• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

MabusIncarnate

12/3 GDT - Red Wings @ Penguins - 7:00 PM EST

Recommended Posts

I'm fine with Coreau playing tonight. This is a game they went into heavily favored to lose regardless, Mrazek came off two solid starts after a few abysmal appearances, why toss him in against the offensive powerhouse Pens and risk him giving up 4-5 and knocking him down a notch? 

The Isles game tomorrow is less tilted, for both Mrazek and his confidence, and as a game overall that can be won. Mrazek gives us the better chance to win than Coreau in a more winnable game. Just my opinion though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, RedWingsRox said:

Damn ... just 4 pages for a game with Pittsburgh ... reflection of the interest in this team.  This team is very depressing to follow and watch.  

I'm just here for the free booze. I don't even like hockey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This team is an embarrassment to all of us.  Having a scrub like Glendenning playing on the wing with your top center is sad.  Also, the team fell asleep defensively on those backdoor plays all game long.  Yet another game given away.  

51 minutes ago, puckbags said:

I'm so sick of that stupid effing look that Blashill has on his face half the time that reminds me of Tortorella.  Like he can't figure out what just

http://nimg.sulekha.com/sports/original700/ken-holland-2011-5-13-1-10-38.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shocky2002 said:

Per my friend's own calculations (he's an analytics-reliant gambler), this is true. Mrazek vs Howard in this game isn't much of a difference because the Pens are so favored to win (68%+ either way). Against the Islanders, Mrazek gives the Wings a 2% edge over Howard (44% vs 42%)

Your buddy must not be that good of a gambler if he gives Howard a 42% chance to win this game. :blind:

Edited by GoalieManPat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't complain about the result if your defense leaves the opponents superstars unguarded and alone before the net. I blame our swarm defense and therefore Blashill for it. It might have been a decent experiment worth to try out but it is time to pull the plug on it. It's a shame that we waste our good goalie performances like this.

 

On a more positive note: What a great debut by Coreau, really happy for him. The goals were not on him and he made at least two brilliant saves. We have 3 more than decent goalies, that makes it much more easy to trade away Howard if the right opportunity arises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Richdg said:

Mantha was second in ice time for the F's-that is good. Z was first-that is bad. We need to put Larkin and Mantha together and play them each 20+ mins per game.

So you want to break up the the line chemistry that is actually working? Rock solid logic my friend. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kickazz said:

So you want to break up the the line chemistry that is actually working? Rock solid logic my friend. 

I want the players that will be here for the next 10+ years to start building chemistry. That can only be done by playing together. By not playing Larkin and Mantha together we are delaying their development. Same is true with using Larkin as a winger instead of a C. The only way for him to get better as a C is to play the position. Take our lumps now, let the young guys learn and improve so that 2-3 years from now we are trending back up.

Z getting 20 mins per game is bad for Z and bad for the team. His body can't handle it over the course of a season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Richdg said:

I want the players that will be here for the next 10+ years to start building chemistry. That can only be done by playing together. By not playing Larkin and Mantha together we are delaying their development. Same is true with using Larkin as a winger instead of a C. The only way for him to get better as a C is to play the position. Take our lumps now, let the young guys learn and improve so that 2-3 years from now we are trending back up.

Z getting 20 mins per game is bad for Z and bad for the team. His body can't handle it over the course of a season.

You're assuming that Larkin and Mantha will/should be playing together in the future.  Dats and Z brought more to the team on separate lines because the opposition couldn't stack their defense against one line.  The Z Mantha combo with Larkin on a separate line is just fine for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Echolalia said:

You're assuming that Larkin and Mantha will/should be playing together in the future.  Dats and Z brought more to the team on separate lines because the opposition couldn't stack their defense against one line.  The Z Mantha combo with Larkin on a separate line is just fine for now.

There is no benefit to the team or the players by doing it. There is one major difference between the Dat/Z pair and the Larkin/Mantha pair. Dat and Z are both natural C's. That is not true with Mantha and Larkin. Mantha is a winger and needs a natural C to help feed him the puck. Do the Ducks play getzlef and Perry on the same line? yes. Same thing here.

Besides, over the last 12 years every time we had to win a game babcock and blashill put Dat and Z back together for the must wins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Richdg said:

I want the players that will be here for the next 10+ years to start building chemistry. That can only be done by playing together. By not playing Larkin and Mantha together we are delaying their development. Same is true with using Larkin as a winger instead of a C. The only way for him to get better as a C is to play the position. Take our lumps now, let the young guys learn and improve so that 2-3 years from now we are trending back up.

Z getting 20 mins per game is bad for Z and bad for the team. His body can't handle it over the course of a season.

Your logic still doesn't make sense. If you play Mantha with Larkin "for the sake of the future" that's still only one line you are developing. What's the point of that when you don't have lines 2-4? It's likely better to have Mantha learn to be an NHL winger (regardless of WHO is center is) and it's likely better to have Larkin learn to be an NHL center (regardless of who his wingers are). Chemistry doesn't mean much in 10 years if you don't learn to be good at your actual position. Right now Larkin is a terrible center. Right now Mantha is showing promise as a Winger (likely because his centerman is a good one). If you put a terrible center with a new winger, that's not really going to help either of them. Larkin needs good support on his sides to help him out (he's got some good wingers) and Mantha needs a good center to help him groom up as a winger; he's got Z. 

When you start driving a car would you have another 16 year old who doesn't know how to drive or would you have your mom or dad that knows the rules and system of the road? I get that these guys are already hockey players (unlike the scenario of learning to drive a car) but these guys are NEW NHL players - a completely different beast than minors or college.

Datsyuk came into the league playing on a line with Brett Hull. Same with Zetterberg when he joined them the year after. Hudler was put on a line with Zetterberg, same with Filpula eventually. Nyquist was put on a line with Zetterberg. Tatar was put on a line with Datsyuk. It's been the process all along. For more than a decade now. 

18 minutes ago, Richdg said:

There is no benefit to the team or the players by doing it. There is one major difference between the Dat/Z pair and the Larkin/Mantha pair. Dat and Z are both natural C's. That is not true with Mantha and Larkin. Mantha is a winger and needs a natural C to help feed him the puck. Do the Ducks play getzlef and Perry on the same line? yes. Same thing here.

Besides, over the last 12 years every time we had to win a game babcock and blashill put Dat and Z back together for the must wins.

Z was a natural winger converted to Center. Common knowledge. 

The benefit is both of them are playing with veterans or established players and have a support system in their own individual lines. See previous paragraph. 

And the last bolded part. Babcock put Z and Datsyuk together on a line in must-win because they naturally clicked since day 1 of being on a line together. They weren't forced into having a chemistry. They just worked. We got lucky with those two. That doesn't mean Mantha and Larkin will necessarily work. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Richdg said:

There is no benefit to the team or the players by doing it. There is one major difference between the Dat/Z pair and the Larkin/Mantha pair. Dat and Z are both natural C's. That is not true with Mantha and Larkin. Mantha is a winger and needs a natural C to help feed him the puck. Do the Ducks play getzlef and Perry on the same line? yes. Same thing here.

Besides, over the last 12 years every time we had to win a game babcock and blashill put Dat and Z back together for the must wins.

Z is a natural winger...

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