• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
nyqvististhefuture

Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Define "pick" in both cases.

Also, not sure where Jagr would slot in. He demands PP and top six minutes.

@TGfireandice: Jagr stated more than once today that teams interested in him should know he'd be willing to play a reduced role.

@TGfireandice: The other interesting thing Jagr said today is he plans to play in the NHL next season and would go on a camp tryout if neccessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say "I know, I know, stats..." because you like to continue to point out his 9 points in 47 games... What about all those advanced stats that newfy mentioned? No comment on any of that?

Jesus Christ...since you two brought it up

Corsi stats (5 on 5)...

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/ratings.php?disp=1&db=201415&sit=5v5&pos=defense&minutes=50&teamid=11&type=individual&sort=icorsi&sortdir=DESC

Fenwick (5 on 5)...

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/ratings.php?disp=1&db=201415&sit=5v5&pos=defense&minutes=50&teamid=11&type=individual&sort=ifenwick&sortdir=DESC

Offensive Zone Starts (5 on 5) : http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=1560

Ericsson: 31%

Kronwall: 32%

Dekeyser 32%

Quincey: 34%

Smith: 40%

Note: On the zone starts, you have to follow the link and then look up each player individually since they don't have them all in the same spot.

Fancy enough for you, or no? Let me guess, you guys were probably talking about some other fancy stats or something right?

How much more absurd does this need to get?

Brendan Smith is NOT a top defenseman on this team. Get over it.

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would you guys think of Kenny if he got Franson for a pick and prospect, then acquired Jagr for a pick? Do you think that would help us up front? Guess the playoff experience and leadership from Jagr couldn't hurt for a run at it, would it?

No to Jagr I thought the point of this retool/rebuild was to get younger not older ? Wings need help on defense but according to BM the price for Franson is a first + a prospect I wouldn't give that up for a soon to be UFA he would be a pure rental.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for funsies I looked up Brendan's "fancy stats" once you adjust for zone starts (taking away his sheltering), and it's not pretty. Here's a taste...

Zone start adjusted Corsi and Fenwick:

Ericsson...57 and 84 respectively.

Quincey...62 and 110 respectively.

Smith...39 and 64 respectively.

Ouch. Looks like "fancy stats" won't be your refuge after all.

Sooo should I keep going with this or did you guys want to just eat your crow now?

Note: As with the zone starts, you've got to follow the link and look up each player respectively. Have fun.

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/players.php

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, Ok, that was a emotional blurp there...wait to see if Jimmy can win that series orbetter yet, take us deep (ewww) this spring...then come draft day, BAM! Howard for Bogo/Stewart/1st.

Yes, I am in dream land, but if Jimmy pukes again in the playoffs...off with his head! (contract)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for funsies I looked up Brendan's "fancy stats" once you adjust for zone starts (taking away his sheltering), and it's not pretty. Here's a taste...

Zone start adjusted Corsi and Fenwick:

Ericsson...57 and 84 respectively.

Quincey...62 and 110 respectively.

Smith...39 and 64 respectively.

Ouch. Looks like "fancy stats" won't be your refuge after all.

Sooo should I keep going with this or did you guys want to just eat your crow now?

Note: As with the zone starts, you've got to follow the link and look up each player respectively. Have fun.

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/players.php

After spending the last hour looking at advanced stats, I believe it can easily be argued that Kindl is a much better D-man than Smith. Corsi numbers anyway. I'd need another hour for Fenwick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would totally take Jagr for a draft pick; Detroit has such a traffic jam in the minors that no one drafted now is probably playing in the NHL for at least 5 years unless they're a once in a generation super star

Edited by hockeybrianboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evaluating Brendan Smith

Smith's a good defenseman. You can make a case against him, but you can also make a case for him. At the end of the day, I don't know why we have to fight about him. Is he getting paid like a first-pairing defenseman? Is he singlehandedly costing us games? Most of the time I barely notice him, which is probably a good thing. He definitely frustrates me at times, because he's clearly a really toolsy player and it feels like he should be more effective than he is. But it's not like he's dragging this team down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure it's even a big deal, but apparently Franson and Lupul aren't practicing right now. Wasn't Franson rumored to be injured this past week?

https://twitter.com/jonastsn1050/status/565548332354125824

Either way, looking at the BUF-WPG deal right now, I'm glad Detroit escaped the whole Myers thing. What an insane deal, if it all comes together.

Looks like franson does have a minor injury....

"@DarrenDreger: It's believed Cody Franson has a minor hip problem. It's not believed to be serious. Clarkson also expected to draw back vs Isles."

Probly keeping him out as a precaution so they don't risk not being able to trade him due to injury imo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evaluating Brendan Smith

Smith's a good defenseman. You can make a case against him, but you can also make a case for him. At the end of the day, I don't know why we have to fight about him. Is he getting paid like a first-pairing defenseman? Is he singlehandedly costing us games? Most of the time I barely notice him, which is probably a good thing. He definitely frustrates me at times, because he's clearly a really toolsy player and it feels like he should be more effective than he is. But it's not like he's dragging this team down.

1. Nobody said he was getting paid like a first pair guy. Nobody said he was single handedly costing us games. Nobody said he's dragging us down. I said he was a third pairing defenseman with upside. Someone else said he was better than two of our top four defenseman. The evidence doesn't back that up.

2. Ok I'll bite. What's the case for him being good?

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kip, I'll be the first to admit I know very little about any of these new fancy stats like corsi and fenwick. I have no idea what those numbers you provided signify nor do I really care to be honest. Stats are fun, but I prefer to go by the old fashion eyeball test... I was just agreeing with what newfy said, assuming he didn't just make up those stats... Are you saying what he said, is false information or was Smith's fancy stats just that much better last year than this year? That I would have a very difficult time believing considering how much he has improved over the past year...

I haven't strayed from my original argument, and that is that Smith has proven to be a very capable top 4 defenseman when given the opportunity. Do you have any fancy stats to disprove that, or are you willing to admit that he looked very good when paired with Kronwall and DeKeyser in the past. That is and has been my main point, the same point that you have avoided responding to since this whole thing started.

Anyway, I do agree that this Smith debate is getting to be too much and I also agree that there isn't much point in it. I believe he is a top 4 defenseman, you don't. Who cares? I never once said he was a superstar, but he is underrated and underappreciated by a lot of fans in my opinion. Much like Ericsson was before he turned his game around. I'm fully confident that Smith will have the same turnaround, and will prove many of the naysayers wrong...

Smith with a two point night against the Pens tonight... ;):lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of Jagr...

How do we feel about our forward corps? Don't get me wrong - I like it. Hell, I love it. But does it match up well against, say, the Bolts' group? (Stamkos, Callahan, Filppula, Johnson, Kucherov, Palat, Killorn, Drouin, Boyle, lately Paquette..) Should we be "a little more than a little" concerned that scoring - or, more specifically, a lack thereof - has been our undoing for three straight postseasons? Price, Lundqvist, Rask, Holtby, Fleury, Bishop - there are some great goalies in the East. Do we have a crew that can crack them when goals are especially hard to come by and the checking gets super-tight? The hope, of course, is that a scoring defenseman like Franson could be The Difference. But would it really be enough? We have four lethal scorers up front, but two of them are on the wrong side of 30 and the other two were invisible in the playoffs last year.

If there's one thing I've learned in my 20+ years as a Wings fan, it's that the formula for success is, generally, "Your team (which you think is "good enough") + at least one huge additional piece." Fortune favors the over-prepared, the overly deep teams.

What I'm saying is, ideally, I'd like for us to add a Cody Franson and a good winger. Franzen's status complicates things, but if it's looking like he's done for the rest of the regular season, that might be added motivation to go out and get a big-bodied winger. I like Jagr. I like Alex Chiasson. (Would the Sens like Smith and a pick/prospect?) I like Tom Wilson, for what he is. (Would the Sens like Weiss? They need a top-nine centerman.) I actually kinda like Zack Kassian, who grew up a Wings fan and who I think is just not a good fit in Vancouver. Wayne Simmonds, like Kassian, grew up a Wings fan and is one of the premier power forwards in the league. He's one of the Flyers' better and more popular players, but they really need help on the back end, and we happen to have a logjam on our back end. Chris Stewart (I know, I know) might only cost a third-round pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kip, I'll be the first to admit I know very little about any of these new fancy stats like corsi and fenwick. I have no idea what those numbers you provided signify nor do I really care to be honest. Stats are fun, but I prefer to go by the old fashion eyeball test... I was just agreeing with what newfy said, assuming he didn't just make up those stats... Are you saying what he said, is false information or was Smith's fancy stats just that much better last year than this year? That I would have a very difficult time believing considering how much he has improved over the past year...

I haven't strayed from my original argument, and that is that Smith has proven to be a very capable top 4 defenseman when given the opportunity. Do you have any fancy stats to disprove that, or are you willing to admit that he looked very good when paired with Kronwall and DeKeyser in the past. That is and has been my main point, the same point that you have avoided responding to since this whole thing started.

Anyway, I do agree that this Smith debate is getting to be too much and I also agree that there isn't much point in it. I believe he is a top 4 defenseman, you don't. Who cares? I never once said he was a superstar, but he is underrated and underappreciated by a lot of fans in my opinion. Much like Ericsson was before he turned his game around. I'm fully confident that Smith will have the same turnaround, and will prove many of the naysayers wrong...

Smith with a two point night against the Pens tonight... ;):lol:

That wasn't your original argument. You're changing your tune. You said he was better than Ericsson AND Quincey. He's not. At all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Nobody said he was getting paid like a first pair guy. Nobody said he was single handedly costing us games. Nobody said he's dragging us down. I said he was a third pairing defenseman with upside. Someone else said he was better than two of our top four defenseman. The evidence doesn't back that up.

2. Ok I'll bite. What's the case for him being good?

I'm not saying you're saying those things. I'm saying I don't get why we're fighting about this guy. You're puffing your chest and telling people to eat crow because you spent five minutes looking at some numbers which you may or may not fully understand. If I didn't know better, I'd think we were talking about Brett Lebda.

Read the page I linked. It's from last season, but it makes a pretty good case. Smith makes boneheaded mistakes and he doesn't put up points (though, he doesn't see time on the PP). But if given the choice between Kronwall-Ericsson and Kronwall-Smith as our first pairing, I'd pick the latter. Smith moves the puck well. He's shown he can be a solid possession player. He has virtually all the tools you could want in a quality NHL defenseman. He just hasn't quite put it all together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not "changing my tune" at all actually. I stand by that statement. And as much as you believe that stats alone can prove that my opinion is "wrong", there's no way to prove that he isn't better than either of those players, unless he gets put back in the situation where he is paired with one of Kronwall or DeKeyser. And once again, you avoid my main and only question... Smith was a much much better looking player while paired with either of those players, was he not? Both Ericsson and Quincey have an identical 3 goals and 10 assists, while Smith has 3 goals and 6 assists... Do you honestly believe that there is no way Smith would have an extra 4 measly assists if he were on the 1st or 2nd pair in either of their spots? Or that either of them would have 4 less assists if they were playing on the 3rd pairing, playing with scrubs? Give me a ******* break Kip...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying you're saying those things. I'm saying I don't get why we're fighting about this guy. You're puffing your chest and telling people to eat crow because you spent five minutes looking at some numbers which you may or may not fully understand. If I didn't know better, I'd think we were talking about Brett Lebda.

Read the page I linked. It's from last season, but it makes a pretty good case. Smith makes boneheaded mistakes and he doesn't put up points (though, he doesn't see time on the PP). But if given the choice between Kronwall-Ericsson and Kronwall-Smith as our first pairing, I'd pick the latter. Smith moves the puck well. He's shown he can be a solid possession player. He has virtually all the tools you could want in a quality NHL defenseman. He just hasn't quite put it all together.

First of all, I understand analytics just fine. Don't be insulting just because you're frustrated. You've never, EVER, heard me make a case by relying on "the eyeball test". Wanna know why? Because I understand stats.

Secondly, your proof that he's "good" is a link to older, less relevant, stats from a season in which our other defensemen were decimated by injury? Stats that are not at all consistent with the seasons before or after them? If I was the kind of guy who understand stats (and what do you know, I am) I'd say that those are probably an outlier.

Third, your "preference" doesn't matter at all when trying to objectively make a case for a guy. So far Brendan Smith is EXACTLY where he should be. Which is fifth on our depth chart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not "changing my tune" at all actually. I stand by that statement. And as much as you believe that stats alone can prove that my opinion is "wrong", there's no way to prove that he isn't better than either of those players, unless he gets put back in the situation where he is paired with one of Kronwall or DeKeyser. And once again, you avoid my main and only question... Smith was a much much better looking player while paired with either of those players, was he not? Both Ericsson and Quincey have an identical 3 goals and 10 assists, while Smith has 3 goals and 6 assists... Do you honestly believe that there is no way Smith would have an extra 4 measly assists if he were on the 1st or 2nd pair in either of their spots? Or that either of them would have 4 less assists if they were playing on the 3rd pairing, playing with scrubs? Give me af****** break Kip...

No I don't. Nothing in his career suggests otherwise, including his "super good" season last year where he put up...wait for it...nearly identical production (with more minutes) than he's putting up this year (with less). And, if the EVIDENCE I've provided over and over and over to discredit your asinine opinion are any indication, if he was forced to start in the defensive zone as much as those guys he'd almost certainly score MUCH LESS.

Of course, I came to that conclusion using fancy stats that you admittedly don't understand. Clearly not as good a way to draw conclusions as the reliable old eyeball test.

My "eyeball test" has determined Franzen is amazing beast goal scorer

My eyeball tests tells me that Luke Glendening is on the cusp of a offensive breakout.

WOO HOO! It's an opinion. It can't be baseless or inaccurate...cuz it's subjective!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I don't. Nothing in his career suggests otherwise, including his "super good" season last year where he put up...wait for it...nearly identical production (with more minutes) than he's putting up this year (with less). And, if the EVIDENCE I've provided over and over and over to discredit your asinine opinion are any indication, if he was forced to start in the defensive zone as much as those guys he'd almost certainly score MUCH LESS.

Of course, I came to that conclusion using fancy stats that you admittedly don't understand. Clearly not as good a way to draw conclusions as the reliable old eyeball test.

My eyeball tests tells me that Luke Glendening is on the cusp of a offensive breakout.

WOO HOO! It's an opinion. It can't be baseless or inaccurate...cuz it's subjective!

Nah man the word test makes it official. FACTS

Unfortunately most of my eye-ball tests have determined I need to wear glasses while I drive :(

Edited by number9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardy Harr Harr, the old eye ball test. Hilarious. Fact is, you can see things you would never see on any stat sheet just by watching the games. What a concept... I would trust the eye ball test over any amount of stats you can throw at me any day...

If you truly believed Glendening was on the cusp of an offensive breakout, I wouldn't say that you are "WRONG" and try to do everything I could to "prove" that you were wrong... I could care less if you agree with me, but you always have to be "right"... It's quite funny actually.

There is no one in their right mind that would say that there is no way that Smith would have as many or more points than either Ericsson or Quincey if he were in their situations... He absolutely would. He played great, much better than Ericsson and Quincey while being paired with Kronwall and DeKeyser. So why the hell would you think that he wouldn't keep up that same great play over time?

I'm not sure if you caught that first period or if you're waiting to review the stat sheet after the game, but despite the entire team playing like s***, Smith was one of the better defenders in that period, along with DeKeyser. Ericsson got corkscrewed into the ice a couple times and Quincey made a great drop pass to Malkin in the defensive zone. If that were Smith making those plays, he would be crucified...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this