be the closest approximation to the symbol for infinity that I can make on my keyboard

Note: y(t) is a function determined based on a quantitative analysis of Holmer's year by year offensive production, using exel to plot a graph of pts vs year (where his rookie year is 1, his second year is 2, etc) then fitting a function of best fit to it (use a polynomial, with the degree chosen through trial and error) would produce an acceptable function for our purposes. But based on the fact that his production must eventually decline as time increases (by logic), we can simply use a limit to avoid having to find the actual function. The result of this limit is based on logical deduction.

lim y(t) = 0 (logically, a 100+ year old Holmstrom wouldn't produce points in the NHL)

t->oo

x = [y(t)]^-1

lim x = lim [y(t)]^-1

t->oo t->oo

lim x = oo

t->oo

Not to nit pick, but I think you've forgotten a variable for the measurement of Jake's lucidity, which is at best spotty. I know this throws a whole f***in' into the works since it is so unpredictable, but I'm trying to contribute.

Edited by Hack & Whack Rule!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:P Let's see... this is a bit weird looking because 95% of the mathematical symbols aren't on my keyboard.

Let:

x = Jake Ryan's hate for Holmstrom

y(t) = Holmstrom's hockey skill as a function of t

t = time in years

oo be the closest approximation to the symbol for infinity that I can make on my keyboard

Note: y(t) is a function determined based on a quantitative analysis of Holmer's year by year offensive production, using exel to plot a graph of pts vs year (where his rookie year is 1, his second year is 2, etc) then fitting a function of best fit to it (use a polynomial, with the degree chosen through trial and error) would produce an acceptable function for our purposes. But based on the fact that his production must eventually decline as time increases (by logic), we can simply use a limit to avoid having to find the actual function. The result of this limit is based on logical deduction.

lim y(t) = 0 (logically, a 100+ year old Holmstrom wouldn't produce points in the NHL)

t->oo

x = [y(t)]^-1

lim x = lim [y(t)]^-1

t->oo t->oo

lim x = oo

t->oo

Now that's brilliant. Reminds me of my math classes from a few years ago in high school.

You should patent that... Drakes theory of...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I also have a minor in kicking ass and taking names, so yeah, I am. :D

Dude, you know I'd never cross you that way. I don't want to get my ass kicked. Everybody knows you're the toughest SOB on here, ACG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now that's brilliant. Reminds me of my math classes from a few years ago in high school.

You should patent that... Drakes theory of...?

Hmm... let me think about that...

Holmstomivity

Sweet-- this one will work perfectly!

You sure it's a patent? Better double check.

I believe you can patent some mathematical stuff, for example, mathematical methods of filtering signals are sometimes patented, if I remember correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this