• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Fonzarelli

Mantha

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

There is no reason to be. Year one with a broken leg he scored 13. Not great but no terrible. Tatar scored 16 his first full season in GR. Year 2 he has scored 23 in regular season games between GR and Detroit with 3 in 3 PO games. That is getting close to 30 for the year.

If that's what you feel his maximum potential is, you're right.

But I have never seen a 6'5, 50 goal scorer (which lead the QMJHL in his draft year) slip to #20 in the draft - It simply hasn't happened. I also haven't seen both Jim Devallano and Ken Holland call out the same 21 year old prospect (to the degree in which they did) before he played even 10 NHL games (considering our historical patience when it comes to prospects).

I'm just saying I think the common denominator might be work ethic.

Edited by WingedWheel91

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair Buppy, I don't think Rich was saying "I told you so" to anyone in particular here, I think that original comment was more so directed toward Holland and his "spare part in the Calder Cup playoffs a year ago" comment... I could be wrong though. Regardless, he was just posting about how he was doing in the playoffs so far, and he's been doing very well down there. He also responded to Dickie's comment about how "Mantha was not good", with "pure craziness. he was good. he wasn't great", and I couldn't agree more with that statement. The thing that is getting confused here is that no one here is saying Mantha is elite or would have put us over the top, but we are saying that he is a very good young player, and he could have definitely helped in the Red Wings playoff run...

How is it premature to say he made the team better, when the stats showed that our power-play was much better with him in the lineup? Was it a coincidence? Maybe, but you don't completely dismiss the idea that maybe he was actually a difference maker out there. I believe he was, others don't, including Blashill, but when our power-play was literally the reason we lost that series and was more deflating to the team than positive, something should have been changed... Maybe you try what worked a couple weeks previous, maybe it works, maybe it doesn't, but it would have certainly been worth a try...

Yes, he really should have been compared to Andersson because that's who he should have displaced in the lineup. Andersson should have been out because like you said, he barely played, and wasn't even used a whole lot in the situations Blashill claimed he needed him in for. Just because player B subs in for player A, doesn't necessarily mean that player B assumes the same role in the lineup. If Andersson comes out, a much better player that was currently in the top 6, like Helm for example, moves down to Andersson's position in the lineup, and Mantha moves into the top 6. Helm is MUCH better than Andersson, so he instantly makes the line of Athanasiou - Andersson Helm - Tatar much better. Mantha then gets inserted into the top 6 on Pavs's line and all of a sudden the Richards - Datsyuk - Helm Mantha line is maybe slightly better as well.. I love Helm but he's much better suited for the bottom 6, and if one of those missed Helm opportunities had been capitalized on by Mantha, maybe it's a difference maker in a game, and in turn a difference maker in the series. Again, not saying we definitely win with Mantha in the lineup, but I do believe the series would have been a little tighter with him in there over Andersson...

Does comparing Mantha to a player that by rights shouldn't even be in the NHL mean he's great? Nope, and no one is saying that he is. But he is good, and he should have been in the lineup.

Anyway, that's the last I will say about how he "should" have been in the lineup... Now, all I'll say is he "better" be in the lineup to start next season...

He's being over-hyped, plain and simple. To make a snide comment, regardless of the target, after one game is ridiculous. You don't have to think he's elite to be over-rating him.

Your point about the roles is exactly what I meant about not comparing him to Andersson. You are comparing Mantha to Helm, then comparing Helm to Andersson. I'd agree that Mantha's potential as a scorer is higher than Helm, though I'm not sure he's actually there yet. Maybe Mantha would capitalize a little better on his chances. But would he get those same chances? Not so clear there. Perhaps more importantly is what would happen to the chances against us. Wouldn't matter if he scored better than Helm if we also gave up more goals against. Andersson wasn't bad in his limited time, so I'm not sure we can say the results would have been better with Helm in that spot. Our PP numbers with Mantha were absolutely, without question, inflated. 30% shooting percentage. Far above the results for anyone over any decent amount of time. Close to double what even most of the really good PP units get. As a team we were about 12% on the season. If you are saying that Mantha is such an amazing offensive force that he single-handedly turned a bad PP into one of the best ever, then you are vastly over-rating him. If you're not saying that then you have to agree that those numbers are anomalous, and we could not realistically expect that kind of production to continue.

So maybe in the course of the series we get an extra goal or two with Mantha. And maybe we get an extra goal or two against. Depending on the timing, there's a small chance it might have made a difference. But there's about 10000 things that could have happened that might have also made a difference. To single out this one with such vehemence, as if it were so obviously some massive change in our chances, is why I think people are vastly over-rating Mantha's abilities right now.

...

The one thing that does bother me with the RW's and Mantha is the negative comments in the press about him that haven't been said about others. The "spare forward" comment by Holland was flat out stupid. Jimmy D last year same thing. This hasn't happened with Nyquist, Tatar, Jurco, Pulk, etc... Why are they doing this with Mantha? Maybe he is a kid that thrives on confrontation? Don't know. But some of this is bad management.

People are just overly sensitive to negativity regarding players they like. Getting defensive. Probably over-compensating because they're a little disappointed that Mantha hasn't yet become the dominant impact player they thought and hoped he'd be. The comments aren't even that critical. Mantha's first year was disappointing. Starting from the injury and all the way through him being a non-factor in the playoffs. Stating facts is not being unduly critical. The only reason those comments were made publicly is because there was so much hype around Mantha that reporters were asking questions about him. I'm sure if anyone had bothered to ask about why Pulk or Jurco weren't given a chance in the playoffs there would have been some similarly negative reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not really concerned with Mantha's defensive lapses. I'd rather they have him focused on scoring goals and making things happen in the offensive zone. There are enough 2 way forwards on this team

Lapses are one thing, being a liability is something else. And when he wasn't scoring on top of that, he shouldn't be playing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Positive words from Holland on Mantha and Bertuzzi:

"Both bring important dimensions," Holland said. "Both are young players that we need to be important in Detroit one day."

plus video of Mantha send 2 goals through the mesh of the net.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW this season Mantha has played 73 pro games between the Grifs regular season, playoffs, and the RW's. In those 73 games he has scored 26 goals. That is a very good season. Not a great season. How many players for us have scored 26 goals this season? If that is what he does for us on average for his career we have a long term solution on the top line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is over hyping Mantha. Every single person has said that he wasn't great, but he certainly was good. We never expected him to carry the team, he just made the team better. The same way it would be ridiculous to scratch Tatar for the 5 playoff games and insert Andersson. It's an absolute joke that people are still defending that move...

Also, him being a "liability" defensively is being completely overstated. He's not a defensive player, nor should he be, but in the 10 games he played he definitely wasn't a liability...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW this season Mantha has played 73 pro games between the Grifs regular season, playoffs, and the RW's. In those 73 games he has scored 26 goals. That is a very good season. Not a great season. How many players for us have scored 26 goals this season? If that is what he does for us on average for his career we have a long term solution on the top line.

2 others in the AHL: Tangradi (28) and Frk (27, 28 including playoffs).

I was hoping Mantha would at least lead GR this year. He did have a pretty good season, though, and bounced back from a rough/injured first pro season. I expect Mantha to become a big player for us, but he's not demanding a spot yet to me so I don't understand why it has become such an issue that he was sent down.

He's leading the Griffins in points in the playoffs so far and that's great to see. He's making the case for himself next year.

Edited by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is over hyping Mantha. Every single person has said that he wasn't great, but he certainly was good. We never expected him to carry the team, he just made the team better. The same way it would be ridiculous to scratch Tatar for the 5 playoff games and insert Andersson. It's an absolute joke that people are still defending that move...

Also, him being a "liability" defensively is being completely overstated. He's not a defensive player, nor should he be, but in the 10 games he played he definitely wasn't a liability...

Don't have to say he's great.

Right here you are seriously comparing a kid who's played 10 games and scored 2 goals to someone who has scored 19, 29, and 21 goals in his first three years. Tatar is tied for 43rd in total goals in the NHL over the last 3 years. 68th in goals/game. Mantha isn't even top 40 in the AHL in his two years. There is nothing about that comparison that is "the same". That is over-hyping him. MAYBE Mantha could be as good as Tatar. I would even say that one day he should be. But he's played 10 games. To say that taking him out is in even the slightest way similar to taking out a proven good NHL goal-scorer is the definition of over-hype.

Also, in the 10 games he played he was on the ice for 10 goals against. By a good margin the worst 5v5 numbers on the team. It's very likely those numbers are skewed by the small sample size, but it is no stretch to think that maybe he was in fact a liability. If you want to use the PP success as evidence of his offensive merits, you should be prepared to accept the negative stats in the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buppy, I'm not in any way saying Mantha is as good as Tatar or should have replaced him. The comparison was simply to point out that it was an AWFUL decision to take ANYONE out of the lineup in place of Joakim Andersson. I used Tatar as my example, but I could have just as easily said Datsyuk or Larkin... You think it was a wise decision to take Mantha out and insert a player that is not even NHL calibre... Cool, I disagree...

I hope Mantha makes the Red Wings out of camp next season. Please don't take that as me "over hyping" him...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad someone brought up Frk. He is in his 3rd year pro. He finally was able to stay in GR full time this year. Players develop at different rates. If we go back to the loaded 2013 draft, Mantha was picked 20th. 1 guy that was drafted between 21 and 30 has outperformed him so far: Barakosky with the Caps. Several guys taken ahead of him are equal or behind mantha in development: Nurse, Morin, Morrissey, Pulok, Muller, and Rychel. Those guys make up 16 out of the 30 players taken in the 1st round. In other words to date Mantha is about average in his development. 14 guys ahead of him (13 of which were drafted before him) and 15 guys equal or behind him.

Mantha's development is normal. Larkin is the exception. Mantha's path is not different thatn the path taken by Abby, Sheahan, Smith, and Scvechnikov.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I guess I understand the deal with the fact that Andy was put in, but the discussion should been of why Jurco or Pulkkinen weren't in instead. To me, those 2 should have been in line ahead of Andy or Mantha.

Glad someone brought up Frk. He is in his 3rd year pro. He finally was able to stay in GR full time this year. Players develop at different rates. If we go back to the loaded 2013 draft, Mantha was picked 20th. 1 guy that was drafted between 21 and 30 has outperformed him so far: Barakosky with the Caps. Several guys taken ahead of him are equal or behind mantha in development: Nurse, Morin, Morrissey, Pulok, Muller, and Rychel. Those guys make up 16 out of the 30 players taken in the 1st round. In other words to date Mantha is about average in his development. 14 guys ahead of him (13 of which were drafted before him) and 15 guys equal or behind him.

Mantha's development is normal. Larkin is the exception. Mantha's path is not different thatn the path taken by Abby, Sheahan, Smith, and Scvechnikov.

While I agree with your larger point about different players developing at different paces, Some of your claims are off.

In the category of 21-30 picks that have "outperformed" Mantha you should also include:

- Marko Dano (#27) has 31 pts. in 69 gp: for Columbus, Blackhawks, and Jets. (2nd trade in 3 years?)

- Maybe also include Shea Theodore (#26) has 8 pts. 19 gp: great for a Dman plus 37pts in 50 gp in the AHL, Don't know much about him, but 6'2" point producing Dman...I want

As for the several guys taken ahead of him that you claim are behind him in development:

- Nurse played the majority of the year with The Oilers (69 gp) and did pretty well from what I've read (though a trade for Hamonic was suggested/rumoured)

-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buppy, I'm not in any way saying Mantha is as good as Tatar or should have replaced him. The comparison was simply to point out that it was an AWFUL decision to take ANYONE out of the lineup in place of Joakim Andersson. I used Tatar as my example, but I could have just as easily said Datsyuk or Larkin... You think it was a wise decision to take Mantha out and insert a player that is not even NHL calibre... Cool, I disagree...

I hope Mantha makes the Red Wings out of camp next season. Please don't take that as me "over hyping" him...

Yeah, you used a much more proven and productive player as an example to try to make your point, and said it was the same. But it isn't the same at all, or even close.

And I've never said that I preferred Andersson, nor that I even necessarily wanted Mantha out of the lineup. What I take exception to is that you and some others don't think it can even be a question whether or not he should have been in the lineup. That is why I think he's being over-hyped. Well, that and Rich blowing the fanfare after he had one two-goal game in the AHL.

Mantha played 10 games in the NHL. He didn't produce much. It is hardly a leap of logic to think that an inexperienced prospect who hasn't been producing much would continue to not produce much. Nor to think that his defensive game wasn't yet developed enough to warrant playing on a top line in the playoffs. Nor to think that if not used on a top line, his chances of producing anything offensively would be even less. Nor, finally, to think that if we're going to have someone in the lineup barely playing and with little to no expectations, it may as well be a defensive-minded center.

And again, it isn't just that you disagree with the conclusion. It's that you don't think there should even be any debate that makes me say you're over-rating him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not in any way over hyping or over rating Mantha, and you saying it over and over again is not going to make it true... Just because I think Mantha should have been in the lineup over a player that is not NHL quality (in my opinion) does not in any way mean that I think Mantha is our savior, or any better than he actually is...

I said right from the beginning that the biggest reason I wanted Mantha in the lineup was because I didn't expect to go on a deep run this year and I would have much preferred one of our top prospects to get the ice time, one last chance with Datsyuk and the playoff experience, over a guy that we've waived (and cleared) countless times, and has already announced that he is leaving the team to go back home to Sweden to play in the SHL...

I wouldn't have said s*** if Mantha were sent down in favor of Jurco, but the fact that an awful, zero impact player was put in while one of our top prospects was sent down, it really pissed me off.

Yes, I do think we could have won an extra game with Mantha in over Andersson, but I'd say the same thing about Jurco, hell I'd even say the same about Frk or Tangradi. This could have just as easily been an Andersson thread. He's simply not a good hockey player, and THAT is why all of this started.. So one last time, Mantha is a very good young hockey player, I am not over rating him, but I do hope he makes this team next year. So unless you have something different to say, drop it... please..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lapses are one thing, being a liability is something else. And when he wasn't scoring on top of that, he shouldn't be playing

I agree that he is not solid on the defensive side of the game but I don't think they should try to turn him into something he's not. He's never going to be defensive minded. Allow him to develop his scoring abilities first and then worry about touching up his d-zone play. I lIke forwards that can play at both ends of the ice but right now this team needs a pure goal scorer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 pages.. Really? Let the kid play in the AHL, rest up and start playing in the big league. He will join up for sure, and you will get your stats and whatnot during the season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that he is not solid on the defensive side of the game but I don't think they should try to turn him into something he's not. He's never going to be defensive minded. Allow him to develop his scoring abilities first and then worry about touching up his d-zone play. I lIke forwards that can play at both ends of the ice but right now this team needs a pure goal scorer.

Yes. More than 1 however.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I guess I understand the deal with the fact that Andy was put in, but the discussion should been of why Jurco or Pulkkinen weren't in instead. To me, those 2 should have been in line ahead of Andy or Mantha.

While I agree with your larger point about different players developing at different paces, Some of your claims are off.

In the category of 21-30 picks that have "outperformed" Mantha you should also include:

- Marko Dano (#27) has 31 pts. in 69 gp: for Columbus, Blackhawks, and Jets. (2nd trade in 3 years?)

- Maybe also include Shea Theodore (#26) has 8 pts. 19 gp: great for a Dman plus 37pts in 50 gp in the AHL, Don't know much about him, but 6'2" point producing Dman...I want

As for the several guys taken ahead of him that you claim are behind him in development:

- Nurse played the majority of the year with The Oilers (69 gp) and did pretty well from what I've read (though a trade for Hamonic was suggested/rumoured)

-

Because Jurco has shown nothing in a decently extensive young career and Pulk has shown he doesn't have NHL abilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not really concerned with Mantha's defensive lapses. I'd rather they have him focused on scoring goals and making things happen in the offensive zone. There are enough 2 way forwards on this team

Great post. The Red Wings are so obsessed with every single guy dedicating themselves to playing 200 feet of hockey and they wonder why they struggle to score goals. You don't have to be defensively responsible if the puck is at the other end of the ice.

Plus it would make the Red Wings more exciting to watch. This low-event, no creativity hockey isn't exactly putting fans at the edge of their seats.

Edited by GoWings1905

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post. The Red Wings are so obsessed with every single guy dedicating themselves to playing 200 feet of hockey and they wonder why they struggle to score goals. You don't have to be defensively responsible if the puck is at the other end of the ice.

Plus it would make the Red Wings more exciting to watch. This low-event, no creativity hockey isn't exactly putting fans at the edge of their seats.

At 5v5 Mantha was on the ice for 4 goals for and 10 goals against. If you're giving up 2.5 goals for every 1 you score, it's not exciting. It's getting blown out. You need to do something better. He doesn't need to be a Selke candidate, but there's some evidence to suggest he needs to be better.

I don't think he's wholly responsible for all the goals against, but I don't think he's wholly responsible for all the goals for either. And I don't believe that right now his offense is good enough to outweigh his defense. At least not in a top line role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post. The Red Wings are so obsessed with every single guy dedicating themselves to playing 200 feet of hockey and they wonder why they struggle to score goals. You don't have to be defensively responsible if the puck is at the other end of the ice.

Plus it would make the Red Wings more exciting to watch. This low-event, no creativity hockey isn't exactly putting fans at the edge of their seats.

Yes. The no goals, no fights and declining wins hockey SUCKS!

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