Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

"Detroit the hottest option for Zuccarello Aasen"


  • Please log in to reply
193 replies to this topic

#61 Drake_Marcus

Drake_Marcus

    Pariah

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,336 posts
  • Location:Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:12 PM

Not sure I can handle two dwarfs on the same team (assuming Hudler comes back). I miss the days when the Wings' actually pursued guys who weren't strictly finesse.


Why does it bother you so much? If two of out 19 players in any given game are really short how does that hurt your enjoyment of the game? So what if 10% of the team is small? The Wings definitely have size, they might not have a San Jose team with every player over 6'0 but how many cups has that collection of giants won? How many Conference Finals have they even been to?

Does winning hockey games really mean less to you than the average skate size of the players? It's not like having a pair of short guys forces the other 17 players on the bench to play less physical hockey. If this kid can score and makes the team better I could give two s***s how tall he is. All I care about is the Wings winning hardware and scoring goals. If I want to watch giants lumber around I can watch basketball.
Dedicated to lulz once lost:
Posted Image
Thanks TeeMan!

"We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas
of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage" --H.P. Lovecraft

#62 Frozen-Man

Frozen-Man

    Thanks for the memories

  • Gold Booster
  • 1,579 posts

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:13 PM

Everything ppl are sayign in terms of adapting to the NHL and rink size etc. are true. So in those terms the risks are high that he wouldnt necessarily develop into what we, as fans, would hope. However, anytime you can acquire a player with this kind of potential without giving up any assets in return I think a team would be foolish not to pursue it. Obviously the Wings would want the kid to come over and play in GR and continue his development and learn the NA game and the Wings system. But the simple fact that if thigns don't work out all the Wings have to lose in this situation is a prospect roster spot and some small time cash I don't see a real down side what so ever.


I couldn't agree more. Even with a bust like Leino we were out nothing to acquire him and got a pick when we traded him.

"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." - Mark Twain


#63 mmamolo

mmamolo

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,809 posts

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:16 PM

On the other hand, does anyone think that the failure of the Leino experiment (i.e. spend a year in the minors and then be a bust with the big club) might dissuade others of his type (European free agents who have options with multiple teams? Obviously, if someone refuses to do their time in the minors, they have an attitude problem, but it may tip the balance if they're choosing between multiple teams.


If anything it should maybe serve as an eye opener to other european players that the transition between the european game and NA game isn't so easy and spending time in the AHL (maybe even more than they'd like) is necessary - or more beneficial in the long run than they realize. Both Leino and Brunstromm both looked like they could step right into the NHL when they were signed. Brunstromm even had a great first game and has since disappeared. Leino spent a year in the AHL and then busted a massive nut in his first full year in the NHL. Those two guys should serve as prime examples of how easily and quickly a fall from grace can be from being the most hotly pursued european free out there to being yet another NHL bust that can barely crack a line up.

Maybe spending some time in the AHL isn't such a bad idea if it gives you a better shot of ensuring yoruself of a long term succesful NHL career. But then again, patience is a viture not everyone possesses.
Posted Imagewww.unsportsmanlike.ca

#64 dat's sick

dat's sick

    Fear can hold you prisoner, hope can set you free

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,335 posts
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:17 PM

I am split here... he is obviously talented and a magician with the puck, but there are a few things against him:

1) He is 5'7" (I won't say this will preclude him from NHL success, but read the rest)
2) In that video, most of his goals are scored from within 10 feet of the goal. In not one of those videos was a defender actually covering him. In the NHL, he would have been leveled (especially at 5'7") in two thirds of those plays had he been in the NHL.
3) Those videos are from the SEL, notice, not once does a defender skate up on him, he is allowed to skate freely through neutral ice, that won't happen in the NHL.

On the other hand though, the big European ice does make him look awfuly slow, I think he is faster than it looks, and in North America, guys have more energy cause there is less space to cover. So this may not be a big issue.

The big thing is size. Zetterberg has shown that speed doesn't really matter, but at least Hank has four inches (5'11 I believe) on this kid.

I don't think it would be the worst idea to sign this kid, but only for a one year deal at an affordable rate... it is not too often that someone of his stature turns into Martin St. Louis. I don't know if anyone on here has ever heard of Corey Locke, but that kid basically led the OHL in scoring for two years, but has never made it to the NHL because of his size, and inability to adapt his game as he moves up. The smaller a player is the bigger a risk because there is a lot more adaptation involved with each level of play. Size goes with speed and good hands as some of the most important things in hockey that you can't teach, and with only one of the three, he isn't even in the Martin St. Louis category, as he is a bit slow, but he would be more of a Zetterberg, with less size.

That video does not do this kid justice. Watch the vid I posted instead:
Also look at this: http://www.youtube.c...oKoAGks#t=6m25s
That's against Slovakia in the Olympics. He chases down a puck and scores a nice goal. A little bit later in the vid you see Norway's 2nd goal where he makes a great play from his knees. Quality is poor as someone has filmed their TV, but regardless, that's small rinks and high-quality opposition. If he can handle himself on that level, I'd say he's got a good shot at being atleast a decent NHLer.

And he is absolutely not "a bit slow". Every time commentators mention him they say "the speedy Zuccarello".

Yzerman's comment during the Olympics? "Every time I've seen Norway I say, god that little 48 is good".

Edited by dat's sick, 18 March 2010 - 01:21 PM.


#65 Original-Six

Original-Six

    1st Line Sniper

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 850 posts

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:20 PM

I am split here... he is obviously talented and a magician with the puck, but there are a few things against him:

1) He is 5'7" (I won't say this will preclude him from NHL success, but read the rest)
2) In that video, most of his goals are scored from within 10 feet of the goal. In not one of those videos was a defender actually covering him. In the NHL, he would have been leveled (especially at 5'7") in two thirds of those plays had he been in the NHL.
3) Those videos are from the SEL, notice, not once does a defender skate up on him, he is allowed to skate freely through neutral ice, that won't happen in the NHL.



If he played great in the Olympics against the NHLs best on a NHL sized sheet of ice i think that would mean hes capable of playing in the NHL.

#66 mmamolo

mmamolo

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,809 posts

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:22 PM

I couldn't agree more. Even with a bust like Leino we were out nothing to acquire him and got a pick when we traded him.

Plus, if anything hopefully the Wings themselves learnt something from the Leino experience. They should have learnt something about setting their expectations more appropriately, about integrating an unknown entity like European UFA into their line up, about getting him NHL experience before full time NHL duty, about attitudes and chemistry etc.

For me, as big of a bust as Leino was on the ice if the Wings, from a managerial perspective, improved I think we're miles ahead of the rest of the NHL (albeit except maybe Dallas as they went through something somewhat similar with Brunstromm - although I think they were silly to through him into the NHL immediately).
Posted Imagewww.unsportsmanlike.ca

#67 GMRwings1983

GMRwings1983

    The Killer is Me

  • Silver Booster
  • 20,709 posts
  • Location:Jerkwater, USA

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:35 PM

Is that a common first name where he's from?

Sounds like some some evil wizard name out of a fairy tale.
According to my profile, my reputation is excellent. LOL.

#68 NGKEIB

NGKEIB

    eltit rebmem motsuC

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 780 posts
  • Location:Woluwe-Saint-Lambert

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:38 PM

Yes, Mats is a common name. Zuccarello Aasen (or rather the first element of it) is not a common last name, however.

He must be at least partially of Italian descent.
"Summa pia gratia nostra conservando corpora et custodita, de gente fera Normannica nos libera, quae nostra vastat, Deus, regna."

#69 Vladifan

Vladifan

    Legend

  • HoF Booster Mod
  • 5,759 posts
  • Location:Central Texas

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:40 PM

But, but, but... Hockey players must be big.


Yeah! What YOU said! Like Sullivan. Like Yzerman. Like Konstantinov. Like Hudler. Like, like...Lidstrom!

"He even ate with women who at that time were accorded the same status as the family donkey. Are we willing to break bread with, say, child sex slaves, transgender teens and undocumented workers? Because when Jesus comes back to Earth, that's where he'll be hanging."
You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him.

 
 
 


#70 skyphoenix

skyphoenix

    JIMMEH

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,734 posts
  • Location:Commerce, MI

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:43 PM

I would back this signing. I mean, why not? He seemed good enough in the playoffs.

Posted Image


#71 Mors

Mors

    The Red Death

  • HoF Booster
  • 1,995 posts

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:43 PM

Why does it bother you so much? If two of out 19 players in any given game are really short how does that hurt your enjoyment of the game? So what if 10% of the team is small? The Wings definitely have size, they might not have a San Jose team with every player over 6'0 but how many cups has that collection of giants won? How many Conference Finals have they even been to?

Does winning hockey games really mean less to you than the average skate size of the players? It's not like having a pair of short guys forces the other 17 players on the bench to play less physical hockey. If this kid can score and makes the team better I could give two s***s how tall he is. All I care about is the Wings winning hardware and scoring goals. If I want to watch giants lumber around I can watch basketball.


Because I enjoyed watching Red Wings hockey in the late 90s? Why does it bother people on this forum so much when anyone suggests that having a skilled team that is still capable of hitting and fighting is enjoyable? I'll be the first to admit that I'd much rather watch the 97-98 roster than the current lineup. It's not necessarily plausible anymore, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to suddenly forget that this team used to be made up of players who stood up for each other and yet were very successful. And, it's not like Hudler and this random guy will be the only softies on the team.

I'm not trying to start another ridiculous "need moar fighters" debate, I'm just saying, I like watching a skilled yet physical team and this guy is even smaller than Hudler.

#72 Off the Post

Off the Post

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 136 posts

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:54 PM

Because I enjoyed watching Red Wings hockey in the late 90s? Why does it bother people on this forum so much when anyone suggests that having a skilled team that is still capable of hitting and fighting is enjoyable? I'll be the first to admit that I'd much rather watch the 97-98 roster than the current lineup. It's not necessarily plausible anymore, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to suddenly forget that this team used to be made up of players who stood up for each other and yet were very successful. And, it's not like Hudler and this random guy will be the only softies on the team.

I'm not trying to start another ridiculous "need moar fighters" debate, I'm just saying, I like watching a skilled yet physical team and this guy is even smaller than Hudler.


You need to move on... if you haven't noticed by now the league has completely changed. Having a skilled team is MORE VALUABLE to me then having 19 fighters on the team.

#73 BamaWing

BamaWing

    4th Line Grinder

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 331 posts
  • Location:Birmingham, AL

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:56 PM

Edit : Also, GET 'ER DONE KENNY!!!

Was gonna post the same thing. Let's get him on the ice next season :thumbup:

Posted Image


#74 Broken 16

Broken 16

    Bonecrushing Blueliner

  • Gold Booster
  • 2,959 posts

Posted 18 March 2010 - 01:59 PM

That's actually pretty funny. In all honesty, I wouldn't sell that line short - and yes, pun intended. Teams would undoubtedly underestimate that line - again, pun intended. They'd have a ton of skill and could fly under the radar - again, pun clearly intended. Who knows, could be fun to see one day.



Not only do I fully agree... this post was fun to read. :)



Absolutely nothing to lose by bringing this guy into the system. No brainer, imo.

Edited by Broken 16, 18 March 2010 - 02:00 PM.


#75 Mors

Mors

    The Red Death

  • HoF Booster
  • 1,995 posts

Posted 18 March 2010 - 02:01 PM

You need to move on... if you haven't noticed by now the league has completely changed. Having a skilled team is MORE VALUABLE to me then having 19 fighters on the team.


Yes, that's exactly what I've said, you understood me perfectly. 19 fighters.

#76 Wingfan191

Wingfan191

    3rd Line Checker

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 469 posts
  • Location:Redmond, WA (originally from Troy, MI)

Posted 18 March 2010 - 02:03 PM

Theo Fleury is 5'6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lCl6jGMJJY

#77 Off the Post

Off the Post

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 136 posts

Posted 18 March 2010 - 02:15 PM

In reality we weren't going after Leino, he was more like a backup plan. We we're more after Brunstrom but he eventually wanted to sign with Dallas so we turn our heads toward Leino. Leino was just a failed experiment. Hope this one turns out to be a successful experiment.

He was playing good for a team with no actual stars and was pretty darn fast, will see how he pans out if he eventually decides to sign here.

Look for him to spend some time in GRG before making his transition to the NHL.


I dunno how you call it failed experiment when he only had one full nhl season lol

#78 dat's sick

dat's sick

    Fear can hold you prisoner, hope can set you free

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,335 posts
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 18 March 2010 - 02:19 PM

Because I enjoyed watching Red Wings hockey in the late 90s? Why does it bother people on this forum so much when anyone suggests that having a skilled team that is still capable of hitting and fighting is enjoyable? I'll be the first to admit that I'd much rather watch the 97-98 roster than the current lineup. It's not necessarily plausible anymore, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to suddenly forget that this team used to be made up of players who stood up for each other and yet were very successful. And, it's not like Hudler and this random guy will be the only softies on the team.

I'm not trying to start another ridiculous "need moar fighters" debate, I'm just saying, I like watching a skilled yet physical team and this guy is even smaller than Hudler.

We're not really a soft this season though. I know we don't see a lot of fighting, but we're 9th in the league in hits.. adding Hudler and/or Zuccarello and getting rid of Williams and/or Bertuzzi/Maltby would not make us a much softer team, just a bit smaller but also more skilled. And there were "softies" on the 97-98 roster as well.

#79 Mors

Mors

    The Red Death

  • HoF Booster
  • 1,995 posts

Posted 18 March 2010 - 02:25 PM

We're not really a soft this season though. I know we don't see a lot of fighting, but we're 9th in the league in hits.. adding Hudler and/or Zuccarello and getting rid of Williams and/or Bertuzzi/Maltby would not make us a much softer team, just a bit smaller but also more skilled. And there were "softies" on the 97-98 roster as well.


This is true, although hitting statistics are always a little sketchy. Cleary and Eaves are two of the top hitters on the team, but do you think anyone out there on the opposition is worried about the hits they're throwing? I guess what I really mean is that I miss having some assholes on our team who actually force people to keep their heads up. Kronwall is probably the only feared hitter on the squad.

97-98 had some softies, but they also had some guys who would take your head off ;)

#80 Broken 16

Broken 16

    Bonecrushing Blueliner

  • Gold Booster
  • 2,959 posts

Posted 18 March 2010 - 02:26 PM

Because I enjoyed watching Red Wings hockey in the late 90s? Why does it bother people on this forum so much when anyone suggests that having a skilled team that is still capable of hitting and fighting is enjoyable? I'll be the first to admit that I'd much rather watch the 97-98 roster than the current lineup. It's not necessarily plausible anymore, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to suddenly forget that this team used to be made up of players who stood up for each other and yet were very successful. And, it's not like Hudler and this random guy will be the only softies on the team.

I'm not trying to start another ridiculous "need moar fighters" debate, I'm just saying, I like watching a skilled yet physical team and this guy is even smaller than Hudler.




This is your flaw... no offense.

You obviously equate size with physicality and one has nothing to do with the other. In fact, one could argue that a smaller size and a lower center of gravity are actually advantages in a fast game like hockey... offset by the fact that you will probably receive and errant elbow every game or so.





Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users