If Kronwall isn't a #1

[DickieDunn 2,571]

To those saying Letang is better than Kronner: have you even watched Letang this season? A rookie defenseman had to cover up for his mistakes. Don't think that kinda d-man can ever be a real number one, even if he brings a lot of offense to the table.

Yeah, he reminds me of Sandis Ozolinsch. Puts up tons of points, but he needs a Garmin in the defensive zone to keep him from getting lost.

[VM1138 1,921]

I think some of you are overrating other defensenen. Kronwall is absolutely in the top 10. Maybe top 5.

Weber is clearly the best in the league, but after him everyone else has glaring weaknesses.Kronwall is an offensive defenseman who plays a solid defensive game.

[GMRwings1983 8,793]

His disappearance last year in the playoffs didn't help matters any.

0 goals, 2 assists in 14 games. Not top quality material and didn't handle the pressure of being a number #1 very well.

Edited March 9, 2014 by GMRwings1983

[Richdg 267]

Every fan base has biased opinions of the local players. Love em or hate em. 1 of the things that GREATLY helps kronwall is our system. We have a ton of defensive F's that help our BL a lot. Other teams don't play that style, and rely on their BL to do the job.

[wings_fanatic 677]

His disappearance last year in the playoffs didn't help matters any.

0 goals, 2 assists in 14 games. Not top quality material and didn't handle the pressure of being a number #1 very well.

You forgot to mention that he played pretty darn good defensively in those 14 games... look at what a good job he did against Perry (did not score a single goal) and Toews and Kane against the Hawks). Toews especially was awful against the Wings, largely due to Kronners.

[frankgrimes 1,836]

If Kronwall doesn't qualify as elite to you, then neither should Seabrook. Also Yandle is nowhere near as good as Kronwall in the defensive zone. And all I have to say about Chara is watch him closely next time you watch the B's. He's a good defenseman no doubt, but far from elite. He's not even the best all around defenseman on his team.

See that's why I've said the guy is extremely underrated. The reason why Keith can do what he does is Seabrook, the guy is like an insurance for every mistake ie. the former Suter/Weber pairing. The thing with Chara is because of his enormous size he is looking slow but watch this guy skate and shutdown the best of them.

This is nothing against Kronwall I like him but I just don't think he is a top 10 but for sure not top 5 defenseman. Since Suter left the Predators I don't think Weber is the best one anymore I think Keith and Pietrangelo will soon be better if they aren't already, although if Weber plays like in the olympics there would be no debate that was insane.

[kook_10 1,705]

Add Subban, Markov

[GMRwings1983 8,793]

You forgot to mention that he played pretty darn good defensively in those 14 games... look at what a good job he did against Perry (did not score a single goal) and Toews and Kane against the Hawks). Toews especially was awful against the Wings, largely due to Kronners.

Well, a really good number one defenseman can play well at both ends in a pressure packed situation. Kronwall was good defensively, but we needed so much more from him on the offensive side and never got it. Our powerplay struggled late in the series.

Edited March 11, 2014 by GMRwings1983

[Shaman 713]

I think some of you are overrating other defensenen. Kronwall is absolutely in the top 10. Maybe top 5.

Weber is clearly the best in the league, but after him everyone else has glaring weaknesses.Kronwall is an offensive defenseman who plays a solid defensive game.

I don't know whether to laugh or vomit.

This is so clearly a homer goggles statement I hesitated even responding to it.

Let me start with what I came here to post:

All number one d-men are not created equal. There are #1A defensemen, those who on most teams would be a #1 over even whomever they have as their current #1. These would be your top 10 defensemen in the league. Kronwall is not in this category. They play big minutes, they shut down elite opponents and they put up a lot of points. These are your usual suspects when Norris conversations come up.

Then there are #1B, they are guys who are capable of playing big minutes, or scoring a lot of points. But they don't have all the tools to be elite, but they are good enough. This is where Kronwall falls. He has a good tool box, but none of his tools are good enough to make him stand out head and shoulders. He's good offensively, but not elite. He's able to play the big minutes, but, he also has brainfarts. And to be honest, if Crosby or Malkin is on the ice I'd personally wouldn't be comforted to see Kronwall on the ice sans Datsyuk or Zetterberg.

I personally think Kronwall would benefit with a better partner, another #1B defenseman, where he wouldn't be expected to be everything all the time.

Now to what VM said: I would take Chara, Keith, Suter, Weber, OEL, and Doughty over Kronwall right now without a second thought. I would take Karlsson, Yandle, Elder, Bouwmeester and Pietrangelo in most situations over Kronwall 9 times out of 10.That right there is enough to make the statement he is top ten pretty laughable. He's good, he's just nowhere near top 10. Top 15 would still put him in very good company, and you would have a legitimate argument for it, but hyperbole serves no one.

[VM1138 1,921]

I'd agree with your first grouping, not your second. We're not as comically far apart as you think. That second grouping of players have just as many, If not more, flaws as Kronwall.

[Jersey Wing 1,521]

He's not a prototypical #1 I'll give you that but he does everything a #1 does for the Wings.

[number9 3,297]

This entire discussion to me comes from we used to have the best #1 in the league (we all know who that is) and now we don't (boohoo)

Kronwall IS a # 1 d-man in this league. Many writers grouped him amongst the best D men in the league (top 20). It's who should be next to him should be the discussion. is Ericsson a #2 D-men? Definitely not. I think Kronwall would very much benefit form either a high profile puck mover next to him, or a high profile shut down guy next time. He's very versatile. Being next to a puck mover like Rafalski and he can anchor the D. Being next to an Orpik type and he can go back to his "Kronwalling" pinch game. If we can give Kronwall a legitimate partner, thus forcing Ericsson to anchor a 2nd pairing with DeKeyser or Smith, we'll be in very good shape. Ericsson and DeKeyser could shut down opponent lines, while a Smith-Ericsson line would give Smith a good anchor while he takes chances and joins the rush.

In a nutshell, I think we are actually searching for a #2 D, not a #1.

Kronwall - UFA
Ericsson - Smith/Dekeyser
Kindl - Quincey
Lashoff

Looks way better

Of available D-men... Ehrhoff/Edler/Boyle/Markov looks way better then Kronwall next to Ericsson. If we could have Ericsson as our steady man on the 2nd pairing (Like Kronners was in the past) we'll look way better at D.

[Richdg 267]

Tonights game was a good example of why Kronwall isn't a true #1 or a top 20ish Dman. he played poorly coming down the stretch and E was downright terrible. Kronwall finished the game -2 and E was -4! That is our top pair!

[atodaso 279]

[BottleOfSmoke 5,965]

Tonights game was a good example of why Kronwall isn't a true #1 or a top 20ish Dman. he played poorly coming down the stretch and E was downright terrible. Kronwall finished the game -2 and E was -4! That is our top pair!

Kronwall not a top 20 D man?! Are you ******* kidding me?!

[Richdg 267]

Yes. he is a very good second pair guy. As of tonight Kronwall is 10th in points by Dmen. But he is 151st in +/-. yes I understand that +/- isn't perfect. But no one that is top 10 or 20 or 30 should be ranked 151st.

[number9 3,297]

Tonights game was a good example of why Kronwall isn't a true #1 or a top 20ish Dman. he played poorly coming down the stretch and E was downright terrible. Kronwall finished the game -2 and E was -4! That is our top pair!

In 2000 Lidstrom went -4 in a game against PHX. He won the Norris that year. What's your point?

[Richdg 267]

151st. after tonight, a game that E was -4, he still has a positive +/-. think about that.

[number9 3,297]

Yes. he is a very good second pair guy. As of tonight Kronwall is 10th in points by Dmen. But he is 151st in +/-. yes I understand that +/- isn't perfect. But no one that is top 10 or 20 or 30 should be ranked 151st.

Shea Weber is 274 in +/-

Karlsson is 279 in +/-

... what's your point?

Letang is 228 in +/-

Ben Lovejoy is 8 in +/- #1 guy right?

Krug - far from a defensive Dman - is 43 in +/- but he's better than Kronners at D right?

Liles couldn't crack the Leafs line up but he's 50 in +/- should we trade kronner for him?

151st. after tonight, a game that E was -4, he still has a positive +/-. think about that.

Lidstrom finished his last season minus. No way he was gonna be our #1 guy if he had come back for one more....

[T.Low 1,011]

That's why Holland was trying to throw $90m at Suter, so we'd have a legit #1 and take the unjust pressure off Kronwall and Ericsson.

[Richdg 267]

 

That's why Holland was trying to throw $90m at Suter, so we'd have a legit #1 and take the unjust pressure off Kronwall and Ericsson.

 

I agree. In fact they are both paid like second pair guys. Top pair dmen make 6+ million each. If we found a top 10 RHed Dman to pair with dekeyser that would allow Kron and E to move back to the second pair. Make us a much better team overall. But those type of Dmen are very expensive.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Yes. he is a very good second pair guy. As of tonight Kronwall is 10th in points by Dmen. But he is 151st in +/-. yes I understand that +/- isn't perfect. But no one that is top 10 or 20 or 30 should be ranked 151st.

In 2011 Lidstrom was 2nd in points by Dmen. He was 148th in +/- with a -2. He also won the Norris trophy.

When plus minus is an argument for or against a player, it's not really much of an argument. At best it's an indication something is going on, like if a player's +/- is much better or worse than his teammates.

[number9 3,297]

Rich, your awfully quiet after your +/- argument...

[Finnish Wing 110]

151st. after tonight, a game that E was -4, he still has a positive +/-. think about that.

+/- is totally a team stat. It's only useful if you compare players who play in the same team. And that's it.

Please, never make the mistake of comparing +/- of players from different teams.

[Richdg 267]

Yes +/-is flawed stat, I understand that and said so. but lets also look at it correctly. prir to becoming a "top pair" guy a typical Kronwall year was 30ish pointsand +7. Now he is a 50ish point guy with a - rating. He is getting more minutes, more PP time, and far more shifts with our top forward line. yet his D is worse overall. yes losing Stuart-who everyone agreed was a #4 Dman hurt. Kronwall is simply not a #1 guy. Even in this very thread others are talking about he needs to be paired with...... #1 Dmen don't need to be paired with others to be great. They are great and make others around them better. Kronwall doesn't.

BTW, anyone who says, and I quote: "Quincey gets to much heat from fans on this forum..... wouldn't mind him back at a lower salary" has no room to talk about the quality of any Dman in hockey.