DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 I keep seeing that he's not a real #1. Figure that not every team has a #1 and a couple might have 2 guys who qualify, there are maybe 25 #1 caliber D in the NHL. Assuming Kronwall isn't a #1, name 25 better. Or even 20. He is not elite, top 5 in the world. He is a #1. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmyemeryhunter 2,747 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 (edited) I feel like we have this same conversation every year after we get eliminated. Edited May 9, 2015 by jimmyemeryhunter 4 F.Michael, PavelValerievichDatsyuk, amato and 1 other reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
derblaueClaus 1,668 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 I feel like we have this same conversation every year after we get eliminated. I'm pretty sure you don't just feel like, but that we have this discussion about Kronner every year since Lidstrom left. You'd think that they would stop, at least after we shut down one of the best offenses in the NHL..... 2 MidMichSteve and jimmyemeryhunter reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Playmaker Report post Posted May 9, 2015 He is the Wings number 1, like it or not. As I've said in the past, the issue with Kronwall is that he does everything generally well, but doesn't excel at any one aspect of the game to set him apart. He doesn't have the size, the speed, the strength, the shot. Another thing that hurts the perception of Kronwall is that other Nik guy. 1 LasVegasRocks reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kliq 3,755 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 Whenever you take over for one of the greatest of all time, its extremely hard to gain full acceptance from the fan base. Because he is not LIdstrom, he will always be criticized. He is a true #1. 2 LasVegasRocks and marcaractac reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Aznknight 139 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 The better question is this... When the opposing team's best player (most hated player), say, Tyler Johnson just picked up the loose puck from the boards and is heading up their blueline and his head is down. His eyes are on the puck and he's speeding up. Who would be the defenseman you would want to meet him at that blue line? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DatsyukianDekes 2,428 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 He is the Wings number 1, like it or not. As I've said in the past, the issue with Kronwall is that he does everything generally well, but doesn't excel at any one aspect of the game to set him apart. He doesn't have the size, the speed, the strength, the shot. Another thing that hurts the perception of Kronwall is that other Nik guy. You know what else hurts Kronwall? Errorson. 1 Detroit \# 1 Fan reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kliq 3,755 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 If we get a legit #2 guy, our D looks like this: Kronwall - New Guy DD - Qunicey Eriksson - Marchenko or Smith Erikkson would be an elite 3rd pairing guy, he just miscast. If this new guy can help Kronwall, I think Kronwall will prove to most he is a #1. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wings87 1,290 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 (edited) I keep seeing that he's not a real #1. Figure that not every team has a #1 and a couple might have 2 guys who qualify, there are maybe 25 #1 caliber D in the NHL. Assuming Kronwall isn't a #1, name 25 better. Or even 20. He is not elite, top 5 in the world. He is a #1. It doesn't work like that. Just because you're a good d-man or a number 1 on your team doesn't make you a true number 1. It's like ace starters, every team has a number 1 pitcher, not every team has an ace. In my opinion, a number 1 defenceman is an elite defenceman. Those guys are rare. I don't get the whole idea of lets label everybody. I'm going to use a baseball reference again, since baseball loves to label. A true number one is someone like Kershaw or a young Verlander, in other words a player who dominates. There are a lot of top defenceman in the NHL, but not a ton of true number 1 players. We love to put players in little boxes, marked with convenient numbers. Causing tags like 1 number defenceman to become overused. I guess it all depends on your opinion of a number 1. To me it means elite, to others it might mean very good. Is Kronwall elite? No is he very good? Yes. One other thing to take into account is that he isn't as good as he used to be. Not having Lids to play with has hurt him. Edited May 9, 2015 by wings87 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VM1138 1,921 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 His point is, can you name twenty or more better defenseman? No. He's a top 10 defenseman I think. If feel even safer saying he's top 15z. He is a number one, especially without Ericsson. 2 LasVegasRocks and DatsyukianDekes reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kliq 3,755 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 It doesn't work like that. Just because you're a good d-man or a number 1 on your team doesn't make you a true number 1. It's like ace starters, every team has a number 1 pitcher, not every team has an ace. In my opinion, a number 1 defenceman is an elite defenceman. Those guys are rare. I don't get the whole idea of lets label everybody. I'm going to use a baseball reference again, since baseball loves to label. A true number one is someone like Kershaw or a young Verlander, in other words a player who dominates. There are a lot of top defenceman in the NHL, but not a ton of true number 1 players. We love to put players in little boxes, marked with convenient numbers. Causing tags like 1 number defenceman to become overused. I guess it all depends on your opinion of a number 1. To me it means elite, to others it might mean very good. This is all subjective, you cannot be proved right or wrong. IMO, when you consider that there are 30 teams with 6 regular d-man which means 180 d-mean in the league. Being a #1 means you are good enough to be the best on a team (ie. top 30). Being top 30 out of 180 (or more if you count guys in the press box/minors) is pretty damn good. I'm not going to touch "elite", had that argument, not care enough to have it again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 I keep seeing that he's not a real #1. Figure that not every team has a #1 and a couple might have 2 guys who qualify, there are maybe 25 #1 caliber D in the NHL. Assuming Kronwall isn't a #1, name 25 better. Or even 20. He is not elite, top 5 in the world. He is a #1. It doesn't work like that. Just because you're a good d-man or a number 1 on your team doesn't make you a true number 1. It's like ace starters, every team has a number 1 pitcher, not every team has an ace. In my opinion, a number 1 defenceman is an elite defenceman. Those guys are rare. I don't get the whole idea of lets label everybody. I'm going to use a baseball reference again, since baseball loves to label. A true number one is someone like Kershaw or a young Verlander, in other words a player who dominates. There are a lot of top defenceman in the NHL, but not a ton of true number 1 players. We love to put players in little boxes, marked with convenient numbers. Causing tags like 1 number defenceman to become overused. I guess it all depends on your opinion of a number 1. To me it means elite, to others it might mean very good. Is Kronwall elite? No is he very good? Yes. One other thing to take into account is that he isn't as good as he used to be. Not having Lids to play with has hurt him. So there are only 5or 6. I think your definition is too narrow. At the least I think you need to say the top 10% which would be 21 (7 d a team 30 team =210 d in the league) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wings87 1,290 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 This is all subjective, you cannot be proved right or wrong. IMO, when you consider that there are 30 teams with 6 regular d-man which means 180 d-mean in the league. Being a #1 means you are good enough to be the best on a team (ie. top 30). Being top 30 out of 180 (or more if you count guys in the press box/minors) is pretty damn good. I'm not going to touch "elite", had that argument, not care enough to have it again. Most of it is subjective. Since there is no specific criteria for the 1 label. It all depends on the criteria you use. I disagree with your statement of "Being a #1 means you are good enough to be the best on a team" that statement implies that every team has a number 1. Can we instead agree that Kronwall is a very good D-man, and labels don't mean s***? This is going to open a whole can of s***, but here goes. Howard is a top 30 goalie in the NHL. Does that make him a true number 1 goalie? Or just a number 1 goalie on the team he plays on? So there are only 5or 6. I think your definition is too narrow. At the least I think you need to say the top 10% which would be 21 (7 d a team 30 team =210 d in the league) I don't disagree It might be too narrow, but yours might be too broad. Plus I don't think it needs a percentage. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Richdg 267 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 Yes we do have this convo every year. No Kronwall is not a true #1 Dman. In fact he isn't even the best on the team anymore. Dekeyser has passed him defensively and is closing the gap offensively. But we all know this. Now the convo will break down and everyone will start arguing with each other about which stats mean more, what is a defensemens job to do, etc....... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wings87 1,290 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 (edited) I feel like we have this same conversation every year after we get eliminated. It has become an annual tradition, kinda like this. https://youtu.be/q4bDXehQJuA Edited May 9, 2015 by wings87 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GMRwings1983 8,794 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 He needs to play like he's a top defenseman. Especially in the playoffs. And we didn't really need another thread on this, imo. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Buppy 1,720 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 Most of it is subjective. Since there is no specific criteria for the 1 label. It all depends on the criteria you use. I disagree with your statement of "Being a #1 means you are good enough to be the best on a team" that statement implies that every team has a number 1. Can we instead agree that Kronwall is a very good D-man, and labels don't mean s***? This is going to open a whole can of s***, but here goes. Howard is a top 30 goalie in the NHL. Does that make him a true number 1 goalie? Or just a number 1 goalie on the team he plays on? I don't disagree It might be too narrow, but yours might be too broad. Plus I don't think it needs a percentage. Well, there is a logical specific criterion: 30 teams, 30 #1s. It makes sense. Now, if you want to qualify it further and say good #1 or #1 for a contending team, maybe you go top 15 or top 10, and maybe there Kronwall falls short. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GMRwings1983 8,794 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 So do 30 teams have a #1 center? Is Abdelkader a #1 winger? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Buppy 1,720 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 So do 30 teams have a #1 center? Is Abdelkader a #1 winger? No, some teams have more than 1. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WingsallTheway 383 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 The better question is this... When the opposing team's best player (most hated player), say, Tyler Johnson just picked up the loose puck from the boards and is heading up their blueline and his head is down. His eyes are on the puck and he's speeding up. Who would be the defenseman you would want to meet him at that blue line? Seabrook lol jk, im a huge kronwall supporter Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Playmaker Report post Posted May 9, 2015 Like what topic on this board hasn't been beaten to death ad nauseum? A topic that only comes up once a year? That's almost an original subject matter. 1 The Greek reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Euro_Twins 4,480 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 Like what topic on this board hasn't been beaten to death ad nauseum? A topic that only comes up once a year? That's almost an original subject matter. It comes up once a month, not year Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Buppy 1,720 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 It comes up once a month, not year LOL. Came up a week ago, and that thread is still on the first page. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 Ok he may not be the best at any specific category. But he is elite at Kronwalling. 1 F.Michael reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mvanpop 98 Report post Posted May 9, 2015 I think he's great considering what role he's been forced into since Lidstrom, Rafalski and Stuart left. If he had someone like Seabrook or Stralman he would play elite. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites