10/2 Exhibition GDT : Chicago Blackhawks at Red Wings, 6:00 EST

[Jesusberg 1,256]

I agree, but this notion that Ouellet is a "lock to make the team" over Sproul is what frustrates the hell out of me. And I'm not just talking about you saying it, it's what every Red Wings reporter is saying. Khan writes it in every other article...

I think Sproul has been the far better player in training camp as well as the two preseason games they played. 2 assists, 9 shots, +2 vs. 1 assist, 3 shots, even +/-. F*** always taking the safe player. We need defensemen that are willing to take risks jumping up in the play to create offense. I just wish our system would allow these types of players to play their game and get the offense going...

Anyway, for me it's Sproul >>> Ouellet and it's not even close...

I don't disagree with the notion that they need someone who's willing to take some risks. I just can't see it with the current state of the defense corps at the moment, though.

They've got issues all over the place. Both Kronwall and Ericsson are slowing down/facing injury-related issues. I don't think they have much faith in Smith, either. If they do, I think he's on a pretty short leash. Green is solid, but a bit of a roamer, too. That basically leaves DeKeyser and Marchenko as the "reliable" defenders on the team right now. To me that screams "we're taking the safe guy". Ouellet's not racking-up stats this preseason, but that's not really his game, anyway. I think he's made a number of smart stick plays and positional decisions.

As I said, I've been high on Sproul ever since they drafted him. However, I can him repeatedly winding up for a slapshot on the power play, having his shot blocked and losing the race back. I just don't think his foot speed is there. I'm all for taking him on as the eighth defender, but I wouldn't take him over Ouellet right now.

[frankgrimes 1,836]

Neither of those guys is going to be more than.a third pairing guy if even that, so there is absolutely no need to create so unfunny new names or repeat the anti ericsson saga in every ******* thread!

Before the defense takes more risks they should learn how. to their job which means: play defense which also means block shots, hit everything in sight and make it hard to the opponent to get into the crease.

Also people are putting way too much stock into this whole pre-season performances..pre-season is a chance for the coaches to see how needs. to be sent back to the AHL, juniors and which guy migh be able to make the team for at least 9 games, nothing more nothing less.

People saying XO would be claimed, whats wrong with it? Well good for him if he can't make this "defense" maybe someone else has even worse one and he migh get a better chane there so I would be very happy for him.

[Dabura 12,207]

Before the defense takes more risks they should learn how. to their job which means: play defense which also means block shots, hit everything in sight and make it hard to the opponent to get into the crease.

There's more to good defense than just defending. If you're focusing on blocking shots and "hitting everything in sight," you're focusing on playing without the puck -- and in this day and age, playing without the puck is playing losing hockey. All those dominant Wings teams of yesteryear? They played with the puck and forced the opposition to focus on blocking shots and hitting. They forced the opposition to endure, and enduring is death. And enduring has never been more death than it is today. Today's game is about speed and skill and possession prowess. It's about having the puck and doing good things with it.

http://www.defendingbigd.com/2012/4/13/2941077/dave-tippett-defense-mark-fistric-matt-niskanen

"We had a player that was supposed to be a great, shut-down defenseman. He was supposedly the be-all, end-all of defensemen. But when you did a 10-game analysis of him, you found out he was defending all the time because he can’t move the puck.

"Then we had another guy, who supposedly couldn’t defend a lick. Well, he was defending only 20 percent of the time because he’s making good plays out of our end. He may not be the strongest defender, but he’s only doing it 20 percent of the time. So the equation works out better the other way. I ended up trading the other defenseman."

[joesuffP 1,746]

I think Ericsson and Kronwall will look a lot better this year in a reduced role. Certainly better than Sproul and Ouellette. I think depth is one of this teams strengths both on offense and defense. What we lack is top end guys

[frankgrimes 1,836]

Leave me alone with that wanna be statistical stuff please, for the f****** 1000 ***** s*** time I don't care about it!!

A defender is there to defend, period. His job is to wait till the other guy comes into his time then take the puck away and then send it to the forward no need to make this stuff more complicated than it needs to be. What that Liles writer describes is a forward not a defender and he does it in a very complicated way..one of the worst articles I've ever read, it's bulls***. If you think my definition is wrong ok but fine problem but next time please link a basic hockey article thank you much.

Edited October 3, 2016 by frankgrimes

[LeftWinger 4,962]

No matter, because Erection will be on the team before Jensen, all day, everyday, whether he's skating on one leg or none.

Also, Jensen will be the one waived before long. With Kronwall probably not starting the season, both XO and Sproul have a spot until Kronwall is healthy. Kronner should stay out until he is 100,500% healthy too. He needs to be. This team with a full healthy Kronwall is better. A broken only at 60% Krownwall, no thanks. Keep two of the kids here until he is healthy and then go from there.

regarding Jensen, he has been and is a better option that Erection, but he will be waived, because...Holland. I hope Jensen gets an opportunity soon, preferably with us, but he can and will be an NHL defenseman.

regarding Frk, it would be a yuuuuuge mistake to waive him. While Pulk is injured (is Jurco still hurt?) he will stay with the club, and then I believe he will make someone else expendable. If he goes on waivers he WILL get snagged up. No doubt. He's fast, RH'd, hard shot, and has a good brain for the game. He finds the open part of the ice better than Pulk, and I am still a fan of Pulk, but it just seems he cannot translate to the NHL.

[NitzGuy 38]

Leave me alone with that wanna be statistical stuff please, for the f****** 1000 ***** s*** time I don't care about it!!

A defender is there to defend, period. His job is to wait till the other guy comes into his time then take the puck away and then send it to the forward no need to make this stuff more complicated than it needs to be. What that Liles writer describes is a forward not a defender and he does it in a very complicated way..one of the worst articles I've ever read, it's bulls***. If you think my definition is wrong ok but fine problem but next time please link a basic hockey article thank you much.

The "sending the puck to the forward" part is exactly what he is talking about. If our D can't break it out worth a s*** then there isn't much our offense can do about it. Then it's right back to defending again.

[LeftWinger 4,962]

I get that Ericsson is one of the players on your hit list and you like to call him out as often as you can, but Ericsson did not look bad in the two games he played. He actually looked the way we should want / expect him to play. Solid in his own end, no noticeable gaffes, and capable of eating up minutes in the bottom 4. And by the way, despite what your biased opinion says, Ericsson was better than Jensen in both games they played. Don't get me wrong, I'd still take Jensen on this team over Ericsson without a second thought, but in this very small sample size of pre-season games, Ericsson > Jensen...

..as long as you're keeping score of my hit list, here is the pecking order:

Ericsson

Howard

Helm

Nyquist

Smith

Pulk

Jurco

(these two for roster spots. Especially if they aren't going to be utilized correctly.)

...not that they all need to go (the 1st two for sure do) but that is just the pecking order. If not E, then Howard, if not E and Howard, then Helm...etc...

If they only got rid of E and Howard, that would be great, but reality says, they need to clear some spots up front. AA, Mantha and Frk all deserve to be on the 23 man roster.

There are two player I am really worried about if/when they go on waivers, Frk and Coreau. Its not that I wouldn't be worried about Sproul, but he at least is (should) be staying around until Kronwall is healthy. We'll cross that bridge soon though. Frk is ready and so is Coreau, I'd hate to lose him because we've spent two entire season's grooming him to our system and he is very familiar with the current goalie coach. It would suck to lose him and have to start over with another.

Edited October 3, 2016 by LeftWinger

[Jesusberg 1,256]

There are two player I am really worried about if/when they go on waivers, Frk and Coreau. Its not that I wouldn't be worried about Sproul, but he at least is (should) be staying around until Kronwall is healthy. We'll cross that bridge soon though. Frk is ready and so is Coreau, I'd hate to lose him because we've spent two entire season's grooming him to our system and he is very familiar with the current goalie coach. It would suck to lose him and have to start over with another.

I spent the summer thinking Coreau had to pass through waivers too, but I read an article earlier today that stated he's likely waiver-exempt. I'm thinking a few of the sites I use to keep track of contracts/waiver status are wrong. The writer cited CapFriendly as his source. Reading it over, I'm thinking he's correct.

https://www.capfriendly.com/waivers-faq

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/jared-coreau

Based on the information from both of those links, Coreau signed at 21, and goaltenders who sign at 20-22 years of age have 4 years/60 games until they're waiver-eligible. I think the mix up occurred because, while Coreau signed in 2012-13, he didn't play his first professional game until 2013-14. CF's waiver FAQ states:

For players whom are 20 or older, the year in which they play their first Professional Game (e.g. NHL, AHL, ECHL, KHL, European Leagues) is the year which is considered their first year towards the waiver exemption; however, the player must be under an NHL contract.

So I mean, unless their information is incorrect/I'm misreading something, it looks as the team can safely send him back down to Grand Rapids this season.

[LeftWinger 4,962]

That would be great news! Thx!