• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

kickazz

Ken Holland "We protected our best goaltender"

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Awesome analogy dude... Problem is, Sproul has never given himself the title of offensive defenseman, let alone... superman... You know how he got labeled as an offensive defenseman? By playing like an offensive defenseman, you know, jumping into the rush, providing offense, and putting up points. He hasn't been able to do that quite as much as we'd like in his first 28 NHL games, therefore he is no longer an offensive defenseman... Got it...

It was a simple analogy but still an anaology nonetheless and makes the point. And it doesn't matter WHO gives the title; so not sure what the purpose of nitpicking that out is lol. 

Lol I'm going to keep going with the analogy because it's fun. Say that someone is considered superman/superhuman  when they were younger because when they were a kid and teen they were stronger than other kids their age. But say when the kids got older, the other kids in the age group caught up, and surpass the supposed superman kid. Is that kid still considered superman? Or does it mean he was once given a title which turned out to NO LONGER BE TRUE when he got older and hit some real situations?

Yeah. Just because a player was an Offensive defenseman statistically in some  junior and minor league doesn't mean he is one in the major league. The title doesn't just stick with you if you have nothing to show for it. 

Here's a more legit analogy related to hockey. When Zetterberg came into the league he was considered a goal scorer by 2008. Scored, 31, 33, 39, 43 goals (5th highest in the league!). But as time went on, his goal scoring dropped to 20s range and his assists started to pick up. Now tell me, is Zetterberg, who was once considered a goal scorer still considered one? No. He isn't. Nowadays you hear him considered as a "playmaker", a "set up guy". Why? Because statistically he no longer is a goal scorer. In fact, statistically he's actually a playmaker.

Same thing for Nyquist and Tatar. One is starting to be considered a goal scorer while the other is starting to be considered a playmaker. I'll let you guess who is who. 

Titles don't mean a thing unless there's something to show for it. And it certainly isn't a permanent thing. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 It's time for the Ilitch family to fire Kenny Holland, the GM of the Dead Red Wings!!!  Kenny Holland gave away all those sweetheart contracts to Third Rate players that cannot produce... The Dead Red Wings have no offense no defense no power play and can't play 60 Minutes of quality hockey and constantly giveaways all over the ice... Kenny Holland has screwed the Dead Red Wings for the next 3 to 5 years... The new production line should be Larkin, Tyler Bertuzzi and Matha... The Griffin's play a better quality hockey than the Dead Red Wings... Fire Kenny Holland!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, kickazz said:

It was a simple analogy but still an anaology nonetheless and makes the point. And it doesn't matter WHO gives the title; so not sure what the purpose of nitpicking that out is lol. 

Lol I'm going to keep going with the analogy because it's fun. Say that someone is considered superman/superhuman  when they were younger because when they were a kid and teen they were stronger than other kids their age. But say when the kids got older, the other kids in the age group caught up, and surpass the supposed superman kid. Is that kid still considered superman? Or does it mean he was once given a title which turned out to NO LONGER BE TRUE when he got older and hit some real situations?

Yeah. Just because a player was an Offensive defenseman statistically in some  junior and minor league doesn't mean he is one in the major league. The title doesn't just stick with you if you have nothing to show for it. 

Here's a more legit analogy related to hockey. When Zetterberg came into the league he was considered a goal scorer by 2008. Scored, 33, 39, 43 goals. But as time went on, his goal scoring dropped to 20s range and his assists started to pick up. Now tell me, is Zetterberg, who was once considered a goal scorer still considered one? No. He isn't. Nowadays you head him considered as a "playmaker", a "set up guy"

Re: "...first 28 NHL games, therefore he is no longer an offensive defenseman... Got it..."

Zetterberg evolved into more of a two-way forward. He didn't just all of a sudden forget how to score. He developed his game to be more of a two-way forward.

So if Sproul isn't an offensive defenseman, what is he?

http://forecaster.thehockeynews.com/player/9068

Assets: Excels on offense, but also has very good size and some physicality to his game. Can quarterback a power play and put up very good scoring numbers.

Career Potential: Big offensive defenseman with a little upside.

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/prospects/ryan_sproul/

Talent Analysis: Sproul boasts tremendous offensive instincts, can quarterback a power play, and no longer is knocked for his skating ability or defensive skills. He has shown vast improvement since being drafted. His defensive game is still developing and he continues to refine the secondary areas of his game.

Future: Sproul continued to hone his overall game in the AHL in 2015-16, spending his third pro season with the Grand Rapids Griffins. A durable defenseman with some offensive ability and prototypical size, he is still working to become more consistent in his positional game. Long-term, Sproul is an intriguing prospect with top-four NHL potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get the semantics here...the guy is an offensive defenseman at this point....period.  The better analogy is to look at highly skilled forwards (offensive guys) who are being seasoned in the AHL.  Until a top 6 spot opens up for them, it doesn't necessarily make sense to call them up to fill in on the 3rd or 4th line as that would not be their role.  You plug them in to the NHL before they are ready, they may produce very little offense....that doesn't mean they are not offensive players.

Doesn't mean he'll always be considered an offensive defenseman, but if he's not, it would mean a shift in his game.  28 games at the NHL level being used to assess someone is absurd.  However, for the sake of looking at stats, which are somewhat meaningless in this small sample size, he had the 3rd highest PPG stat amongst defensemen on the Wings last season (very, very, very close to a tie at #2).

Edited by toby91_ca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Re: "...first 28 NHL games, therefore he is no longer an offensive defenseman... Got it..."

Zetterberg evolved into more of a two-way forward. He didn't just all of a sudden forget how to score. He developed his game to be more of a two-way forward.

So if Sproul isn't an offensive defenseman, what is he?

http://forecaster.thehockeynews.com/player/9068

Assets: Excels on offense, but also has very good size and some physicality to his game. Can quarterback a power play and put up very good scoring numbers.

Career Potential: Big offensive defenseman with a little upside.

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/prospects/ryan_sproul/

Talent Analysis: Sproul boasts tremendous offensive instincts, can quarterback a power play, and no longer is knocked for his skating ability or defensive skills. He has shown vast improvement since being drafted. His defensive game is still developing and he continues to refine the secondary areas of his game.

Future: Sproul continued to hone his overall game in the AHL in 2015-16, spending his third pro season with the Grand Rapids Griffins. A durable defenseman with some offensive ability and prototypical size, he is still working to become more consistent in his positional game. Long-term, Sproul is an intriguing prospect with top-four NHL potential.

First, Zetterberg was a two-way forward since his junior career. He started killing penlaties for the Red Wings since his rookie season. In fact he was considered for Selke candidacy well before Datsyuk was in his career (finished 9th in the 2005-06 season, then 7th in 06-07 season, as a comparison Datsyuk didnt even finish top 10 until he actually won it in the 08 season). 

Second, you're just adding to my point. Considered an offensive defenseman in his juniors and minors career. Whether he lives up to it in the NHL is another story.

This is reminding me a lot about Smith. Supposedly an offensive defenseman who can't even put up 20 points and he's played how many NHL games now..? Just checked: 309 NHL games holy s***

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, toby91_ca said:

I don't get the semantics here...the guy is an offensive defenseman at this point....period.  The better analogy is to look at highly skilled forwards (offensive guys) who are being seasoned in the AHL.  Until a top 6 spot opens up for them, it doesn't necessarily make sense to call them up to fill in on the 3rd or 4th line as that would not be their role.  You plug them in to the NHL before they are ready, they may produce very little offense....that doesn't mean they are not offensive players.

Doesn't mean he'll always be considered an offensive defenseman, but if he's not, it would mean a shift in his game.  28 games at the NHL level being used to assess someone is absurd.  However, for the sake of looking at stats, which are somewhat meaningless in this small sample size, he have the 3rd highest PPG stat amongst defensemen on the Wings last season (very, very, very close to a tied at #2).

This.

Quite possibly the dumbest conversation I've ever been a part of on here... But you're right kickazz. Hell, you're never wrong. Sproul isn't an offensive defenseman. Not sure what he is, but definitely not an offensive defenseman...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

How well (or poorly) a player plays doesn't determine his style of play. There are offensive defensemen, defensive defensemen, and two-way defensemen. Sproul IS an offensive defensemen. Whether he ever hacks it as an NHLer or not doesn't change that. I'm okay with him not getting every game, the only thing I ask is he's given a fair shot. Don't bench him for one giveaway (he's going to make mistakes), and don't scratch him for weeks at a time for one off game (especially when other guys don't get the same treatment). If he's given a fair crack at it, and he doesn't pan out, whatever, let him walk at the end of the season.

I'm guessing that if Sproul struggles again then whatever shot he's given won't be fair in your mind. The new Jurco.

1 hour ago, toby91_ca said:

I don't get the semantics here...the guy is an offensive defenseman at this point....period.  The better analogy is to look at highly skilled forwards (offensive guys) who are being seasoned in the AHL.  Until a top 6 spot opens up for them, it doesn't necessarily make sense to call them up to fill in on the 3rd or 4th line as that would not be their role.  You plug them in to the NHL before they are ready, they may produce very little offense....that doesn't mean they are not offensive players.

Doesn't mean he'll always be considered an offensive defenseman, but if he's not, it would mean a shift in his game.  28 games at the NHL level being used to assess someone is absurd.  However, for the sake of looking at stats, which are somewhat meaningless in this small sample size, he had the 3rd highest PPG stat amongst defensemen on the Wings last season (very, very, very close to a tie at #2).

The semantics aren't the point. I'm not trying to quibble about labels, I'm pointing out that the labels don't actually mean anything. Being labeled an offensive defenseman doesn't mean he's providing offense. Labels and potential should not form the foundation for an assessment of how a player is playing, or for comparing players at present, or making an argument for giving a player more time. That is what is absurd.

Like I said before, it's fine to be optimistic about his potential, and no one is arguing against giving him another shot. Just that we shouldn't be saying Sproul was as good as Ouellet because we think someday he'll be better. Or that we prefer the "offensive" guy over the "defensive" guy, and criticizing the coach for doing the opposite, when in fact the defensive guy is also providing more offense. 

 

 

Share this post


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

Like I said before, it's fine to be optimistic about his potential, and no one is arguing against giving him another shot. Just that we shouldn't be saying Sproul was as good as Ouellet because we think someday he'll be better. Or that we prefer the "offensive" guy over the "defensive" guy, and criticizing the coach for doing the opposite, when in fact the defensive guy is also providing more offense. 

 

 

Perhaps you can "factually" state that Ouellet provide more offense last season (12 pts vs. 7pts), he also did in in 66 games vs. Sproul's 27 games.  I'm not really getting into the who's better argument, but I think I'd agree, right now, XO has been better.  He hasn't been better offensively though and there are factual stats to back that up (last 5 seasons in all leagues, junior, AHL and NHL):

Sproul - reg season - 321 gp, 50g, 121pts (0.16gpg, 0.38ppg), playoffs - 30gp, 6g, 19pts (0.20gpg, 0.63ppg)

Ouellet - reg reason - 329 gp, 24g, 95pts (0.07gpg, 0.29ppg), playoffs - 49gp, 10g, 26pts (0.20gpg, 0.53ppg)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maltby was considered a sniper/scorer in juniors. He was a bottom 6 grinder in the NHL.
Just because Sproul was an offensive D-man in other leagues doesn't mean he'll ever be one in the NHL. He might continue to try to play that style, but if he does so unsuccessfully I wouldn't considered him an NHL puckmover. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought this thread was about Ken Holland and goalie protection. Got derailed as many other countless threads.

Yes, I concur with KH, we protected our best goaltender. Yes, he's getting up there in age but he is certainly not old and can produce. And Mrazek seems to need a kick in the booty in order to see if he's going to wake up and play to what many of us thinks he can. I for one am looking forward to the goalie battle next season. Many a times the only thing that kept us in games were them. Mostly Howard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Buppy said:

I'm guessing that if Sproul struggles again then whatever shot he's given won't be fair in your mind. The new Jurco.

Can you say definitively that Jurco was given a fair shot? No, just like I can't say definitively that he wasn't. It's all conjecture. I do believe he was mishandled. Whether you agree with that or not means absolutely nothing to me. But for whatever reason, it bothers some people when someone says something they don't necessarily agree with, even if it is just an opinion. I think Sproul needs a solid stretch of games once he's healthy, to get into a rhythm and gain some confidence. If he's given as much rope as a guy like Ericsson has been given in regards to turnovers and poor play, and he still looks out of place, then scratch him. He's an RFA at the end of this season. If he doesn't impress by then, let him walk. Simple as that.

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Maltby was considered a sniper/scorer in juniors. He was a bottom 6 grinder in the NHL.
Just because Sproul was an offensive D-man in other leagues doesn't mean he'll ever be one in the NHL. He might continue to try to play that style, but if he does so unsuccessfully I wouldn't considered him an NHL puckmover. 

No one is saying that Sproul will be a good offensive defenseman at the NHL level. All we're saying is, at this point in his career, he has always been known for his offensive ability, which gave him the label of "offensive defenseman". A 28 game stretch is not going to change that one way or another. He's still a defenseman that would like to play an offensive style game, he just hasn't been able to do it at the highest level yet. Maybe he never will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Can you say definitively that Jurco was given a fair shot? No, just like I can't say definitively that he wasn't. It's all conjecture. I do believe he was mishandled. Whether you agree with that or not means absolutely nothing to me. But for whatever reason, it bothers some people when someone says something they don't necessarily agree with, even if it is just an opinion. I think Sproul needs a solid stretch of games once he's healthy, to get into a rhythm and gain some confidence. If he's given as much rope as a guy like Ericsson has been given in regards to turnovers and poor play, and he still looks out of place, then scratch him. He's an RFA at the end of this season. If he doesn't impress by then, let him walk. Simple as that.

No one is saying that Sproul will be a good offensive defenseman at the NHL level. All we're saying is, at this point in his career, he has always been known for his offensive ability, which gave him the label of "offensive defenseman". A 28 game stretch is not going to change that one way or another. He's still a defenseman that would like to play an offensive style game, he just hasn't been able to do it at the highest level yet. Maybe he never will.

We're saying the same thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need more data on Sproul. I hope he's healthy and can play and is given the chance this coming season. The hockey lords know we need an(other) offensive defenseman. Our back doesn't look too sharp regarding that. Except for Green we don't have excessively offensive minded d-men.

If he blossoms he could fill that role on our second pairing. However as a tidbit, my takeaway thoughts about Sproul last season was that he looked good offensively but looked damn bad defensively. I would like to be proven wrong next season.

Edit addon: Another tidbit: he can skate. As in he can Skate. A prerequisite for offensive danger.

Edited by Jacksoni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, toby91_ca said:

Perhaps you can "factually" state that Ouellet provide more offense last season (12 pts vs. 7pts), he also did in in 66 games vs. Sproul's 27 games.  I'm not really getting into the who's better argument, but I think I'd agree, right now, XO has been better.  He hasn't been better offensively though and there are factual stats to back that up (last 5 seasons in all leagues, junior, AHL and NHL):

Sproul - reg season - 321 gp, 50g, 121pts (0.16gpg, 0.38ppg), playoffs - 30gp, 6g, 19pts (0.20gpg, 0.63ppg)

Ouellet - reg reason - 329 gp, 24g, 95pts (0.07gpg, 0.29ppg), playoffs - 49gp, 10g, 26pts (0.20gpg, 0.53ppg)

But I'm talking about who was better this year, in the NHL. How they scored in juniors/AHL doesn't mean anything. 

Sproul had a better ppg and p/60 rate when looking at all situations, I'll give him that. However, that isn't a very fair comparison. Sproul got significant PP time and almost no SH time, while Ouellet was the exact opposite. Sproul's smaller sample size is also more subject to skewing.

5v5 scoring rates for the two were nearly identical. Sproul was more sheltered, getting much more favorable offensive deployment. Individual shot rates were similar. With Ouellet on the ice, the team took more shot attempts, more shots on net, and scored more.

That's why I say he produced more offense, not because of his total points. And that in addition to being better defensively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Howard last year was better then Mrazek. Like the move or not, it worked out.


None of the goalies would have been taken, especially after all the stuff management let fly about Mrazek's attitude. He was and is the best asset, and may have been taken if all there was for LV to worry about was a poor season, but other factors obv weighed in. With the way Holland operates, I don't think the smear he put on Mrazek was to see he gets claimed, but the opposite. Talk s*** about him, LV backs off, he keeps his asset and the potential he has in him. And, he can still be happy about the fact he gave his love Howard protected status. Don't wanna piss off a guy who's done soooo much for the franchise in his career, now do we Kenny?

Howard-Approaching mid-30's, injury prone, inconsistent, lacklustre playoff goalie.

Mrazek- Inconsistent, attitude, and a poor work ethic when he's at a crossroads and needs to work a lot harder and ditch that aggressive playing style that gets him exposed.

Coreau-Inconsistent, few holes in his game to fix, plays small for a big goalie, needs more AHL time.

Not exactly a list that would leave a GM salivating at the thought of taking one. Only one would be Petr, strictly on potential. Holland got away with not losing any though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

 


None of the goalies would have been taken, especially after all the stuff management let fly about Mrazek's attitude. He was and is the best asset, and may have been taken if all there was for LV to worry about was a poor season, but other factors obv weighed in. With the way Holland operates, I don't think the smear he put on Mrazek was to see he gets claimed, but the opposite. Talk s*** about him, LV backs off, he keeps his asset and the potential he has in him. And, he can still be happy about the fact he gave his love Howard protected status. Don't wanna piss off a guy who's done soooo much for the franchise in his career, now do we Kenny?

Howard-Approaching mid-30's, injury prone, inconsistent, lacklustre playoff goalie.

Mrazek- Inconsistent, attitude, and a poor work ethic when he's at a crossroads and needs to work a lot harder and ditch that aggressive playing style that gets him exposed.

Coreau-Inconsistent, few holes in his game to fix, plays small for a big goalie, needs more AHL time.

Not exactly a list that would leave a GM salivating at the thought of taking one. Only one would be Petr, strictly on potential. Holland got away with not losing any though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Why doesn't Kronwall get the same cuddly love treatment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why doesn't Kronwall get the same cuddly love treatment?


He does. Wasnt on the protected list, but no reason to take him at this point, unless to take on salary. I read somewhere he's projected as second pairing D this season and Holland seems to be happy that he and E are/will be ready to go. Oh the joy!

Howard would have been perfectly safe had he been unprotected, just like every other vet except Z. He has about as much value as Kronwall does right now to other teams.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

 


He does. Wasnt on the protected list, but no reason to take him at this point, unless to take on salary. I read somewhere he's projected as second pairing D this season and Holland seems to be happy that he and E are/will be ready to go. Oh the joy!

Howard would have been perfectly safe had he been unprotected, just like every other vet except Z. He has about as much value as Kronwall does right now to other teams.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

But now Kronwall is pissed off after doing sooooo much for the franchise in his career

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But now Kronwall is pissed off after doing sooooo much for the franchise in his career


That's really too bad. Not every vet can get protection like Jimmy for no reason I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess there were better players that Ken needed to protect over Kronwall. Too bad we can't say the same for Howard.


Yep. Guess so. But, he pretty much guaranteed Mrazek's protection anyways with his mouth, so I guess it all evens out. Two for one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Free protection just by leaking a few news tid bits? Clever move Ken!


It worked, even when many analysts said it was the biggest mind boggler on the unprotected lists. When you say a goalie has a bad attitude and an ego, ditched practice early, was at odds with the coach, got pissed about losing starts, and wouldn't take any coaching or advice on his play, then yeah, you probably hurt his value.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, chaps80 said:

 


It worked, even when many analysts said it was the biggest mind boggler on the unprotected lists. When you say a goalie has a bad attitude and an ego, ditched practice early, was at odds with the coach, got pissed about losing starts, and wouldn't take any coaching or advice on his play, then yeah, you probably hurt his value.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

So you agree it was a good move by management?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you agree it was a good move by management?


Just cause it worked (or maybe it didn't, they just wanted a forward with Fleury a sure bet), doesn't mean it was good to talk that much s*** about him. Was kinda surprising coming from the Wings, who usually care about their players and keep things hush for the most part. I don't recall the last time I've heard Holland talk about a player like that. He must really think Mrazek has a lot of talent he's wasting and he's pissed off enough that he hasn't taken the starting job and ran with it to say those things publicly. So maybe it is good? Who the f*** knows.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

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