Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The New Reality


  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

#21 Theophany

Theophany

    Mr. Norris

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,411 posts
  • Location:Seattle, WA

Posted 14 May 2011 - 09:59 PM

Wow. I consider myself a very thoughtful, open-minded, patient and informed fan. I've watched this team closely for 16 years and I try not to say anything that I haven't really considered.

That said, I only pointed out something I started to notice about Babcock this playoff. It's akin to saying I've been noticing Lidstrom make mistakes. Stating Lidstrom makes mistakes doesn't mean I want him gone and same for Babs. Read recent posts of mine, definetly support Babcock.

As for Filppula, I believe I can make an informed opinion as to what he brings to this team in regards to what he needs to bring to this team. I think its consensus that Fil isn't living up to his potential.

Not living up to his potential? He had the GWG (and made the play to take away the puck) in game six. How much more clutch would you like him to be?

He also put up 8 points in 11 games, and he only got points in two games of the Sharks series (1 G, 1 A in game six and 1 A in game seven). Also keep in mind that he was primarily used as a defensive center for most of the series, until Babcock put him on Datsyuk's wing.

How about Cleary? He's only paid slightly less than Filppula, and yet he gets a pass for producing markedly less than Filppula in the playoffs? Not only that, he does markedly less than Filppula on defense.

#22 eva unit zero

eva unit zero

    Save the Princess...Save the World

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 11:10 PM

Not living up to his potential? He had the GWG (and made the play to take away the puck) in game six. How much more clutch would you like him to be?

He also put up 8 points in 11 games, and he only got points in two games of the Sharks series (1 G, 1 A in game six and 1 A in game seven). Also keep in mind that he was primarily used as a defensive center for most of the series, until Babcock put him on Datsyuk's wing.

How about Cleary? He's only paid slightly less than Filppula, and yet he gets a pass for producing markedly less than Filppula in the playoffs? Not only that, he does markedly less than Filppula on defense.


In the Sharks series Filppula centered Franzen and Hudler, and you say he was being used primarily as a defensive center?

Well, I guess that means Hudler was being used in a defensive role, right? So the fact that he didn't score any points either doesn't matter because he wasn't out there to score points.

The fact that Franzen played like s***, and then got injured and kept playing like s*** is what kept that line from scoring. But people here don't like to bag on Franzen for some odd reason. Here's a nice juicy fact. FRANZEN SUCKED. FRANZEN WAS THE REASON THE FRANZEN/FILPPULA/HUDLER LINE WASN'T SCORING. Not Flip, and not Huds. They were both effective in all of the games that line played.

"I've never seen a warlock do that without his magic."
"I once devoured a monk's soul. It tasted like chocolate."

#23 Grayne Wetzky

Grayne Wetzky

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 124 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 11:51 PM

Guys,

Let's get a couple things clear:

1) There are Red Wings that are OLD, SLOW, and SOFT = Bertuzzi, Holmstrom, Rafalski
2) There are Red Wings that are OLD and SOFT = Modano, Draper, Osgood

All of these guys need to go before we talk about any other upgrading. The team needs an overhall to get some YOUTH into it. It's stupid to talk about dropping Hudler, Filppula, and Ericsson and keeping the guys mentioned above. Do you realize how much better our line-up gets when the old guys leave? Fill in the blanks with anyone, and you'll see an improvement.

Filppula-Datsyuk-Cleary
Franzen-Zetterberg-Abdelkader
Eaves-Helm-Mursak
Ericsson-Miller-Tatar

Lidstrom-Stuart
Kronwall-Salei
Kindl-Pyett

Howard


I would have rather seen those guys on the ice THIS YEAR, let alone next year.

Edited by Grayne Wetzky, 14 May 2011 - 11:53 PM.


#24 Theophany

Theophany

    Mr. Norris

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,411 posts
  • Location:Seattle, WA

Posted 15 May 2011 - 12:55 AM


In the Sharks series Filppula centered Franzen and Hudler, and you say he was being used primarily as a defensive center?

Well, I guess that means Hudler was being used in a defensive role, right? So the fact that he didn't score any points either doesn't matter because he wasn't out there to score points.

The fact that Franzen played like s***, and then got injured and kept playing like s*** is what kept that line from scoring. But people here don't like to bag on Franzen for some odd reason. Here's a nice juicy fact. FRANZEN SUCKED. FRANZEN WAS THE REASON THE FRANZEN/FILPPULA/HUDLER LINE WASN'T SCORING. Not Flip, and not Huds. They were both effective in all of the games that line played.

Babcock always uses his centers as shutdown guys, especially against the Sharks, who were extremely deep down the middle (Thornton/Pavelski/Couture). That he trusted Filppula to play center on a line with Franzen and Hudler, two huge defensive liabilities, shows how much he trusted Filppula to play a defensive/backchecking role on that line.

And yes, Franzen sucked. But then again, that's nothing new. He has large periods during the regular season where he sucks/is invisible.

#25 achildr1

achildr1

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,021 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 08:25 AM

Terrible comparison? We are talking about who is qualified to be a 1st liner. Has Homer ever been legit point producing 2nd liner on his own? I love the guy, but that criteria is just fantasy - take a look at first lines around the league. As far as being a PP specialist - that is a BS excuse. On one hand you defend Holmstrom being a first liner and excuse his even strength play by saying his value is on the power play. On the other hand, Flip outscores him but he isn't qualified. Out of 3rd wheel first liners on the teams left in the playoffs, Fil could very realistically with full time fist line duties put up numbers comparable to Clowe, Burrows, Lucic & Horton, and already does outscore Bergenheim. So is it the non-elite teams that you want to compare to?

If a player could produce on the second line on his own, why would you want him on the first line? So he could eat Dats or Z's points? That doesn't make any sense. Z and D need players to complement them rather than supplement them. Supplementary players should be on different lines.


OK bud, I hope to be clear this time. Holmstrom isn't not and has never been qualified to be a first line player. I am not defending that. Homer may be the worst skater in hockey, it ain't like he's going to provide much defensively on the back check. Holmstrom is essentially the best lefty specialist ever (in baseball terms) and for the majority of his career has played with two elite players on his line to hold him up.

I had to know when I started questioning Fil that I'd get an uber-reaction from some. Let me state that I was in attendance at game 2 of the Pheonix series and the March 21st Pittsburgh game, both games in which Fil stood out in a big way. I realize his potential. I also realize that I may have noticed him one time throughout the Sharks series (although only a few Wings showed up anyway. Filppula works very hard, is good on defense, and seems to be a mature player although inconsistent. Ill even say, if I were to strip this team down to the most contributing players, he be one of the latter cuts. My concerns are his contract, his age in relevance to his offensive output, and his ability to disappear on the ice and in the scoresheet for long periods of time. Basically, if he doesn't start scoring (regular season and playoffs) to his potential he may be more valuable in a trade than he is as a 45 point 3rd line guy. For the record, I like Filppula. He rarely makes glaring mistakes, usually gives his all, and occasionally can bring you out of your seat. I just want us to get maximum value for our dollars and we no lack for defensive minded forwards and prospects and I believe other teams would covet Fil enough to make an awesome deal. But, if Fil comes out this year on the top two lines and is everything he already is and puts up 60+ points, ill eat my crow....charred.

Edit: as for your Clowe, Horton, Lucic, Burrows, and Bergenheim comparison...

Bergenheim is playing out of his mind and far from his career average. No comparison here.

As for the rest there's an arguemant that any of those guys would be more valuable to the Wings than Fil and I'd like to see how many LGW's would agree with me.

Edited by achildr1, 15 May 2011 - 08:49 AM.


#26 achildr1

achildr1

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,021 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 08:40 AM

Not living up to his potential? He had the GWG (and made the play to take away the puck) in game six. How much more clutch would you like him to be?

He also put up 8 points in 11 games, and he only got points in two games of the Sharks series (1 G, 1 A in game six and 1 A in game seven). Also keep in mind that he was primarily used as a defensive center for most of the series, until Babcock put him on Datsyuk's wing.

How about Cleary? He's only paid slightly less than Filppula, and yet he gets a pass for producing markedly less than Filppula in the playoffs? Not only that, he does markedly less than Filppula on defense.


I think Fil was very good in round 1, even had me wondering how great it would be if he could do that consistantly. I really feel he was near invisible against a much better team in round two though and was obviously outplayed by his type players on San Jose.

As for Cleary, at the beginning of this year I posted here about how his contract, his injury history, and his overall skill level wasn't worth it to the Wings. This year, although he got hurt again, he proved me wrong. Dan Cleary works as hard as anyone on this team and makes more of his lack of gamebreaking skill than any player on the Wings. He goes to the hardest parts of the ice on a consistant basis and is likely to be Holmstrom's replacement when he leaves. He scores goals, something lacking a bit on our team; finishers. If he can be healthy, he is now likely to be a 60+ point, 30-35 goal, legimate second line player. That makes his contract look like a steal. Cleary plays well above his skill level whereas Filppula leaves you wondering how much he'd contribute if he played to his potential (although even now it is t for his lack of effort).

#27 kook_10

kook_10

    I Like Our Team

  • Gold Booster
  • 2,238 posts
  • Location:Los Angeles, CA

Posted 15 May 2011 - 12:57 PM

OK bud, I hope to be clear this time. Holmstrom isn't not and has never been qualified to be a first line player. I am not defending that. Homer may be the worst skater in hockey, it ain't like he's going to provide much defensively on the back check. Holmstrom is essentially the best lefty specialist ever (in baseball terms) and for the majority of his career has played with two elite players on his line to hold him up.

I had to know when I started questioning Fil that I'd get an uber-reaction from some. Let me state that I was in attendance at game 2 of the Pheonix series and the March 21st Pittsburgh game, both games in which Fil stood out in a big way. I realize his potential. I also realize that I may have noticed him one time throughout the Sharks series (although only a few Wings showed up anyway. Filppula works very hard, is good on defense, and seems to be a mature player although inconsistent. Ill even say, if I were to strip this team down to the most contributing players, he be one of the latter cuts. My concerns are his contract, his age in relevance to his offensive output, and his ability to disappear on the ice and in the scoresheet for long periods of time. Basically, if he doesn't start scoring (regular season and playoffs) to his potential he may be more valuable in a trade than he is as a 45 point 3rd line guy. For the record, I like Filppula. He rarely makes glaring mistakes, usually gives his all, and occasionally can bring you out of your seat. I just want us to get maximum value for our dollars and we no lack for defensive minded forwards and prospects and I believe other teams would covet Fil enough to make an awesome deal. But, if Fil comes out this year on the top two lines and is everything he already is and puts up 60+ points, ill eat my crow....charred.

Edit: as for your Clowe, Horton, Lucic, Burrows, and Bergenheim comparison...

Bergenheim is playing out of his mind and far from his career average. No comparison here.

As for the rest there's an arguemant that any of those guys would be more valuable to the Wings than Fil and I'd like to see how many LGW's would agree with me.


It appears you are confused on a few things, son.

First, making a baseball analogy doesn't support a hockey "arguemant" in any way, shape, or form. Power play specialists play on lower lines all the time. To say that he has played on the first line for so long because he is one is garbage.

Second, his contract has no bearing on which line he plays on. His play and his role and utility on the ice determine that. (see that - a novel concept - A Role sounds familiar, eh Homer?)

Third, if Flip is underperforming as much as you say it makes absolutely no sense to trade him. Who would want to give up a $3M in assets for a third liner like you say? If he is only playing worth $2M he will only get a $2M guy in return.

Fourth, again, take a look around the league and see who is playing third man on the first line and you will see it is a support player. You totally copped out of an argument on the comparable first line forwards. He has proven a worthy defender of the opposition's first line and is very good at making entry into the offensive zone and controlling the puck on the half boards creating space for his line mates. While you're at it look at second lines around the league and compare Flip. You've got blinders on.

Edited by kook_10, 15 May 2011 - 01:29 PM.


works every time


#28 Grayne Wetzky

Grayne Wetzky

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 124 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 03:34 PM

It appears you are confused on a few things, son.

First, making a baseball analogy doesn't support a hockey "arguemant" in any way, shape, or form. Power play specialists play on lower lines all the time. To say that he has played on the first line for so long because he is one is garbage.

Second, his contract has no bearing on which line he plays on. His play and his role and utility on the ice determine that. (see that - a novel concept - A Role sounds familiar, eh Homer?)

Third, if Flip is underperforming as much as you say it makes absolutely no sense to trade him. Who would want to give up a $3M in assets for a third liner like you say? If he is only playing worth $2M he will only get a $2M guy in return.

Fourth, again, take a look around the league and see who is playing third man on the first line and you will see it is a support player. You totally copped out of an argument on the comparable first line forwards. He has proven a worthy defender of the opposition's first line and is very good at making entry into the offensive zone and controlling the puck on the half boards creating space for his line mates. While you're at it look at second lines around the league and compare Flip. You've got blinders on.



Give it time, bud. The blinders are starting to come off around these parts. It's hard to let go of your favorite players when their value goes down to next to nothing. People will let go eventually, though. Just give it time.

#29 achildr1

achildr1

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,021 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 04:01 PM

It appears you are confused on a few things, son.

First, making a baseball analogy doesn't support a hockey "arguemant" in any way, shape, or form. Power play specialists play on lower lines all the time. To say that he has played on the first line for so long because he is one is garbage.

Third, if Flip is underperforming as much as you say it makes absolutely no sense to trade him. Who would want to give up a $3M in assets for a third liner like you say? If he is only playing worth $2M he will only get a $2M guy in return.

Fourth, again, take a look around the league and see who is playing third man on the first line and you will see it is a support player. You totally copped out of an argument on the comparable first line forwards. He has proven a worthy defender of the opposition's first line and is very good at making entry into the offensive zone and controlling the puck on the half boards creating space for his line mates. While you're at it look at second lines around the league and compare Flip. You've got blinders on.


Homer is a PP specialist that CAN'T play on a lower line. If he did he wouldnt put up points and wouldnt be able to contribute in any other way because of his skill set. I was trying to make the point that Holmstrom has played with two elite players on his line for the majority of his career (Yzerman-Shanahan, Zetterberg-Datsyuk) and that because of that it even's out to make a dominant top line. Nowadays we have one elite player paying with a couple third line types (ie players like Filppula) and our offense suffers because of it.

Who would make that trade? Brian Burke, Dale Tallon, Rick Dudley, etc. Also, I wouldn't mind picks returning in the deal. I'm basing this on what I believe, in my opinion, a young, strong two-way performing, Stanley Cup Champion from Detroit's system would be worth on the open market. I'm thinking you, and maybe even me, would be suprised what would be offered for him.

Your right, it would be a support player, im not even arguing that and i said that teams cant afford 3 elite players on a line anyway. I have plenty of knowledge of 2nd lines across the league and i have an awareness of what Fil brings to the table.

Bottom line:

Filppula, a 27 year old fifth year NHL'er, put up 39 points in 16:43 ATOI (2nd line minutes! ;)). In terms of offensive skill and finishing ability, to put up adequate points as a 2nd line player, Hudler (played 3:00 less min in ATOI), Holmstrom (at least this season anyway, his rate of points for games played is better for the last 4 years), Bertuzzi, and Cleary are all better suited for top 6 minutes. As of right now, Filppula is a third line player. He may be the best 3rd line center in hockey. I just think that Helm will be a better defensive player and will put up the same numbers if given the same minutes. That meaning, if Fil does have more value to another team at his current production than he does to us, we could use him as bait to obtain a player or player/picks that would present a better value to the whole of this team.

Edited by achildr1, 15 May 2011 - 04:02 PM.


#30 achildr1

achildr1

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,021 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 04:07 PM

Give it time, bud. The blinders are starting to come off around these parts. It's hard to let go of your favorite players when their value goes down to next to nothing. People will let go eventually, though. Just give it time.


I don't know how unclear I'm apparently being but I believe that Homer, if he doesnt retire this offseason, only has one more year in him and it probably wouldnt be pretty. I was trying to compare the type of player Holmstrom to the type of player Filppula is in terms of point production. I have very few, if any, allegiances to players that would cloud realism and I don't have one for Homer.

#31 eva unit zero

eva unit zero

    Save the Princess...Save the World

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 04:14 PM

Guys,

Let's get a couple things clear:

1) There are Red Wings that are OLD, SLOW, and SOFT = Bertuzzi, Holmstrom, Rafalski
2) There are Red Wings that are OLD and SOFT = Modano, Draper, Osgood


Rafalski is the fastest of those players, and was the Wings' fastest defenseman this past season. The only faster Wings defenseman who had a realistic shot at playing in the regular season was Derek Meech.

Old and slow my ass.

As for Draper or Homer being soft?? I can understand you arguing that for the others. But those guys, especially Homer, take tons of punishment every shift. Bert was coming around to play as his old physical self, and hopefully that carries over.

Osgood is one of the most mentally tough goalies to play during his era, and in the league right now. Not sure how else you would measure how "soft" a goalie is.

It seems like you are just using soft to describe "not a big hitter" in which case you forgot Lidstrom.

"I've never seen a warlock do that without his magic."
"I once devoured a monk's soul. It tasted like chocolate."

#32 Doc Holliday

Doc Holliday

    LGW's impromptu Photoshopper

  • Silver Booster
  • 4,340 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 04:21 PM

Oh good, another overreaction thread from someone who doesn't know what the hell they're talking about.

Seriously, bashing Filppula and Babcock? :rolleyes:


Who did Babcock put on the ice in the late stages of the third period in game 7.

The guy is stubborn, which is a big issue, in my opinion.

Posted Image


#33 Grayne Wetzky

Grayne Wetzky

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 124 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 04:30 PM

Rafalski is the fastest of those players, and was the Wings' fastest defenseman this past season. The only faster Wings defenseman who had a realistic shot at playing in the regular season was Derek Meech.

Old and slow my ass.

As for Draper or Homer being soft?? I can understand you arguing that for the others. But those guys, especially Homer, take tons of punishment every shift. Bert was coming around to play as his old physical self, and hopefully that carries over.

Osgood is one of the most mentally tough goalies to play during his era, and in the league right now. Not sure how else you would measure how "soft" a goalie is.

It seems like you are just using soft to describe "not a big hitter" in which case you forgot Lidstrom.



Calling Rafalski fast is like calling Helm slow.

Rafalski was the weakest link on the Wings defense the whole playoffs. That was easy to see. The Sharks OWNED his ass every time he touched the ice. To old, too slow, too soft. Simple.

#34 Konnan511

Konnan511

    #FreePulkkinen

  • HoF Booster
  • 10,333 posts
  • Location:Traverse City, Mi

Posted 15 May 2011 - 05:17 PM

Calling Rafalski fast is like calling Helm slow.

Rafalski was the weakest link on the Wings defense the whole playoffs. That was easy to see. The Sharks OWNED his ass every time he touched the ice. To old, too slow, too soft. Simple.


Did you mix up Brian Rafalski with Rrian Bafalski?

Haha neggin' me because I disagree with ya eh.

Edited by Konnan511, 15 May 2011 - 05:46 PM.

The Best Of BC
HankthaTank
- Squirrels, they hate to be thrown. / Why is the magical unicorn named Brian... Jedi - I just downloaded the "kids" book, "Go the F--k to Sleep" as narrated by Samuel L. Jackson on my kindle. I am now ready to be a daddy. / *Checks Router* No, I'm positive I didn't hit the "Wings Defense Sucks" button. Electrophile - I'm just glad the Wings were able to win despite the Curse of Brian. ACallToArms - I think Trey needs to put something about payroll tax and deferred income in his sig... Edicius - I'd rather [have] a soundbite of me saying "I like (man sausage)" rather than "I like Crosby".

#35 achildr1

achildr1

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,021 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 05:37 PM

Who did Babcock put on the ice in the late stages of the third period in game 7.

The guy is stubborn, which is a big issue, in my opinion.


Realism, i love it. The guy is a winner, to be sure. I was pretty suprised then to see some of the players out during key times. It's like he doesn't see Ericsson and Rafalski make the same collasal defensive lapses that we see.

Calling Rafalski fast is like calling Helm slow.

Rafalski was the weakest link on the Wings defense the whole playoffs. That was easy to see. The Sharks OWNED his ass every time he touched the ice. To old, too slow, too soft. Simple.


This mostly true. Rafalski was terrible offensively and defensively the whole series. I was honestly blown away by his lack of poise on the point and less suprised by him getting manhandled is his own zone.

Edited by achildr1, 15 May 2011 - 05:35 PM.


#36 Grayne Wetzky

Grayne Wetzky

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 124 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 05:48 PM

Realism, i love it. The guy is a winner, to be sure. I was pretty suprised then to see some of the players out during key times. It's like he doesn't see Ericsson and Rafalski make the same collasal defensive lapses that we see.



This mostly true. Rafalski was terrible offensively and defensively the whole series. I was honestly blown away by his lack of poise on the point and less suprised by him getting manhandled is his own zone.



Me too. It was like the Sharks caught him off guard or something, and he had been expecting an ice-capades show like the one the Wings got in Phoenix. Rafalski was a fish out of water in that San Jose series. I cringed everytime he came on the ice with Ericsson. The last 2 goals of the game 3 loss came while those two girls were on the ice.

#37 eva unit zero

eva unit zero

    Save the Princess...Save the World

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 10:16 PM

Calling Rafalski fast is like calling Helm slow.

Rafalski was the weakest link on the Wings defense the whole playoffs. That was easy to see. The Sharks OWNED his ass every time he touched the ice. To old, too slow, too soft. Simple.


Being forced into a turnover, or caught out of position does not make a player slow. And Rafalski is not slow. He's not as fast as he used to be, but he's certainly faster than any other defenseman on the Wings.
"I've never seen a warlock do that without his magic."
"I once devoured a monk's soul. It tasted like chocolate."





Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users