Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Our Current Defense / What Holland Can Do *merged


  • Please log in to reply
105 replies to this topic

#1 datterberg1340

datterberg1340

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,361 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 01 August 2012 - 08:55 PM

Apologies in advance if this has been covered previously, but didn't see it anywhere else

Looking at our current roster, looks like we have only 8 players remaining from the '08 Cup run(Pav,Z,Mule,Sammy,Cleary,Helm,Flip,&Kronner) and just one other who has a ring in Miller(though I don't count him so much as he played only 3 games during Anaheim's run) and Kronner is the only d-man

I was thinking that perhaps instead of trying to land some big name d-man in a trade where we would likely have to overpay, maybe we should be trying to sign a free agent veteran d-man to help out the rest of the defense, b/c also right now Kronner is the oldest member of the group at 31, with the avg. age at 26.8, so we're as young as we have been on D for quite some time

This is of course assuming that our current d-men perform at least near expectations, and if that happens, we could benefit from a guy like Kubina, Spacek, Rozsival, Hannan, etc.

Y'know a guy that can help provide leadership to the younger guys both on and off the ice

Thoughts?

#2 Dominator2005

Dominator2005

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,269 posts

Posted 01 August 2012 - 09:41 PM

No to Spacek... Kubina or Roz and Vandermeer
"Some guys dream about scoring goals, or making big saves... I swear to God I dream about kicking ass in a hockey fight - no other way to say it than I love to do it, its who I am"... Brian McGrattan

#3 joshy207

joshy207

    Black Ace

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,460 posts
  • Location:Berkley, MI

Posted 01 August 2012 - 09:53 PM

I like Hannan. He's 33, but can play 20 minutes a night, kill penalties, block shots, and he's decent in his own end of the ice, which is more than we can say collectively for last year's group. With no real defense prospects on the horizon, he could be worth a 2- or 3-year deal in the $2M-plus range. I also wouldn't mind taking a chance on Cam Barker, if he's healthy. He'd be the kind of guy, if still available in September, you sign to a cheap deal or bring in on a tryout. If he works out, you can waive Kindl; if not, you waive or don't sign Barker. At 26, Barker is 10 months older than Kindl, so he's still on the younger side of things.

#4 martinezsvsu

martinezsvsu

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts

Posted 01 August 2012 - 10:18 PM

couldnt hurt

#5 The Axe

The Axe

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,379 posts

Posted 01 August 2012 - 10:30 PM

No. Our D needs trial by fire. We've got good peeps on D. Our forwards are weak. Not enough snipe, grit, or speed. Too much perimeter play. We are toast if Brunner isnt Stamkos reborn.

#6 VM1138

VM1138

    Legend

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,572 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 02 August 2012 - 08:31 AM

I'm usually a glass half full kind of fan, but there's just no getting around the fact that our defense is not very good.

Kronwall, White, Ericsson, Smith, Kindl, Quincey. That's it. Kronwall is good, White is sort of an uneven or unknown commodity without Lidstrom around to play with, Ericsson has become a bit more solid but he's still not good, Quincey had a rough run with the Wings but maybe, just maybe he'll improve, and Smith is an unknown commodity. But realistically there's little chance he plays better than 5th d-man.

Compare that to other defenses around the league, and we don't stack up well. We've got a #1 in Kronwall, a #3 in White, and two #4s in Quincey and Ericsson, and a #6 or 7 in Kindl. We still need a #1 or a #2 to even have a good defensive corps.
Check out my short e-book on the Red Wings' 1937 Stanley Cup championship entitled: "Nothing Could Keep 'Em Down." Please download it from my profile at Smashwords: https://www.smashwor...ile/view/victor

New e-book: The Spanish-American War: A Brief History. Relatively short, introductory read for casual history buffs and people who want to learn more about a forgotten war that changed America. Available at BN.com, Smashwords, Kobo, and Diesel E-Books right now. Same link as above.

#7 St. Michael (the Red Wing)

St. Michael (the Red Wing)

    Heavenly With the Puck

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,822 posts
  • Location:Mankato, MN

Posted 02 August 2012 - 08:48 AM

No. Our D needs trial by fire. We've got good peeps on D. Our forwards are weak. Not enough snipe, grit, or speed. Too much perimeter play. We are toast if Brunner isnt Stamkos reborn.


Ehhhh that's a little overboard don't you think?

#8 Carman

Carman

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 5,114 posts
  • Location:Riverview, MI

Posted 02 August 2012 - 09:13 AM

I'm usually a glass half full kind of fan, but there's just no getting around the fact that our defense is not very good.

Kronwall, White, Ericsson, Smith, Kindl, Quincey. That's it. Kronwall is good, White is sort of an uneven or unknown commodity without Lidstrom around to play with, Ericsson has become a bit more solid but he's still not good, Quincey had a rough run with the Wings but maybe, just maybe he'll improve, and Smith is an unknown commodity. But realistically there's little chance he plays better than 5th d-man.

Compare that to other defenses around the league, and we don't stack up well. We've got a #1 in Kronwall, a #3 in White, and two #4s in Quincey and Ericsson, and a #6 or 7 in Kindl. We still need a #1 or a #2 to even have a good defensive corps.


Ian White has put up 26 points with three teams in 10-11, 38 in 09-10, 26 in 08-09, 21 in 07-08, and 26 in 06-07 I mean it's pretty much a given that's he's going to give you 25ish points, he's a pretty good top 4 defenseman even without Lidstrom in the past. We'll see how he plays without Lidstrom for us, but I like how he plays - smart, tough, and aggressive.

Quincey was terrible with us no doubt, but the potential is there for him to be extremely good defenseman, even with his bad season his numbers were the same as Erik Johnson, Visnovsky, Corvo, Meszaros.Coburn etc. And he's proven to have much more productive seasons in the past. Even if he repeats his performance last season he would still put up top 4 offensive numbers, but if he feels comfortable and starts understanding his partner/system he could really take off.

Smith has done nothing in his career to assume he'll be bottom pairing defenseman, .55 in the AHL in 120 games, .92 in 95 NCAA games, for example let's take Suter, .48 in 39 NCAA games, and .36 in 63 AHL games. Brendan Smith is one of the highest potential defenseman to come out of college hockey, dominated (Almost doubled their PPG)what Gilroy, Shattenkirk, Clitsome, Petry did and they've turned out all to be solid NHL defenseman. I don't understand why people aren't as high on Smith as they should be, he very well might be the best defenseman not currently playing in the NHL. Now I don't know if that will translate into a good first season of course, defenseman are usually slow to develop, but Smith stepped right in last season and at least produced offensively in his 14 games with 7 points. So it's not like he can't play at the NHL level and came up last season and was outmatched, he needs to improve decision making no doubt, but as a rookie he looked very good in my eyes.

I agree though, we could very well use another good dman, but glass half full our defense isn't as bad as it seems. I mean compare it to Pittsburgh for example, yikes I'd take ours any day of the week. I'm just saying if the pieces come together and we end up trading for a top pairing defenseman, we wouldn't just be good, we'd be among the elite. I realize "if" is a strong word, but so is assuming Quincey isn't going to play better actually having time to play with the system, or Kronwall/White might not end up having good chemistry. If's can go both ways.

Edited by Carman, 02 August 2012 - 09:50 AM.


#9 The Axe

The Axe

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,379 posts

Posted 02 August 2012 - 11:03 AM

I'm usually a glass half full kind of fan, but there's just no getting around the fact that our defense is not very good.

Kronwall, White, Ericsson, Smith, Kindl, Quincey. That's it. Kronwall is good, White is sort of an uneven or unknown commodity without Lidstrom around to play with, Ericsson has become a bit more solid but he's still not good, Quincey had a rough run with the Wings but maybe, just maybe he'll improve, and Smith is an unknown commodity. But realistically there's little chance he plays better than 5th d-man.

Compare that to other defenses around the league, and we don't stack up well. We've got a #1 in Kronwall, a #3 in White, and two #4s in Quincey and Ericsson, and a #6 or 7 in Kindl. We still need a #1 or a #2 to even have a good defensive corps.


During the 4 cups, look at our #1 and #2.

We dont have those now. Big trouble ahead.

#10 FlashyG

FlashyG

    1st Line All-Star

  • HoF Booster
  • 1,153 posts
  • Location:Canada

Posted 02 August 2012 - 11:18 AM

No. Our D needs trial by fire. We've got good peeps on D. Our forwards are weak. Not enough snipe, grit, or speed. Too much perimeter play. We are toast if Brunner isnt Stamkos reborn.


We absolutely need another D. We only have 6 and there is nobody on the Griffins good enough to fill in should someone get injured.

As far as your other complaints, replacing Hudler and Holmstrom with Samuelsson, Brunner and Tootoo gives us a slight overall upgrade in scoring (providing Brunner can put up around 20pts or so), a larger upgrade in grit, and a massive upgrade in speed.

If we can somehow translate our wealth of bottom 6 forwards combined with picks or prospects to land a top pairing defenceman this team would be in great shape going into next year. That seems unlikely this offseason though so we may need to sign a shutdown journeyman FA to fill a role and try to add to the D-corps during the season. Either way there is no reason for us to go all chicken little yet.

#11 Carman

Carman

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 5,114 posts
  • Location:Riverview, MI

Posted 02 August 2012 - 11:23 AM

During the 4 cups, look at our #1 and #2.

We dont have those now. Big trouble ahead.


*Puts time machine back to 07-08*

During our 3 cups look at our top lines, no yzerman, fedorov, shanahan, hull, or robitaille. We don't have those now, big trouble ahead.

#12 Barrie

Barrie

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,941 posts

Posted 02 August 2012 - 02:09 PM

No. Our D needs trial by fire. We've got good peeps on D. Our forwards are weak. Not enough snipe, grit, or speed. Too much perimeter play. We are toast if Brunner isnt Stamkos reborn.


Funny how people look at things, I think the depth of our forwards is strong, and it's the defense that's weak. However I think that means more ice time for Smith, which could be a good thing. I wouldn't be surprised if Kronwall-Smith end up as our top 2 on the blueline.

Edit: Back to the forwards, I think we have the potential of 10-12 of our forwards getting at least 10 goals this year.

People are talking about the Cup teams, one thing I think people forget is in this socialist Cap area, with the talent spread out, every team has the same depth problems. Last year a 6th seed played an 8th seed in the final, so the regular season means nothing.

Edited by Barrie, 02 August 2012 - 02:05 PM.

Lets Go:
Red Wings
Tigers
Roughriders
Lions
Spartans
Pistons

#13 kipwinger

kipwinger

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,004 posts
  • Location:Mt. Pleasant, MI

Posted 02 August 2012 - 02:12 PM

Ian White has put up 26 points with three teams in 10-11, 38 in 09-10, 26 in 08-09, 21 in 07-08, and 26 in 06-07 I mean it's pretty much a given that's he's going to give you 25ish points, he's a pretty good top 4 defenseman even without Lidstrom in the past. We'll see how he plays without Lidstrom for us, but I like how he plays - smart, tough, and aggressive.

Quincey was terrible with us no doubt, but the potential is there for him to be extremely good defenseman, even with his bad season his numbers were the same as Erik Johnson, Visnovsky, Corvo, Meszaros.Coburn etc. And he's proven to have much more productive seasons in the past. Even if he repeats his performance last season he would still put up top 4 offensive numbers, but if he feels comfortable and starts understanding his partner/system he could really take off.

Smith has done nothing in his career to assume he'll be bottom pairing defenseman, .55 in the AHL in 120 games, .92 in 95 NCAA games, for example let's take Suter, .48 in 39 NCAA games, and .36 in 63 AHL games. Brendan Smith is one of the highest potential defenseman to come out of college hockey, dominated (Almost doubled their PPG)what Gilroy, Shattenkirk, Clitsome, Petry did and they've turned out all to be solid NHL defenseman. I don't understand why people aren't as high on Smith as they should be, he very well might be the best defenseman not currently playing in the NHL. Now I don't know if that will translate into a good first season of course, defenseman are usually slow to develop, but Smith stepped right in last season and at least produced offensively in his 14 games with 7 points. So it's not like he can't play at the NHL level and came up last season and was outmatched, he needs to improve decision making no doubt, but as a rookie he looked very good in my eyes.

I agree though, we could very well use another good dman, but glass half full our defense isn't as bad as it seems. I mean compare it to Pittsburgh for example, yikes I'd take ours any day of the week. I'm just saying if the pieces come together and we end up trading for a top pairing defenseman, we wouldn't just be good, we'd be among the elite. I realize "if" is a strong word, but so is assuming Quincey isn't going to play better actually having time to play with the system, or Kronwall/White might not end up having good chemistry. If's can go both ways.


That's a lot of print just to say that our defense can score. But they actually have to play defense too, and I think that's where some fans (myself included) start getting nervous. We don't really have any good, top four, defensive defensemen. We also don't really have any big bodied top four defensemen. I recall a couple years ago watching Thornton, Marleau, and Heatley steamroll our defensemen and dominate the front of our net, and that was with Stuart and Lidstrom in the top four. I can't even imagine what they'd have done to Kronwall, White, and Quincey. Same as I sort of cringe when I think about our current defense trying to handle a steady diet of David Backes or Jonathan Toews.

That's the worry from me anyway, there's no doubt in my mind that our defense will score, but that's only useful if they actually play defense too.

GMRwings:  "Well, in other civilized countries, 16 years old isn't considered underage.  For instance, I believe the age of consent is 16 in Canada.  There's some US states where it's 16 as well.  

 

Get off the high horse.  Not like she was 10."

 

"Some girls are 17 even though they look 25."

 

 


#14 Carman

Carman

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 5,114 posts
  • Location:Riverview, MI

Posted 02 August 2012 - 02:23 PM

That's a lot of print just to say that our defense can score. But they actually have to play defense too, and I think that's where some fans (myself included) start getting nervous. We don't really have any good, top four, defensive defensemen. We also don't really have any big bodied top four defensemen. I recall a couple years ago watching Thornton, Marleau, and Heatley steamroll our defensemen and dominate the front of our net, and that was with Stuart and Lidstrom in the top four. I can't even imagine what they'd have done to Kronwall, White, and Quincey. Same as I sort of cringe when I think about our current defense trying to handle a steady diet of David Backes or Jonathan Toews.

That's the worry from me anyway, there's no doubt in my mind that our defense will score, but that's only useful if they actually play defense too.


Quincey is the same height as Stuart(a couple pounds lighter) and fairly physical all while being a better skater(not saying he's better defensively, but potential is there), Smith is physical and 6'1", White maybe small is actually pretty tough around the net. Ericsson is using his body much more than the past(increasing number of hits every season). I agree though, I would love a Willie Mitchell type dman, but there is potential for us to be a lot more physical on the back end than we've been in the last couple years.

#15 kipwinger

kipwinger

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,004 posts
  • Location:Mt. Pleasant, MI

Posted 02 August 2012 - 02:31 PM

Quincey is the same height as Stuart(a couple pounds lighter) and fairly physical all while being a better skater(not saying he's better defensively, but potential is there), Smith is physical and 6'1", White maybe small is actually pretty tough around the net. Ericsson is using his body much more than the past(increasing number of hits every season). I agree though, I would love a Willie Mitchell type dman, but there is potential for us to be a lot more physical on the back end than we've been in the last couple years.


Ericsson is getting better and I'm really interested to see how he plays this year, he might be the biggest surprise of the defensive corps if he can step up and be a consistent shutdown guy. Quincey is good, but he's not a defensive defenseman. He scores decently, is good on the PP, and is good in transition, but he does not play the type of game that makes me believe that he's going to win matchups against guys like Getzlaf, Perry, Backes, Thornton, Hossa, Toews. Smith is good but unknown, and even if he plays like a stud, he still weighs in at under 200 lbs. Power forwards will eat him alive. Smith is projected to be an offensive defenseman with a physical edge, a lot like Kronwall, who incidentally doesn't really play well against big forwards.

I guess what I'm saying is that we're going to have defense my committee this year, and I'd feel a lot better if that committee had a little bit more shutdown ability, and a little more size. Here's hoping Kindl and Ericsson step up in a HUGE way.

Edited by kipwinger, 02 August 2012 - 06:57 PM.

GMRwings:  "Well, in other civilized countries, 16 years old isn't considered underage.  For instance, I believe the age of consent is 16 in Canada.  There's some US states where it's 16 as well.  

 

Get off the high horse.  Not like she was 10."

 

"Some girls are 17 even though they look 25."

 

 


#16 The Axe

The Axe

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,379 posts

Posted 02 August 2012 - 07:05 PM

Id like to see a move for Hedman. Hes good.

#17 LeftWinger

LeftWinger

    42 years in Detroit! Time to spend the rest in paradise!

  • Silver Booster
  • 8,737 posts
  • Location:HART - MI

Posted 02 August 2012 - 09:48 PM

our current defense is incomplete...there are only 6 of them. Got to have that #7 guy. I wonder who it will be? What was that guy over in Europe that the Wings had interest in? There was a thread about it, but I cannot seem to find it... I know he had an O with a slash through it or something like that...

Don't Be Jealous, But I Live Here...

www.thinkdunes.com

 

Nestrasil, yes...Cleary....No!

Dump Q and K Now!


#18 ogreslayer

ogreslayer

    1st Line All-Star

  • HoF Booster
  • 1,994 posts
  • Location:Indianapolis

Posted 02 August 2012 - 09:53 PM

Still think Kenny will end up grabbing a UFA on a short-term contract to rotate with Kindl in the 6th spot. Carlo Colaiacovo anyone? Either that or wait for the inevitable lockout, CBA change, & buy-outs to see what hits the market.

#19 LeftWinger

LeftWinger

    42 years in Detroit! Time to spend the rest in paradise!

  • Silver Booster
  • 8,737 posts
  • Location:HART - MI

Posted 02 August 2012 - 09:58 PM

anyone else still bitter that Suter chose family over Detroit? Damn it! Why couldn't he have met his wife in Ann Arbor!?!?!

Don't Be Jealous, But I Live Here...

www.thinkdunes.com

 

Nestrasil, yes...Cleary....No!

Dump Q and K Now!


#20 kipwinger

kipwinger

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,004 posts
  • Location:Mt. Pleasant, MI

Posted 02 August 2012 - 10:28 PM

anyone else still bitter that Suter chose family over Detroit? Damn it! Why couldn't he have met his wife in Ann Arbor!?!?!


Honestly no, he got paid too much and he's not even top five or maybe even ten at this position. I am a little miffed however, that we didn't hedge our bets and land a quality 4-5 guy like Bryan Allen early on in free agency, just in case.

GMRwings:  "Well, in other civilized countries, 16 years old isn't considered underage.  For instance, I believe the age of consent is 16 in Canada.  There's some US states where it's 16 as well.  

 

Get off the high horse.  Not like she was 10."

 

"Some girls are 17 even though they look 25."

 

 






Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users