Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

What is more important?


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

Poll: What is more important?

More important?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 Buppy

Buppy

    1st Line All-Star

  • Silver Booster
  • 1,980 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 12:41 AM

Well I agree the devils and wings for example won with balance and good/great goal contending but that was before the cap. After the cap it's the team that prioritize offense and having a really good top 6 that are winning the cup most.

I'd have to partially disagree. LA in particular won with defense and goaltending. That was a huge part for Boston as well. Chicago has a great top 6, but also a very good defense. Pittsburgh hasn't won anything since their Cup, their defense and goaltending being the reason. Even when they did win, they won by playing very good defense in the final two games.

 

You do need a strong offense, but you need strong defense and goaltending as well. Could get away with an average defense maybe if you have a great goalie, or vice versa. 



#22 DeGraa55

DeGraa55

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,464 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 05:06 AM

I don't get what you are trying to say. All of those teams except for maybe Pittsburgh had Championship caliber defence and goaltending when they won.Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk


Boston has how many injuries on defense? Their defense has less games played in playoffs then most. Chicago has Keith and seabrooke then who?

I'm mostly getting at the star power. Chicago atop six consist of toews Kane hossa and sharpe plus two complimentary guys. Pittsburgh is same way. Boston id say doesn't have the star power as much up front but more balanced and good players top to bottom.

I'd have to partially disagree. LA in particular won with defense and goaltending. That was a huge part for Boston as well. Chicago has a great top 6, but also a very good defense. Pittsburgh hasn't won anything since their Cup, their defense and goaltending being the reason. Even when they did win, they won by playing very good defense in the final two games.
 
You do need a strong offense, but you need strong defense and goaltending as well. Could get away with an average defense maybe if you have a great goalie, or vice versa. 


You mean doughty who is considered an offensive defenseman? And letang?

#23 Dabura

Dabura

    Everydayer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,997 posts
  • Location:In an octopus's garden

Posted 27 April 2014 - 06:49 AM

Great defense. This shouldn't really be up for debate.


Don't Toews me, bro!


#24 frankgrimes

frankgrimes

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,737 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 07:23 AM

Defens wins championships and you build from the net out, therefore

 

average forwards/great defense


kftx.jpg

 

The Offseason of truth ...

Welcome to hockeytown Jonas aka Lundquist 2 Gustavsson!

blank cheque for The Captain or Jim Star Nil please..


#25 Dabura

Dabura

    Everydayer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,997 posts
  • Location:In an octopus's garden

Posted 27 April 2014 - 07:30 AM

Ultimately, it comes down to puck possession. Great defense is what gets you there. Great defense is more than just d-zone coverage. It's the transition game, the first passes. Great offense comes from great defense. Great defense doesn't come from great offense.

 

The Kings are so good defensively because they don't spend any time in their zone. Their defensemen know how to manage the puck once they regain possession. If they have the puck and they're not forechecking or cycling in the o-zone, they're pushing the play up the ice, away from Quick (who, yes, does benefit greatly from all this). That means they're not embarking on African safaris deep within their zone every 40 seconds like we are. They're spending a lot of time on the attack, because they're spending little time in their zone. They're spending little time in their zone because they "defend" well. They move the puck out of their zone and through neutral ice well.

 

Arguably the best top three we've ever had is Lidstrom, Rafalski, Kronwall. Three offense-minded, puck-moving, possession-savvy veteran defensemen. Lidstrom and Rafalski especially - they knew how to take care of business in their own end and put us on the attack with brilliant breakouts, a quick-strike transition. And that's saying nothing of their work in the o-zone. They were spectacular quarterberbacks, and they could bomb it from the points.

 

We miss the old Mule. We miss Z and D in their prime. But, more than anyone else, we miss Lidstrom and Rafalski, and the luxury of being able to play Kronwall on the second pairing. (I'd also take Stuart over Quincey.) I mean, think about it. Our forward corps isn't bad, even with the injuries we've had. It's actually quite good. It should've been scoring at a much better clip. What went wrong? Was it beause we just needed one more top-sixer? Was it because we didn't have Thomas Vanek? Would Vanek have been the difference? Doubtful.

 

What we need is a veteran top-four defensemen who, above all else, does good things with the puck.


Don't Toews me, bro!


#26 Dabura

Dabura

    Everydayer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,997 posts
  • Location:In an octopus's garden

Posted 27 April 2014 - 07:43 AM

They were spectacular quarterberbacks

 

Typo. That should be "spectaculular."


Don't Toews me, bro!


#27 Red Crazy

Red Crazy

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 626 posts
  • Location:Manitoba, Canada

Posted 27 April 2014 - 09:52 AM

To win Championships to need above average D. We are not even close to this.



#28 Rivalred

Rivalred

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,259 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 10:02 AM

Need more solid D to cause turn overs and scoop up rebounds, plus the first outlet passes and shots from the point. Detroit needs to go shopping this off season and come in with a new fall apparel to walk down the runway and pull off a Zoolander
D-Fence Avatar Win-O-Meter 8-1

#29 Shinzaki

Shinzaki

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 135 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 10:03 AM

I think we're close defensively.  Brendan Smith took a huge step forward this past series playing with Kronwall.  The Bruins baited him a lot and other than that incident with Chara, he kept his emotions in check and played hockey.   Loved that play he made taking Marchand to the outside and then running him into  the cage.   Kronwall, Smith, Ericcson and DeKeyser is a workable top four.   So..out of a pool of  Almquist, Sproul, Marchenko, Oulett, Jensen and (someday )Nedomlel, you need a couple of guys to step up to form that third pairing.    I like what Quincey has done over the second half of the season and the playoffs...he's not a huge hitter, but he understands positioning and leverage around the cage...but I think he's going to be too expensive to re-sign.



#30 Richdg

Richdg

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 12:16 PM

Most seem to think D is the more important way to go. So the next question is, what are you willing to give up to get the D we need? We have 4 NHL caliber Dmen and 2 holes. DK needs a true top guy to work with him-thus becoming our top pair, that allows Kronwall and E to be the second pair, then Smith and someother guy to be the third pair. So at what price? A Greene or Fayne signing in UFA works to fix the third pair. Both are good sized RHed defensive Dmen that would allow Smith to roam more. It is the top pair guy that we need that will have to be a trade. 


I think we're close defensively.  Brendan Smith took a huge step forward this past series playing with Kronwall.  The Bruins baited him a lot and other than that incident with Chara, he kept his emotions in check and played hockey.   Loved that play he made taking Marchand to the outside and then running him into  the cage.   Kronwall, Smith, Ericcson and DeKeyser is a workable top four.   So..out of a pool of  Almquist, Sproul, Marchenko, Oulett, Jensen and (someday )Nedomlel, you need a couple of guys to step up to form that third pairing.    I like what Quincey has done over the second half of the season and the playoffs...he's not a huge hitter, but he understands positioning and leverage around the cage...but I think he's going to be too expensive to re-sign.

No Q is not worth it. He is not good or even average. At 4+ million per year he is also getting expensive.



#31 Buppy

Buppy

    1st Line All-Star

  • Silver Booster
  • 1,980 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 04:20 PM

Boston has how many injuries on defense? Their defense has less games played in playoffs then most. Chicago has Keith and seabrooke then who?

I'm mostly getting at the star power. Chicago atop six consist of toews Kane hossa and sharpe plus two complimentary guys. Pittsburgh is same way. Boston id say doesn't have the star power as much up front but more balanced and good players top to bottom.

You mean doughty who is considered an offensive defenseman? And letang?

Star power is not a good way to judge. Guys like Mitchell, Seidenberg, Scuderi, Orpik, Boychuk, Hjalmarsson might not be stars, but they're effective.

 

Of the past 8 Cup winners:

Average ranking in playoff scoring: 3.625

Average ranking in playoff defense: 2.875

Average regular season scoring: 7.375

Average regular season defense: 7

All 8 finished 6th or higher in playoff scoring (1 1st, 4 of 8 in the top 3)

All 8 finished 5th or higher in playoff defense (3 finished 1st, 2 more 3rd)

7 of 8 finished 8th or higher in regular season scoring (4 of 8 finished 2nd or 3rd)

6 of 8 finished 7th or higher in regular season defense (4 of 8 finished 1st or 2nd)

Only twice has a team won the Cup while finishing in the bottom half of the league in regular season defense

Only once has a team won the Cup while finishing in the bottom half of the league in regular season scoring

 

The numbers for the last 8 Cup runners-up are not too far off from that.

 

The conclusion is evident. Winning a Cup, or even making the Finals, is pretty highly unlikely unless you're above average at both ends. 



#32 evilmrt

evilmrt

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,533 posts
  • Location:Winter Freakin Wonderland

Posted 27 April 2014 - 04:31 PM

This is a Red Wings forum. Obviously the answer is a rock solid defense and when that is accomplished, worry about offense. I don't know why Ken Holland can't figure that out. Did he not watch any games the last twenty years?

#33 Dominator2005

Dominator2005

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,222 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 04:52 PM

How about getting bigger and tougher?!
"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

#34 nawein

nawein

    4th Line Grinder

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 318 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 07:30 PM

How about getting bigger and tougher?!


Sometimes I honestly think if we had a poll that went something along the lines of
"Which would you prefer?
A team of John Scott's or
A team of Tomas Tatar's"

The team of Scott's would win by a landslide just because "We need moar big. We need moar tough. We need moar goals and moar goals come from moar big and tough."

#35 Richdg

Richdg

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 08:54 PM

No one is debating that great teams are great at scoring and at defense. We are not a great team, nor are we great at O or at D. The question is, which do we fix first, and at what price?



#36 Buppy

Buppy

    1st Line All-Star

  • Silver Booster
  • 1,980 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 11:08 AM

No one is debating that great teams are great at scoring and at defense. We are not a great team, nor are we great at O or at D. The question is, which do we fix first, and at what price?

Actually the question was, "What is more important". My answer to that being, "Neither".

 

As to your follow-up, the obvious answer is we try to fix both. But opportunities are limited, so you take what you can get. You try to avoid weakening one for the other, but we have solid depth at both forward and defense, so we can afford either if a good opportunity arises. Given our specific situation, I think we need more immediate help on defense, but in the not too distant future we'll need forwards. I think it's a little too soon to get aggressive.

 

Keep most of the prospects and kids, though giving up a couple wouldn't kill us. Of the vets, only Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and Kronwall have significant certain trade value, and none would bring enough immediate return to offset their loss. I doubt any would bring even enough future return to make it worth it either. Franzen, Weiss, and Helm might have value, depending on how their health and performance holds up next year. Either way, I don't think there's much chance at any major moves right now. Maybe at the deadline next year, or more likely at the 2015 draft. Of course by then, depending on how the kids are looking, we might not need any moves.



#37 kipwinger

kipwinger

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,552 posts
  • Location:Mt. Pleasant, MI

Posted 28 April 2014 - 11:33 AM

Ask the predators how this worked for them...

 

I think you need to put up goals and have a decent D - and a good goalie to make saves. 

 

While you're at it, ask the Capitals how great forwards and average defense works out.  If you want to go to extremes then any position is absurd. 

 

I voted for defense first, but the truth is, there's no exact recipe for success.  I would, however, venture to guess that every Cup winner in recent memory was pretty good at both (even L.A.'s offense picked it up in the playoffs). 


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."

 

 


#38 frankgrimes

frankgrimes

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,737 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 04:56 PM

Man just read a few other forums from eliminated teams, if people here think we are overreacting holy cow the Blues fans are absolutely furious and losing it some are even putting guys like Backes on the table.

 

Having said that if Army panicks and Shattenkirk will be made available Holland has to be in on this deal I'd offer Tatar + Almquist + 2nd rounder. The guy is young and would fix our defense immedeiately.


kftx.jpg

 

The Offseason of truth ...

Welcome to hockeytown Jonas aka Lundquist 2 Gustavsson!

blank cheque for The Captain or Jim Star Nil please..


#39 DeGraa55

DeGraa55

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,464 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 06:44 PM

Man just read a few other forums from eliminated teams, if people here think we are overreacting holy cow the Blues fans are absolutely furious and losing it some are even putting guys like Backes on the table.
 
Having said that if Army panicks and Shattenkirk will be made available Holland has to be in on this deal I'd offer Tatar + Almquist + 2nd rounder. The guy is young and would fix our defense immedeiately.


Blues did have one if the best teams though. But their collapses began with what ten games Togo in season?

Whereas us? We were going to far no surprise at all we lost.

#40 nawein

nawein

    4th Line Grinder

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 318 posts

Posted 28 April 2014 - 09:09 PM

Man just read a few other forums from eliminated teams, if people here think we are overreacting holy cow the Blues fans are absolutely furious and losing it some are even putting guys like Backes on the table.
 
Having said that if Army panicks and Shattenkirk will be made available Holland has to be in on this deal I'd offer Tatar + Almquist + 2nd rounder. The guy is young and would fix our defense immedeiately.


Offering Tatar, Almquist and a 2nd for Shattenkirk would almost ensure that St Louis never answers a phone call from you again. I agree with the sentiment though, Shattenkirk would make us a much better team.





Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users