gdt 10/15 GDT : Bruins 3 at Red Wings 2 (SO)

[Mckinley25 678]

Did I say that Babs was a "terrible coach" or an "awful coach" because he screwed the pooch on the shootout last night? I don't remember that. I did say he made an awful decision which cost us a point. He's a good coach, he was just stupid last night.

Here's another reason why. His best statistical shootout performers on the team (last night) are Tatar, Zetterberg, and Franzen. Tatar's probably the best of the bunch (or was last year). Now, even if he was slated to shoot last (as some have speculated) it's still a bad decision by Babcock because there's a 100% chance your first and second shooters will get to shoot. There a less than 100% chance your third shooter will get to shoot. By putting your best shooter (from a year ago) in the third spot you're reducing the likelihood he can contribute in a positive way. There's a reason Datyuk ALWAYS shoots first and not third...they don't want to take the stick out of his hands (so to speak). So even IF you're going to experiment with a rookie third liner in the shootout (which you shouldn't if you've got better choices)...you should have him shoot third, not first.

Why is what I'm saying sof****** controversial? Oh, because I'm criticizing Babcock, that's why.

I never claimed you said those things. I was pointing out my original comments that started this tangent were in response to others making what amounted to those claims. I felt that your response was artificially injected with implications of unwarranted defense of Babcock when I was only pointing out his decision may have been based on other information. As you aptly brought up, he has good reasons for using Datsyuk first normally, so he's clearly not an imbecile, maybe he knows something about Nestrail we don't. He may have been wrong or he may have been right and it just didn't work out in his favor but I wasnt defending Babcock just because he's "Babcock"

[kipwinger 8,524]

So in the preseason goalies don't try to stop the puck?

Preseason play definitely has consequences on who's going to used where and how. It's why Weiss and Cleary are sitting (unless Weiss is secretly injured), and I think it's why Nyquist didn't start on the first line. One of the main reasons there is a preseason is so Coaches can judge players against NHL competition. The fact that Nestrasil scored against Rask in the preseason is a legitimate consideration.

The thing that bothers me most about this is the fact that people are acting like we clearly had multiple superior options. Jurco was 0 for 2 last year, Zetterberg was 0 for 4, Franzen 0 for 2, Nyquist was 0 for 3.

The only players out there last night who scored last year was Tatar (3 for 9) and Helm (1 for 2). Tatar might very well have been the 3rd shooter. We don't know, but I feel that it would be a safe guess.

It really doesn't seem to be that outrageous a choice to put Nestrasil out there when so many of our players have shown that they can't score and Nestrasil scored on the same goalie in a shootout not very long ago.

I didn't realize that Weiss had played so much worse than the 90% of the rest of the team who didn't score in the preseason.

Also, unless Franzen and Zetterberg have never scored shootout goals in their careers (which they have) they're still better choices than a kid who hasn't. Turns out, while they're not spectacular at shootouts, both of those guys have scored shootout goals in the NHL and are more skilled finishers than a checking line rookie.

Finally, as I've said already, using your best shooter (in this case Tatar) third is a mathematically stupid decision. If he shoots first or second he has a 100% chance of getting to take a shot and score. If he goes third there's a chance he doesn't hit the ice. Since he's your best chance at scoring, you probably want to make sure he gets on the ice. Again, there's a reason Datsyuk ALWAYS shoots first and never third. Because he's our best chance at scoring a shootout goal. So even if Tatar was slotted to go third, it's a bad decision by Babcock.

[Mckinley25 678]

It's also not like your standing for virtue here. All of us have seen post after post after post of unfounded criticisms of Holland and I don't see you saying "it's easy to criticize in hindsight" or "you don't know what happens behind the scenes". I've literally seen people on here explicitly speculate on whether Holland is a drunk, has dementia, or has vaguely "lost it" without ever such an ardent defense as you're giving Babs right now despite his decision being mathematically (using statistical probability) bad BEFORE he made it.

I think you're responding to Harold but I do defend Holland when people say those things and point out there's more to it. I think it's a valid discussion point, certainly more valid than claiming Holland is an idiot.

[kipwinger 8,524]

The best statistical shooters on the team last year were Eaves , Helm, and Tatar. Eaves isn't on the team anymore. Helm converted on 1 of 2 attempts for 50% total. Tatar converted on 33% for third best on the team. Not very good odds.

Zetterberg was 0 for 4, which means last year he was not among the best shootout players on the team. He was tied for the worst. Franzen was also tied for the worst with a total of 0 shootout goals.

So I'm not surprised to see Nestrasil get the nod over Zetterberg and Franzen. Statistically speaking there's literally no way he could perform any worse than what we've come to expect of them. When your team is as bad as the Wings have been in the recent past in shootout attempts, it's not that difficult to crack the top 3 as a new face from the AHL.

I'm surprised that Nyqvist got the nod over Tatar in the shootout, though, but maybe Babs was trying to ride a hot hand through the shootout.

You're literally saying we couldn't expect better from Z or Franzen because they weren't good in the shootout one year ago? That's not how probability works. You know that right?

That's last year. Are you suggesting that Franzen and Zetterberg are somehow worse options on the shootout because they didn't do great last year? What about all the shootout goals they scored prior to last year? Do those not count?

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

I never said you couldn't criticize Babcock. The issue I had with your criticism is you asserted that Babcock made the decision simply because if he liked nestrasil. That's absurd. As to your points about Nestrasil's inexperience or there being better guys to put out there, I think it's easier in hindsight but I can understand that point of view. Agree with the decision or not, Babcock is not an idiot. I have no problem with criticizing him. It's just when people attribute his decisions to mostly emotional reasons they could only know if they were Mike Babcock. It's probably best we drop it. I don't know if it's your dislike of Babcock or of me but for whatever reason when we discuss him you seem to get more and more pissed off. I think I'm beating a dead horse at this point.I don't dislike you, I do however dislike your knee jerk defense of the guy. I've given quite a lot of reasons why I think it was a bad move. You responded to none of them, yet still defended Babs. Your response seems to be "it's easy to say that in hindsight" and "you don't know what he's thinking". That pisses me off a bit because there's nothing in there about why it was a good idea, only a generic defense of him. At least those saying "Nestrasil scored on Rask" in the preseason have provided a reason. I don't think it holds up, but it's a reason. You don't even provide that when you come to his defense.

The reason I first saw from you was that it was because he liked Nestrasil. As I've stated since, I can understand your other reasons. As for the hindsight, mostly what I mean is it's the nature of making a call like that. If Nestrasil scores there then Babcock looks like a genius, which is too much praise for that one event. I've tried to make clear that I'm not even really defending his choice. I'm just saying he didn't do it because of his fondness for Nestrasil, which to me is not a hugely controversial statement.

It's also not like your standing for virtue here. All of us have seen post after post after post of unfounded criticisms of Holland and I don't see you saying "it's easy to criticize in hindsight" or "you don't know what happens behind the scenes". I've literally seen people on here explicitly speculate on whether Holland is a drunk, has dementia, or has vaguely "lost it" without ever such an ardent defense as you're giving Babs right now despite his decision being mathematically (using statistical probability) bad BEFORE he made it.

I'm not sure what this has to do with Holland but in cases where people say he's drunk or has dementia, it's not even worth responding to. You may feel like this is bad news for you, but I respect your hockey opinion and the points you make so I'm more likely to engage you in discussion than someone who just rants "Holland is drunk."But your even being in up Holland makes me think there's some baggage coming to this argument that has nothing to do with Nestrasil. Either way I've more than beaten this dead horse. Especially considering I hate the shoot out, I'm not sure why I'm arguing some point about it for so long.Probably to avoid work. :pEdit: I'm posting from my phone. Do my posts really look like one long sentence with no line breaks??

[kipwinger 8,524]

The reason I first saw from you was that it was because he liked Nestrasil. As I've stated since, I can understand your other reasons. As for the hindsight, mostly what I mean is it's the nature of making a call like that. If Nestrasil scores there then Babcock looks like a genius, which is too much praise for that one event. I've tried to make clear that I'm not even really defending his choice. I'm just saying he didn't do it because of his fondness for Nestrasil, which to me is not a hugely controversial statement.

You're speculating just as much as I am by saying that. There's at least some, admittedly circumstantial, evidence that Babcock totally makes decisions based on his fondness for players. He's certainly made lots of otherwise questionable decisions which can't be supported by stats, or prior successes. I've listed a bunch of them above. So while I can't verify with certainty that he did it because he likes the kid, you can't discount it either. He played Cleary for 53 games last year despite his contributing nothing and being a liability on every shift. Did that have some unforseen logic to it as well or did he do it because he's a softie for hard working, blue collar, types? I don't know. Neither do you. But you shouldn't be so surprised when decisions like that make me think he plays favorites.

I suppose what it comes down to is you don't think Babs makes important decisions based on gut feelings. I do.

Edited October 16, 2014 by kipwinger

[Guest Praying Mantha]

Arguing who Babcock selects in the shootout is pure moot so long as the first pick he makes is to leave Howard in net. He can't stop a beach ball one on one, so what does it matter? The first thing that should happen in our shootouts is the backup goalie relieving Howard. Jimmy got us that point yesterday when we didn't deserve it. But he also gave us zero chance at the 2nd point.

[rrasco 1,312]

Edit: I'm posting from my phone. Do my posts really look like one long sentence with no line breaks??

No, they wrap fine from my side.

[Echolalia 2,961]

You're literally saying we couldn't expect better from Z or Franzen because they weren't good in the shootout one year ago? That's not how probability works. You know that right?

That's last year. Are you suggesting that Franzen and Zetterberg are somehow worse options on the shootout because they didn't do great last year? What about all the shootout goals they scored prior to last year? Do those not count?

I'm suggesting that Zetterberg and Franzen have both proven themselves to be unreliable in the shootout. Sure we can look back four years ago when Z occasionally put one in, and if you take value in what he did four years ago then by all means put him into your shootout rotation. You could play Cleary in the top six, too, because, you know, he was pretty good four years ago.

[rrasco 1,312]

Arguing who Babcock selects in the shootout is pure moot so long as the first pick he makes is to leave Howard in net. He can't stop a beach ball one on one, so what does it matter? The first thing that should happen in our shootouts is the backup goalie relieving Howard. Jimmy got us that point yesterday when we didn't deserve it. But he also gave us zero chance at the 2nd point.

Well, he gave us a chance all game, but I understand what you were trying to say.

[Guest Praying Mantha]

Well, he gave us a chance all game, but I understand what you were trying to say.

Yah, let me correct - zero chance at the 2nd point in the shootout. That 3rd period was awesome from Jimmy.

[kipwinger 8,524]

I'm suggesting that Zetterberg and Franzen have both proven themselves to be unreliable in the shootout. Sure we can look back four years ago when Z occasionally put one in, and if you take value in what he did four years ago then by all means put him into your shootout rotation. You could play Cleary in the top six, too, because, you know, he was pretty good four years ago.

Lol. I must be confused. It seems like you're saying that trends over time don't matter as much when drawing conclusions. And that the most reliable information, with which to form expectations, is the most recent information.

But if that's true than we can reasonably expect Zetterberg to produce over a point per game, Weiss to only produce 8 pts. total, Gustavsson to play better than Jimmy, and Darren Helm to shoot two percentage points higher than the league average. I'll admit those things are theoretically possible, but I'd also wager on every single one of them.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

I suppose what it comes down to is you don't think Babs makes important decisions based on gut feelings. I do.

I absolutely think he makes important decisions based on gut feelings, but it sounds like we have different definitions of what that means.

I think whether Babcock likes a player or not has little to do with how they're utilized. Based on his reputation and what we do know about his coaching style I bet he'd give a player he hated all the opportunities in the world if he liked how that guy played on the ice and thought it gave the team a better chance to win.

He admitted his not putting nyquist out there last night was stupid. That must be some consolation.

[Echolalia 2,961]

Lol. I must be confused. It seems like you're saying that trends over time don't matter as much when drawing conclusions. And that the most reliable information, with which to form expectations, is the most recent information.

But if that's true than we can reasonably expect Zetterberg to produce over a point per game, Weiss to only produce 8 pts. total, Gustavsson to play better than Jimmy, and Darren Helm to shoot two percentage points higher than the league average. I'll admit those things are theoretically possible, but I'd also wager on every single one of them.

Judging by your response, and apparent desire to completely ignore any extenuating circumstances with regard to the examples you provided, yes, I'd agree that you're terribly confused.

Anyway, if you're really insisting on relying on this as your defense, it makes playing Dan Cleary in your top six even more of a smart idea on your part.

[kipwinger 8,524]

Judging by your response, and apparent desire to completely ignore any extenuating circumstances with regard to the examples you provided, yes, I'd agree that you're terribly confused.

Anyway, if you're really insisting on relying on this as your defense, it makes playing Dan Cleary in your top six even more of a smart idea on your part.

Yep, I would totally play Cleary in the top six. Because that's exactly the same thing as using Franzen or Zetterberg in the shootout before Nestrasil. Exactly. You win, I lose. I guess I better go pick up Dan Cleary on my fantasy hockey team now.

[kipwinger 8,524]

Lol. Well at least SOMEONE else thinks that Mike Babcock does dumb s*** that costs us points sometimes.

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2014/10/not_having_gustav_nyquist_on_i.html

[Echolalia 2,961]

Yep, I would totally play Cleary in the top six. Because that's exactly the same thing as using Franzen or Zetterberg in the shootout before Nestrasil. Exactly. You win, I lose. I guess I better go pick up Dan Cleary on my fantasy hockey team now.

I'm glad you're finally seeing reason, and realized the lunacy of your argument

[kipwinger 8,524]

I absolutely think he makes important decisions based on gut feelings, but it sounds like we have different definitions of what that means. I think whether Babcock likes a player or not has little to do with how they're utilized. Based on his reputation and what we do know about his coaching style I bet he'd give a player he hated all the opportunities in the world if he liked how that guy played on the ice and thought it gave the team a better chance to win. He admitted his not putting nyquist out there last night was stupid. That must be some consolation.

It's immensely satisfying to know that Babs will admit to doing "dumb" things, which are counter intuitive, even though he discussed not doing them before making the decision, and ultimately regretting it. It gives me a huge amount of ammunition the next time I say Babs did something dumb, and that he should know better, and that it cost us, and that he didn't have a valid reason for doing it.

Actually, I think I'm going to put the best parts of that quote in my signature line so that I don't forget.

[Wheelchairsuperhero 1,453]

I don't dislike you, I do however dislike your knee jerk defense of the guy. I've given quite a lot of reasons why I think it was a bad move. You responded to none of them, yet still defended Babs. Your response seems to be "it's easy to say that in hindsight" and "you don't know what he's thinking". That pisses me off a bit because there's nothing in there about why it was a good idea, only a generic defense of him. At least those saying "Nestrasil scored on Rask" in the preseason have provided a reason. I don't think it holds up, but it's a reason. You don't even provide that when you come to his defense.

I question a lot of things Babcock does, particularly last night. Hell I thought going with Nyquist was dumb. But a scouting report on Nestrasil mentions that he's got good moves 1 on 1 and in the shootout as one of his strengths, not to mention he scored a shootout goal in the preseason. We struggled mightily in the shootout last year and I for one was pretty happy for him to give Nestrasil a shot. Maybe not first, and I would've rather Tatar went second, but I don't think it was as stupid as you say except in hindsight.

I haven't read all the posts hear so if I just repeated someone sorry about that.

[joesuffP 1,746]

I think our 4th line has been good but you can't let them eat up all those minutes. Nyquist just has a knack for big goals in crucial situations even when he may not be having the best game. Ridiculous to not have him on the ice to finish the game and I think he only had 1 OT shift. Glad Babs admitted it and hopefully learns you have to leave the goose loose sometimes

Our guys should be simplifying there shots in the shootout. You have to make the goalie make a save. Howard looks rattled on 1 on 1's he should be more aggressive. It looks all mental to me

[WingFanInLA 9]

I think our 4th line has been good but you can't let them eat up all those minutes. Nyquist just has a knack for big goals in crucial situations even when he may not be having the best game. Ridiculous to not have him on the ice to finish the game and I think he only had 1 OT shift. Glad Babs admitted it and hopefully learns you have to leave the goose loose sometimes

Our guys should be simplifying there shots in the shootout. You have to make the goalie make a save. Howard looks rattled on 1 on 1's he should be more aggressive. It looks all mental to me

Babs loves him some 4th liners. Most ice time by the forwards goes Hank, Floater, Glendenning. Sorry but that is just stupid.

And to be fair, LFG probably was playing the best out of those three. Babs doesn't seem to want to ride the hot hand. I'd be double shifting Nyquist not demoting him from the first line. I'd also try to get more ice time for Tatar.

Edited October 17, 2014 by WingFanInLA