Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

[kipwinger 8,524]

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.

Wings were scouting Toronto last night. Just sayin'.

[Dabura 12,207]

Mike Babcock does not believe Brendan Smith is a top four defenseman. If he was, he would be.

Not sure I believe that. I think Babcock is just majorly against splitting up Kronwall-Ericsson and he wants a clockwork shutdown pairing, which he's found in DeKeyser-Quincey.

[kipwinger 8,524]

Not sure I believe that. I think Babcock is just majorly against splitting up Kronwall-Ericsson and he wants a clockwork shutdown pairing, which he's found in DeKeyser-Quincey.

Smith is worse than Quincey AND Dekeyser in every single statistical category. He's simply not better than they are. I suppose you can try to make the argument that he's currently better than Ericsson, however probably not given Ericsson's role on that pair. There are currently four better defensemen for our team's system. No knock on Smith, he's looked better with Marchenko and that pair has made some things happen lately. But this tired old "Smith's really super good, but the stars are just aligned to keep him on the third pair" crap is lame. He's been given every opportunity to grab on to a top four spot. He didn't win it. Oh well.

[Dabura 12,207]

Watching Hockey Central @ Noon. Kypreos and MacLean always kill me. Guest Tim Campbell makes a good point about Kane: he's not a playmaker, he doesn't have especially good vision, he needs to have the puck on his stick and he needs to be looking and thinking and playing in straight lines. If I've had concerns about Kane (in terms of him maybe becoming a Wing), those are the concerns, and they're not minor ones. Kypreos responds with the standard "YEAH BUT HE CAN HIT AND FIGHT AND HEART AND GRIT AND HEART" business. (Can you tell Kypreos wasn't a high-end player?) And then MacLean wants to know if this move makes sense for Buffalo, because it hurts them in the short term. I just....ugh. These are the people who keep the rumor mill going. These are the people who said this would be the year the Wings finally miss the playoffs.

[krsmith17 7,191]

Kip, I've never said that Smith is in any way, shape or form, better than DeKeyser. I've actually stated numerous times that DeKeyser is the better defenseman right now. You're right, I don't believe that it's technically a third pairing if all three lines are getting between 18-22 minutes a night. Make DeKeyser and Quincey your second pair and Smith and Franson your third pair if it really makes you happy. Hell, I even said, rearrange them if you see fit, but it comes down to balance and chemistry for me, and keeping our two most steady pairs together makes the most sense in my opinion. If we had 6 of those players, plus any of our defense prospects (including Marchenko), that would be our top 6, Marchenko would be our number 7 at best. There is a TON of benefit in acquiring a top 4 defenseman and demoting one of your second pair guys... it's called depth and that would be one hell of a deep blue line in my opinion. Again, I am not saying that Smith is better than DeKeyser, so stop with that bulls***...

Marchenko is not THAT good. He is a reliable third pairing minute muncher, and I think that's where he maxes out in the NHL. Whether you like to admit it or not, Smith has looked better because he is paired with a right handed defenseman who can get him the puck quicker, giving him more time to make a play, not because Marchenko is awesome... Ouellet is a good defenseman, but no I don't ever see him being better than Smith. They are both still improving their game but I think Smith's ceiling is much higher.

LOL if Smith should have been flipping burgers after his first 21(25) games, Ouellet should be scraping the gum off the bottoms of all the chairs in that same burger joint... Ouellet has 3 points through his first 25 NHL games. Smith had 3 points through his first 5 NHL games and 8 points through his first 25 games... Remember, this is a guy that has been praised by his coach on a regular basis lately, but yeah, let's go back to a quote from a year ago, that's much more fitting... to your argument...

[kipwinger 8,524]

Kip, I've never said that Smith is in any way, shape or form, better than DeKeyser. I've actually stated numerous times that DeKeyser is the better defenseman right now. You're right, I don't believe that it's technically a third pairing if all three lines are getting between 18-22 minutes a night. Make DeKeyser and Quincey your second pair and Smith and Franson your third pair if it really makes you happy. Hell, I even said, rearrange them if you see fit, but it comes down to balance and chemistry for me, and keeping our two most steady pairs together makes the most sense in my opinion. If we had 6 of those players, plus any of our defense prospects (including Marchenko), that would be our top 6, Marchenko would be our number 7 at best. There is a TON of benefit in acquiring a top 4 defenseman and demoting one of your second pair guys... it's called depth and that would be one hell of a deep blue line in my opinion. Again, I am not saying that Smith is better than DeKeyser, so stop with that bulls***...

Marchenko is not THAT good. He is a reliable third pairing minute muncher, and I think that's where he maxes out in the NHL. Whether you like to admit it or not, Smith has looked better because he is paired with a right handed defenseman who can get him the puck quicker, giving him more time to make a play, not because Marchenko is awesome... Ouellet is a good defenseman, but no I don't ever see him being better than Smith. They are both still improving their game but I think Smith's ceiling is much higher.

LOL if Smith should have been flipping burgers after his first 21(25) games, Ouellet should be scraping the gum off the bottoms of all the chairs in that same burger joint... Ouellet has 3 points through his first 25 NHL games. Smith had 3 points through his first 5 NHL games and 8 points through his first 25 games... Remember, this is a guy that has been praised by his coach on a regular basis lately, but yeah, let's go back to a quote from a year ago, that's much more fitting... to your argument...

1. Ken Holland is not going to acquire Cody Franson to play him on the third pair.

2. That's exactly what I said. Smith's game has improved because he's with a righty. I didn't say, or suggest that his game improved because Marchenko is "that" good. The left/righty matchup made the third pair better by improving Smith's game. It did not noticeably change Marchenko's game.

3. We were talking about Smith's past (e.g. his first 21 games). Why would I pick a quote from this week?

[Dabura 12,207]

Wings were scouting Toronto last night. Just sayin'.

We're definitely interested in Franson. I'd be absolutely shocked if we weren't. But I dunno if I can see Holland giving up a 2nd and a prospect for him and then committing $5.5M x 7 years to him. He's a good player. I like him as a Wing, in theory. But, does Babcock play him on the first pairing with Kronwall? Does he even play him on the second pairing (which would mean breaking up the shutdown pairing)? Is he a player Babcock feels he can really trust? Is he good enough on the defensive side of the puck? What if he settles in as a third-pairing guy on this team? Are we so sure that that wouldn't happen?

The Jets' top three is now Byfuglien, Enstrom, Meyers. That...is pretty damn decent.

I forgot about Trouba.

Wow.

Edited February 11, 2015 by Dabura

[kipwinger 8,524]

We're definitely interested in Franson. I'd be absolutely shocked if we weren't. But I dunno if I can see Holland giving up a 2nd a prospect and committing $5.5M x 7 years to him. He's a good player. I like him as a Wing, in theory. But, does Babcock play him on the first pairing with Kronwall? Does he even play him on the second pairing (which would mean breaking up the shutdown pairing)? Is he a player Babcock feels he can really trust? Is he good enough on the defensive side of the puck? What if he settles in as a third-pairing guy on this team? Are we so sure that that wouldn't happen?

Babcock is the one who wants the righty. He's the one that consistently emphasizes how important it is. I have no question that Babcock will use him correctly, acquiring Franson (or a guy like him) was Babcock's idea. Holland didn't just come up with this on his own.

[krsmith17 7,191]

I find it hilarious how you pick and choose which points you want to respond to. Just forget about the point I made about Smith being twice as good as Ouellet, statistically, in their first 25 games after you trying to portray the opposite... Ouellet is definitely going to be better than Smith though, no question...

We need more offense from the blue line, Smith can provide that if given the opportunity with the right partner. And no he has not been given every opportunity to succeed. He's been on a short leash and you know that. For good reason? Maybe. But only because I believe Smith will be a better all around player because of Babcock's ways with him. He hasn't been given the green light to free wheel and go all out offense. He was expected to play defense and that's been great for his game. He's finally starting to figure it all out.

I'm sure Holland didn't acquire Legwand to be our 4th line center or Wiess to be our 3rd line winger either, but that's where Babcock has elected to put them. Why? Because Babcock likes balance. He plays his 4th line just as much as his 1st for f***s sake, why would he not be willing to play all three pairings the same?...

So, if you think Smith - Marchenko have been good, and you admit that Smith is better because he is with a righty, and I'm sure you would say that Franson is much much better than Marchenko, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that a Smith - Franson pairing would be really good?...

Umm because, who really gives a s*** what either player has done in the past? It's about where they are right now and where they project to be in a few months / years from now...

[krsmith17 7,191]

Lol Kip, you really don't think Holland has had any interest in bringing in a right handed shooting defenseman? Babcock is the ONLY reason he's after this elusive right handed defender?...

I'm sure Babcock has been harping for one for quite some time now, but Holland has been after one for just as long.

But after Holland acquires any player, it is up to Babcock where he plays that player. And as he has shown time and time again, his line combinations and pairings don't always make the most sense...

Edited February 11, 2015 by krsmith17

[VM1138 1,921]

I'd assumed they were looking to package Kane and Bogosian together. I think I said so here or on SBNation.

Bogosian's bombed pretty hard, and everyone hates Kane, but those are basically the two pieces we're looking for - a premier power forward with serious issues (otherwise, his team wouldn't be trading him) and a right-shot defenseman who can log big minutes. So in that sense it's kind of a bummer. (Not to mention the fact that we get to see Kane five times every season now. Ugh.) But I'm assuming Cheveldayoff would've wanted Nyquist or Tatar.

Bogosian has like 13 points. He's always been way overrated.

[kipwinger 8,524]

I find it hilarious how you pick and choose which points you want to respond to. Just forget about the point I made about Smith being twice as good as Ouellet, statistically, in their first 25 games after you trying to portray the opposite... Ouellet is definitely going to be better than Smith though, no question...

We need more offense from the blue line, Smith can provide that if given the opportunity with the right partner. And no he has not been given every opportunity to succeed. He's been on a short leash and you know that. For good reason? Maybe. But only because I believe Smith will be a better all around player because of Babcock's ways with him. He hasn't been given the green light to free wheel and go all out offense. He was expected to play defense and that's been great for his game. He's finally starting to figure it all out.

I'm sure Holland didn't acquire Legwand to be our 4th line center or Wiess to be our 3rd line winger either, but that's where Babcock has elected to put them. Why? Because Babcock likes balance. He plays his 4th line just as much as his 1st for f***s sake, why would he not be willing to play all three pairings the same?...

I didn't say Ouellet would be better. EVER. I said it would is premature to say after 21 games. Which is totally reasonable. Further, I questioned why you give Smith endless rope after he struggled to begin his career, yet you have already concluded on negatively about Ouellet based on an even smaller sample size.

So, if you think Smith - Marchenko have been good, and you admit that Smith is better because he is with a righty, and I'm sure you would say that Franson is much much better than Marchenko, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that a Smith - Franson pairing would be really good?...

Smith has been better because he's got a righty passing him the puck to make plays. You don't want Franson passing Smith the puck to make plays. You want Franson making plays. He's the better player. Also, Babs never, ever, plays two offensive d-men together unless one of them is a two ways stud (kronwall, lidstrom). Neither Smith nor Franson are that. So why would he put them together? The Smith/Marchenko pair works because its lefty/right AND because Marchenko is stay at home and Smith is a puck mover.

Umm because, who really gives a s*** what either player has done in the past? It's about where they are right now and where they project to be in a few months / years from now...

When comparing a guy who's got 21 games in the NHL, to a guy who's got over 150 games in the NHL, and trying to decide who will "Be Better", who have to compare them at similar points in their respective careers. If you only compare right now, without any context whatsoever, you're off base. You certainly can't conclude that Weiss will DEFINITELY be better than Pulkkinen by comparing them right now. You have to A) project Pulkkinen's career into the future, or B) Look at what Weiss did when he was brand new to the league.

[blgillett 48]

I would love to see us get a right shooting defenseman and a scoring forward but I feel the price will be way to high for Kenny to pull the trigger again this year

[Dabura 12,207]

Smith is worse than Quincey AND Dekeyser in every single statistical category. He's simply not better than they are. I suppose you can try to make the argument that he's currently better than Ericsson, however probably not given Ericsson's role on that pair. There are currently four better defensemen for our team's system. No knock on Smith, he's looked better with Marchenko and that pair has made some things happen lately. But this tired old "Smith's really super good, but the stars are just aligned to keep him on the third pair" crap is lame. He's been given every opportunity to grab on to a top four spot. He didn't win it. Oh well.

I wasn't necessarily defending Smith. You framed this as a discussion about what Babcock thinks of Smith - specifically, that Babcock doesn't believe he's a top-four defenseman.

Smith's a good defenseman. The big mistakes stick out in our minds and we judge him accordingly. He moves the puck well. He drives possession. He doesn't get PP time (make of that what you will), but Babcock isn't afraid to use him in key situations. He's an incredible skater. He's got a mean streak, reminds me of Stuart at times. I think of him as a dynamic two-way defenseman.

Pairing him with Quincey was a mistake, one that we rode for far too long. He should be paired with Kronwall (IMHO), but, again, the top four seems to be set in stone in Babcock's mind.

My one issue with him is actually his work in the o-zone. He doesn't shoot enough (and when he does, it tends to look almost like he's holding back, like he doesn't want to score). He has great offensive instincts, but, for whatever reason, he's struggling to make things happen. He's struggling to generate. He looks like someone whose special spark has been punitively beaten out of him.

I do think he's on increasingly thin ice. At 26, he needs to take that next step that we've been waiting for him to take. Ouellet and Marchenko want his job.

If anything is done - it'll be sometime on, or after July 1st.

Not that I necessarily disagree, but I feel like we say this every year. "He should wait until later." And then when that time comes, "He should wait until later." In the summer, we'll hear about our young players and how we want to see what they show us in training camp and how we'll make some decisions based on that. "There's no rush, no need to make a move in the summer. Might as well wait until the fall."

Edited February 11, 2015 by Dabura

[kipwinger 8,524]

I wasn't necessarily defending Smith. You framed this as a discussion about what Babcock thinks of Smith - specifically, that Babcock doesn't believe he's a top-four defenseman.

If Babcock thought he was a top four defenseman, he would be one. It's not like his way to the top four is being blocked by up and coming studs. If he can't beat out Quincey for a top four spot, he's not a top four defensman. That's my point.

Smith's a good defenseman. The big mistakes stick out in our minds and we judge him accordingly. He moves the puck well. He drives possession. He doesn't get PP time (make of that what you will), but Babcock isn't afraid to use him in key situations. He's an incredible skater. He's got a mean streak, reminds me of Stuart at times. I think of him as a dynamic two-way defenseman.

Two way defenseman? Lol. Don't you have to score to be a two way defenseman? Only Brendan Smith can be a two way defenseman without ever being a scoring threat at any point in his NHL career. This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. The perceptions people have about this guy are insane. He's a third pairing defenseman with offensive upside, NOT a dynamic two way defenseman lol.

Pairing him with Quincey was a mistake, one that we rode for far too long. He should be paired with Kronwall (IMHO), but, again, the top four seems to be set in stone in Babcock's mind.

You have to earn top minutes in Babs' system. He's said it time and time again. It's called accountability. Sure Smith would look better with Kronwall. Pulkkinen would look better with Datsyuk too. So what? You have to earn that right. Brendan hasn't.

My one issue with him is actually his work in the o-zone. He doesn't shoot enough (and when he does, it tends to look almost like he's holding back, like he doesn't want to score). He has great offensive instincts, but, for whatever reason, he's struggling to make things happen. He's struggling to generate. He looks like someone whose special spark has been punitively beaten out of him.

I actually think he's been better offensively since being paired with Marchenko and hope that pair continues to do what it has been. At which point Brendan should, presumably score more, and then I won't have an issue with him.

I do think he's on increasingly thin ice. At 26, he needs to take that next step that we've been waiting for him to take. Ouellet and Marchenko want his job.

Edited February 11, 2015 by kipwinger

[krsmith17 7,191]

I see the potential in Smith that I don't see in Ouellet, simple as that. You don't have to agree with it, and you don't have to like it, but that's what I've seen by watching both players from their days with the Griffins to the Red Wings. Also, Ouellet was more of a well rounded, two-way player, even in his days with Armada in the Q before he was drafted and continued that style in the minors and up in Detroit. Smith on the other hand, was an offensive defenseman right through college and the minors and was forced to refine his game at the NHL level, to be a two-way defender... That's not an easy thing to do. It takes time, it has taken time and he's almost there...

So like I've said two times now, but you fail to get the point... Rearrange the top 6 however you want, but Smith is better than Ouellet, which is why I'd prefer to trade Xavier... and Franson is better than Marchenko, which is why I'd like to acquire Franson... Very simple.

Which is exactly what I did... But you missed that point as well apparently... After 25 NHL games, which is all we have to go on at this point, Smith was the better player. Does that mean he will be in the future? No, not necessarily but I do believe he will. And that's just based on what I've seen of them in their respective careers thus far...

[joesuffP 1,746]

I'd be ok with moving Ouellette for Franson and roll something like this

Dekeseyer-Kronwall

Franson-Quincey

Smith-Ericsson

That's a lot of depth top to bottom. Very strong defensively with 1 offensive weapon. Babs could cut down on Kronwall's ice time

[kipwinger 8,524]

I see the potential in Smith that I don't see in Ouellet, simple as that. You don't have to agree with it, and you don't have to like it, but that's what I've seen by watching both players from their days with the Griffins to the Red Wings. Also, Ouellet was more of a well rounded, two-way player, even in his days with Armada in the Q before he was drafted and continued that style in the minors and up in Detroit. Smith on the other hand, was an offensive defenseman right through college and the minors and was forced to refine his game at the NHL level, to be a two-way defender... That's not an easy thing to do. It takes time, it has taken time and he's almost there...

Smith is almost to being a two way defender? He's got 9 pts. in 47 games. He's fifth on the depth chart. And he's still not great defensively. How's he "almost there"?

So like I've said two times now, but you fail to get the point... Rearrange the top 6 however you want, but Smith is better than Ouellet, which is why I'd prefer to trade Xavier... and Franson is better than Marchenko, which is why I'd like to acquire Franson... Very simple.

Rearrange it how? There is no way to make two pairs out of Frason, Smith, Dekeyser, and Quincey without A) putting two guys together who shouldn't be (Smith/Quincey or Smith/Franson), or B) demoting someone who deserves more time (Dekeyser and Franson).

Which is exactly what I did... But you missed that point as well apparently... After 25 NHL games, which is all we have to go on at this point, Smith was the better player. Does that mean he will be in the future? No, not necessarily but I do believe he will. And that's just based on what I've seen of them in their respective careers thus far...

And I responded that early in his career Smith was being called out by his Captain for being a liability. So maybe, despite their difference in point production, Smith wasn't better at all. You certainly don't hear anybody calling out Ouellet for being a liability do you?

[rick zombo 3,739]

I'd be ok with moving Ouellette for Franson and roll something like this

Dekeseyer-Kronwall

Franson-Quincey

Smith-Ericsson

That's a lot of depth top to bottom. Very strong defensively with 1 offensive weapon. Babs could cut down on Kronwall's ice time

I'd be careful about breaking up the "DeQuincey" pairing (as Ken and Mickey call them). I'd start Franson out with Smith. But that's a pretty good looking group of six D.

[joesuffP 1,746]

That's a pretty big and mean defensive group.

[kipwinger 8,524]

I'd be careful about breaking up the "DeQuincey" pairing (as Ken and Mickey call them). I'd start Franson out with Smith. But that's a pretty good looking group of six D.

Franson and Smith would be a laugh a minute defensively. Plus, their strengths are exactly the same. It would be like playing Datsyuk with Datsyuk. Both Smith and Franson can't lead the breakout at the same time.

Also, Babcock and Holland have explicitly said they want a right hander for the top four. So I think they're probably ok with breaking up that pair.

Edited February 11, 2015 by kipwinger

[Dabura 12,207]

Holland isn't the type to pull off any big trade unless he gets the upper hand by a considerable margin...We've all become accustomed with his usual phrase 'our healthy player/s returning will be our deadline acquisition...And if the Mule does return healthy, and contributes as he did a few years ago - well - there ya go I guess.

I'm certainly not against seeing some new faces - however I'd rather stay with what we have rather than giving up too much for a rental, or for a player who won't help as much as we'd like.

Oh, I know. What I'm saying is, the best course of action is always, without fail, presented as the one which doesn't see us making any significant moves. July 1, the draft, training camp, December, the All-Star break, the trade deadline - it's always "Well, our two options are overpaying or standing pat. Given those options, we should stand pat. My hands are tied. There's no hockey store. It is what it is." To which I say: bulls***! We have a clear-cut need, one we can't immediately address with in-house options. We've had this need for years. We've waited for the perfect deal for years. Our cupboard is now full of assets. We're a piece away from making a very good case for being The Team to Beat in the East. If we don't make a move, I'll consider it a failure on Holland's part. The counter-argument is "Well, there were no deals out there. It was overpay for a rental or stand pat, so I stood pat." And I'll refuse to believe that. The league is full of quality defensemen! If Ken Holland is half the GM we think he is, he should be able to find the player we need at a reasonable price. He's had years to find him. We're now a contender. No more waiting. Get something done.

Edited February 11, 2015 by Dabura

[rick zombo 3,739]

Franson and Smith would be a laugh a minute defensively. Plus, their strengths are exactly the same. It would be like playing Datsyuk with Datsyuk. Both Smith and Franson can't lead the breakout at the same time.

Also, Babcock and Holland have explicitly said they want a right hander for the top four. So I think they're probably ok with breaking up that pair.

And it's not like Babcock would ever put a guy deserving of "top four" minutes on the bottom pair. The same way he would never put a top six winger on the third/four line. Right?

Also, I said "start out", not "etch in stone". Yeesh.

[krsmith17 7,191]

What is a two-way defender to you Kip? To me it is a player that can play both ends of the ice, very well. I think Smith is almost there. I think he should be put in better situations and in a different system, under a different head coach, he would be a 30-40 point guy. Disagree all you want... because... stats right?

That's the coaches job to sort those things out after having those 6 players on his roster. Why not break up the top pair? They're no more of a staple at this point than the DeKeyser - Quincey pairing. I don't know. Maybe Kronwall - Smith, DeKeyser - Franson, Quincey - Ericsson. Oh but, never mind, Smith hasn't "earned it". Never mind how he played last time he was paired with Kronwall. And oh yeah, that would never happen, because Babcock would NEVER put two offensive defenders together...

No one if calling out Ouellet for his defensive game because he has been quite good on the defensive side of the puck. That is and always has been his game. He will never have the offensive ability that Smith has (I know, I know, 9 points...) I think Smith is just as good as Ouellet defensively right now and much better offensively.

[joesuffP 1,746]

IMO a line up with this much depth and key defensive forwards is built for the tight checking playoffs. Then our defense is balanced and Babs could really manage ice time/match ups

I think Smith's defensive game is very underrated here. Most his mistakes come in the offensive zone