Signed Glendening signs 4-year, $1.8m AAV extension

[LeftWinger 4,953]

I don't mind Glendening at $1.8M for 4 as much as I hate Helm at $3.8M for 5.

disney.com is what he is, and Helm is what disney.com is, just a bit quicker. the Helm contract will be an albatross in 2 years time. Much like E and Howard. Holland never learns.

[AtlantaHotWings 984]

Why are people bitching about this?? Does everyone forget that his injury lost us the 2015 series with the lightning. He owned tyler Johnson ala 2009 zetterberg on Crosby. People need to remember that it isn't 2006 anymore and 1.8 million for a 4th liner is not a bad deal.

Not sure who should be more insulted by the above statement. Crosby being compared to Johnson or Z being compared to Glenndog.

[NerveDamage 4,176]

Not sure who should be more insulted by the above statement. Crosby being compared to Johnson or Z being compared to Glenndog.

Or Glendog being referred to as Disney.com

[skerrydude 3]

This article seems spot on...

http://www.yardbarker.com/nhl/articles/the_red_wings_are_looking_for_continuity_in_all_of_the_wrong_places/s1_10240_21315478

I bet we just have to wait for Holland to retire for this nonsense to stop...

[kickazz 5,459]

Or Glendog being referred to as Disney.com

Even Glen "dog" might be offensive to the guy lol.

Let's put a cute spin on it and call him something else.

Glenpooch.

Edited July 15, 2016 by kickazz

[Jacksoni 418]

Nielsen is a player put against top players. That's his job. He drew the toughest matchups for the Islanders.

So the answer is Nielsen.

http://www.lighthousehockey.com/2010/7/20/1577993/grading-the-islanders-frans (bit of an older article but it still stands)

So Nielsen at age 32,33,34,35,36 (I'll be overly nice) will defend against the top players. I would assume he would get offensive objectives as well. I'll have that in mind when watching us play.

Edited July 15, 2016 by Jacksoni

[kickazz 5,459]

So Nielsen at age 32,33,34,35,36 (I'll be overly nice) will defend against the top players. I would assume he would get offensive objectives as well. I'll have that in mind when watching us play.

Same. Only because I want to see if Blashill uses Nielsen for who he is. And what he is, is a top 6 shutdown centerman.

BTW that's also the good thing about the Nielsen signing, he hasn't regressed much (actually his scoring went up) and only missed like 7 games in the last 5 years or something insane.

Also Nielsen at age 32, 33, 34 = Crosby/Kopitar 29, 30, 31 and Ovechkin 31, 32, 33

Top players are all aging together. Of course there's the new speedy crew of McDavids, Eichels and Mathews. But we also have a Larkin.

Edited July 15, 2016 by kickazz

[LeftWinger 4,953]

This article seems spot on...

http://www.yardbarker.com/nhl/articles/the_red_wings_are_looking_for_continuity_in_all_of_the_wrong_places/s1_10240_21315478

I bet we just have to wait for Holland to retire for this nonsense to stop...

Haha, Holland is such an ass hat and needs to be fired if he doesn't get a better defenseman this summer. He needs to dangle nyquist out there along with a prospect and pick.

He needs to make a trade or delve back into ufa to try to find a better dman. Our current crop is not good enough.

[romagoth 47]

That is completely false

Peak age is 26-30 both physically and mentally. Its more of a case-by-case basis but there is no way players are best at 23. If I have a good player at that age i get really excited because there is ample room for growth

Especially in the case of a defensive player, the mental game is half the battle. You have to try things and gain experience to shut guys down, so Glendenning will get better

I may have been a little on the low side, but it was very close; probably more around 24-25. So, no...not completely false.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/when-nhl-players-peak-hockey-metrics-1.2646054

Brander's team also found that forwards:

• Improve more quickly than they decline and typically begin "a significant decline in their early 30s."
• Perform within 90 per cent of their peak from 24 to 32 years old.
• 25 is their most common age, with 24-27 very similar.

Defencemen, the co-authors report:

• Improve and decline more slowly than forwards and do so very symmetrically.
• Perform within 90 per cent of their peak from 24 to 34 years old (two years longer than forwards).
• 26 is their most common age, with 25 and 27 very similar.

For goalies, they found that:

• Performance varies little by age.
• At every age between 20 and 37, their save percentage is between 90 per cent and a tiny fraction over 91 per cent.
• 28 is their most common age, with 26-29 very similar.

http://www.tsn.ca/pinning-down-a-player-s-prime-performance-years-1.388514

The seminal work on the subject was completed by Gabriel Desjardins, whose 2010 study into peak performance years is still cited today. Desjardins' study, which focused on forwards and their per-game scoring rates, found that peak age for a player in today's NHL is around 25.

[romagoth 47]

So Nielsen at age 32,33,34,35,36 (I'll be overly nice) will defend against the top players. I would assume he would get offensive objectives as well. I'll have that in mind when watching us play.

36 year old Nielsen > Glendening now

[krsmith17 7,191]

Fun read...

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2016/07/analyzing_forwards_with_compar.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+detroit-redwings+%28Detroit+Red+Wings+-+MLive.com%29

[kickazz 5,459]

Lol you think that's bad. Take a look at this. He's one of the worst penalty killers in the league. This isn't even advanced stats btw. This is just simple numbers put on a graph. It's basically showing all the penalty killers from 2007-2016. It's showing how many shots different penalty killers allow per 60 minutes of penalty killing time. Just take a look at Glendening on the graph. He allows 100 shots per 60 minutes of penalty kill time. I feel bad for Howard and Mrazek. Take a look at where Datsyuk and Zetterberg on the graph lol. They only allowed about 50 shots per 60 minutes. It also shows that Glendening is one of the worst penalty killers when it comes to goals against on the PK.

Edited July 22, 2016 by kickazz

[kickazz 5,459]

Lol here's another one. Between 2013 and 2016, 332 forwards played >1500 minutes 5 on 5. Luke Glendening is DEAD LAST in shots against relative to teammates.

I guess hard work really puts a curtain on how terrible one is.

The more I look into Glendening the more I realize how bad he really is and how blinded management and fans are with this guy. Babcock overrated the hell out of him and everyone fell for it.

Edited July 22, 2016 by kickazz

[krsmith17 7,191]

Yeah, despite all of these glaring numbers, I would still rather him on the team over Miller and Ott. That's not saying a whole lot though... It's really scary to think that we could have all three of those guys on our 4th line this season though...

[kickazz 5,459]

I don't mind having him if he wasn't treated like a savior defensive forward. I don't hate the guy at all. I hate how he's used. I also don't like how he's labelled as a great defensive forward when he's clearly not.

I present all these bad numbers of Glendening. But is that his fault? No. That's a coaching issue. When you put a player in a position to fail, that's on you as a coach. The difference between Babcock and Blashill is that Babcock used Glendening sparingly and in the right situations.

Blashill for whatever reason decided to take it up 3 or 4 notches and use the hell out of him last season. Something Babcock was too smart to do. One thing Babcock was good at was masking his players weaknesses. Blashill has a lot to learn in that regard. His player usage is definitely poorer. He's got to stick to his own philosophy and step away from Babcockian hockey.

Edited July 22, 2016 by kickazz

[DickieDunn 2,571]

He's an average 4th liner treated like he's a good one. Babs and Blash both rake a guy who works hard or they like fir some other reason and push this idea that they're better than they really are and play them in situations they shouldn't and Kenny says well his role us this, let's pay him for that regardless of his actual performance

[krsmith17 7,191]

Two things people always go to when trying to defend Glendening, blocked shots and faceoff percentage. Two of the most skewed individual stats in hockey could be blocked shots and giveaways... A player gets all kinds of praise when he blocks a lot of shots, but all that 'usually' means is he never has the puck... Another player gets s*** on because he has a ton of giveaways, when that 'usually' means he has the puck all the time... Glendening falls under the former. I will admit though, he is a very good faceoff man, but is that reason enough to pay him the big bucks and keep him around for another 5 years?...

[kickazz 5,459]

Two things people always go to when trying to defend Glendening, blocked shots and faceoff percentage. Two of the most skewed individual stats in hockey could be blocked shots and giveaways... A player gets all kinds of praise when he blocks a lot of shots, but all that 'usually' means is he never has the puck... Another player gets s*** on because he has a ton of giveaways, when that 'usually' means he has the puck all the time... Glendening falls under the former. I will admit though, he is a very good faceoff man, but is that reason enough to pay him the big bucks and keep him around for another 5 years?...

Go back a few pages and probably 5 times on this forum and you'll find a member or two who think his value is all about faceoffs. Faceoffs are a laughable stat to argue for. Just because player A is 1% better than player B at faceoffs, all of a sudden player A is labeled as "OMG HES THE BEST FACEOFF GUY ON OUR TEAM HES SO VALUABLE"

(Player A is Glendog and Player B is Datsyuk)

Hard work should never be an excuse over how bad a player is in situations. That's the dumbest philosophy and a hill coaches die on. You always play the best players in the best positions you can. That's what separates Quennevelle and Babcock and Bowman etc from others. It's like what my mother says. "I don't care how popular he is or how hard he works, he just better be a godam good doctor"

Edited July 22, 2016 by kickazz

[kickazz 5,459]

I'll clarify my point on what I mean by Babcock having better usage of Glendening and using him sparingly. I'll do it with the perfect example.

Babcock used Glendog against the Johnson line in the 2015 playoffs. It worked for a couple of games in our favor. Good stuff. Blashill came in and tried to build on this by initially pairing up Glendening against a crap ton of top line players. This resulted in a lot of game tying goals being given up in 2016 season. Now here's my example. Blashill decided to use Glendening against Ovechkin last november. That night Ovechkin broke the shots on goal in one game NHL record by shooting 15 times on Mrazek.

In short, what is Glendening's weakness? His weakness is possession. He's not very good at keeping the puck away from our net and more often than not, players on opposing teams end up shooting on our goal a lot when Glendening is on ice. Blashill, instead of masking Glendening's weakness, decided to put Glendening against the best shot taker in the league (Ovechkin). This resulted in Ovie exploiting our weakness and managing to get off 15 shots.

I think because of his weakness, Glendening is better served by having more of his faceoffs taken in the offensive zone rather than defensive. I think they need to stop putting him up against high shooting team top lines and I think they need to match him with a PK partner who is better at hanging onto the puck. I'd suggest someone like Larkin. Not Miller. Miller should be with someone like Helm.

Edited July 22, 2016 by kickazz

[joesuffP 1,746]

That kind of has more to do with the team strategy we don't pressure pucks we get in lanes and sit back. Usually a pretty good penalty killing team on average

Possession doesn't always equal good especially for a defensive player. Glendening and the fourth line play a safe game where they don't give up big plays and lower the quality shots faced. If they got two men deep cycling the puck of offense chances are they'll give up big plays especially if they're facing top lines

Let ovechkin take unscreened slappers from the blueline all night

[kickazz 5,459]

Doesn't matter. The guy scores regardless of screens. Mrazek just turned Super Saiyan on Ovechkin that night.

That kind of has more to do with the team strategy we don't pressure pucks we get in lanes and sit back. Usually a pretty good penalty killing team on average
Possession doesn't always equal good especially for a defensive player. Glendening and the fourth line play a safe game where they don't give up big plays and lower the quality shots faced. If they got two men deep cycling the puck of offense chances are they'll give up big plays especially if they're facing top lines

Let ovechkin take unscreened slappers from the blueline all night

Lmao that's exactly what I mean about your bold sentence. It's not safe. Glendening is one of the worst in goals against on the PK. Did you not read my previous post?

Luke Glendening ranks in the bottom in shots against and goals against while short handed.

Edited July 23, 2016 by kickazz

[joesuffP 1,746]

He's used like a premier shut down forward on this team. Probably one of the most utilized shut down centers in the league. For him to have glowing stats the way he was used he'd have to be the best defensive forward in the league and a star player. Glendening has tough assignments night in night out. For his possession numbers to be great he'd have to be outplaying top line players every night and therefore be a superstar. He plays the tough minutes so Z and co don't have to and last I checked our defensive game was one of the only respectable parts to our game last year

Literally the wings were a team that was bad at everything but defensively were decent but we blame our defensive forwards all off season

But I know if Jurvo was allowed to play instead of our defensive forwards we'd score more because pretty soon Jurco will score I bet. I mean he is young. Our defensive forwards out score Jurco and everyone on this board will always complain about our lack of scoring because our defensive forwards play over guys like him. Makes no sense

[kickazz 5,459]

He's used like a premier shut down forward on this team. Probably one of the most utilized shut down centers in the league. For him to have glowing stats the way he was used he'd have to be the best defensive forward in the league and a star player. Glendening has tough assignments night in night out. For his possession numbers to be great he'd have to be outplaying top line players every night and therefore be a superstar. He plays the tough minutes so Z and co don't have to and last I checked our defensive game was one of the only respectable parts to our game last year

Literally the wings were a team that was bad at everything but defensively were decent but we blame our defensive forwards all off season

This is starting to become one of the most used and incorrect arguments for Glendening. The whole "well he plays tough minutes that's why his numbers are bad".

Let me show you other players in the league who also play so called "tough minutes". The title of this graph is a dead give away btw.

Take a look. Out of 15 players in the league who are subject to "tough minutes" Glendening ranks amongst the bottom at shot generation. What's his excuse? There is no excuse. He's just not a good shutdown forward. I'm moving on from this narrative that Luke Glendening is a good defensive forward.

He simply isn't. Kruger, Desjardins, Watson, Nystrom. Majority of the people on that list have better shot attempts than Glendening and similar defensive zone starts. And before anyone says, "it's because our coaches prefer to play safe". That excuse doesn't work when you look at other defensive forward on our team.

This guy ranks bottom in shots against when short handed, ranks bottom in GOALS AGAINST when short handed. Ranks towards bottom shot generation amongst other players in the league who have just as much defensive zone starts as him.

I think I'd rather us move on from using Glendening for this role and move onto using Sheahan and Helm. Or like I said earlier, give Frans Nielsen the defensive shutdown role just as Zetterberg was in from 2006-2013.

If people want to ride on the "Well Luke Glendening works hard and Holland, Babcock and Blashill all praised him so he must be good" narrative then by all means. But even the simplest stats, eyeball tests and obviously advanced stats are racked against this argument.

Anyways no point. 5 more years. Hopefully rookie coach learns from his mistakes sooner rather than later.

The top two overusage issues on this team are:

1. Henrik Zetterberg

2. Luke Glendening

Edited July 23, 2016 by kickazz

[joesuffP 1,746]

Again just because he doesn't generate shots doesn't mean he isn't good defensively. Wings defensive zone style is to sit back and allow outside shots and get into lanes. If Glendening had great possession numbers the way he is utilized he'd be Zetterberg in his prime. Giving up a lot of shots doesn't mean you're not doing your job defensively. To say Glendening isn't good defensively is to go against every knowledgeable coach he's ever had

You can really see who on this board goes to Winging it in Mowtown... As soon as you realize those people on that site are nothing but fans you become humbled and realize you're not more knowledgeable than NHL coaches and managers. I'm not going to just cast off all advanced analytics but the data is so skewed on a team to team basis. If we were a Stanley cup contender this data would be alarming. This is a bad hockey team and the data reflects that more so than a single player. What a strange coincidence, every player that isn't used defensively has outstanding numbers and every defensive player has terrible ones. I guess that can only mean those guys are trash and Jurco and smith are elite. If you ran your team based off these stats you wouldn't have a good team

[kickazz 5,459]

Again just because he doesn't generate shots doesn't mean he isn't good defensively. Wings defensive zone style is to sit back and allow outside shots and get into lanes. If Glendening had great possession numbers the way he is utilized he'd be Zetterberg in his prime. Giving up a lot of shots doesn't mean you're not doing your job defensively. To say Glendening isn't good defensively is to go against every knowledgeable coach he's ever had

You can really see who on this board goes to Winging it in Mowtown... As soon as you realize those people on that site are nothing but fans you become humbled and realize you're not more knowledgeable than NHL coaches and managers. I'm not going to just cast off all advanced analytics but the data is so skewed on a team to team basis. If we were a Stanley cup contender this data would be alarming. This is a bad hockey team and the data reflects that more so than a single player. What a strange coincidence, every player that isn't used defensively has outstanding numbers and every defensive player has terrible ones. I guess that can only mean those guys are trash and Jurco and smith are elite. If you ran your team based off these stats you wouldn't have a good team

Lol. First it's not WIIM. It's quite clear you have decided to brush away any fact given here and run the same narrative OVER AND OVER again. The original article came from Mlive that Krsmith posted.

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2016/07/analyzing_forwards_with_compar.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+detroit-redwings+%28Detroit+Red+Wings+-+MLive.com%29

Second, when all things are equal I showed you a graph of top 15 tough usage forwards in OTHER teams and still in denial. Cool. Seriously if you can't come up with a good argument and keep going on about "well I don't believe numbers" blah blah blah then that's fine. If you have nothing to show for your argument then this conversation is useless. I'm giving you basic stats and you're still stuck on anti-advanced stats narrative.

Basic simple, goals against, shots against, ice time.

Edited July 23, 2016 by kickazz