Rumors Thread

[krsmith17 7,191]

3 hours ago, Buppy said:

On the other hand, if a kid is only "tied" with the bottom of a rebuilding roster, that kid could probably use another year or two in the minors.

But there aren't any ties anyway. If Joe Hicketts was the author of his own comic book, titled "the Amazing Hicketts-man", the superhero's weakness would be the inability to lift the jockstraps of Red Wings' veteran defensemen. He was never tied with anyone. 

Of course, you'll say again that it isn't about Hicketts. But who is it about? Where did this whole idea of veteran bias come from? Who has ever been held back? Maybe you could argue Nyquist and Tatar for half the lockout season? Mantha for 10 games? And all three of them were also behind other young players. Does that really seem like a logical foundation for suggesting that the Wings don't give young players a fair shot?

Putting in two good young guys is a positive. Two young guys that you think maybe might not be any worse than the crap we already have is not. It's nothing. It's just a way to get sick of those kids earlier. (See: Kindl, Smith, Marchenko, Ouellet, Jensen, Hicketts by February 2020) 

The rules shouldn't change, and I doubt all the rhetoric about the wide-open roster, "overripe is over", etc. means what people think it means. It's an acknowledgement that our current team sucks. It sucks because our players aren't very good. Since they aren't very good, it's a naturally lower bar. Lower bar + better prospects + prospects in general developing pro-style habits earlier = more open roster. But there's no philosophical change. The "rule" is, and always has been, "get over the bar". Hopefully that never changes. If it does, that's when we'll need new management.

No, you're absolutely right. Hicketts wasn't held back. He never proved anything in training camp / pre-season. He didn't have the best performance of all defensemen on the team... Nope. 4 assists, 10 shots on goal, 4 blocked shots and 13 hits in 4 games averaging 19 minutes a night...

He played extremely well. Exactly what management wanted to see. Not a single person watching those games (except of course for Buppy and CRL) thought there was any way Hicketts could possibly be sent down after that showing.

They had to make room for this kid, right? Wrong. He was sent back down and struggled big time. Probably because he was disinterested and felt he should be in Detroit. Should he have been? Yes. Was that the right attitude? Not at all.

You can say, that was pre-season and he was playing against weaker competition and regular season is a different beast, etc. All true, but everyone else also played against the same weaker competition, but yet Hicketts was one of the most impactful players on the ice in each of the 4 games he played.

Fast forward to January 22nd when he finally got the call to play in his first NHL game in New Jersey. He played 15 minutes that night, was a +1, and played very well, despite not putting up any points. I was in Detroit watching that game on the big screen at the MotorCity Casino Hotel Viewing Party with hundreds of Wings fans. I remember everyone saying how good Hicketts looked and how he was there to stay. Even Larry Murphy said after the game how much he loved Hicketts' game and that he should have been up long before that night. I was pretty excited to see him play live the following night against the Flyers, my first game at the LCA. He was sent back down that following morning... They inserted Ouellet back in (who is clearly a better player...)

He didn't get called up again for another 2 months on March 27th against the Pens. He yet again played extremely well, putting up 2 assists, 6 blocked shots, 1 hit, in nearly 18 minutes, playing on both specialty teams. He played the following 3 games, before getting sent down for the last 2 games of the season.

He played 5 games last season, leading the entire team with a +5. He put up 3 assist, 2 shots on goal, 12 blocked shots and 9 hits. The only negative on his stat line is the 5 giveaways and only 1 takeaway. He averaged over 17 minutes a night, playing on both specialty teams units.

Of course I got dragged back into this. And you're right, I am going to say this isn't about Hicketts once again, because it's not. If Hicketts got traded tomorrow, I wouldn't give a s***. But when we have a 21 year old that has proven every opportunity he has gotten that he belongs on the team, has outplayed players on the team, he should be on the team. Period.

Again, I don't see Hicketts ever being anything more than a bottom pairing defenseman. However, we have several bottom pairing defensemen on this team as bad or worse than Hicketts. That's my issue. 

[SwedeLundin77 460]

2 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

No, you're absolutely right. Hicketts wasn't held back. He never proved anything in training camp / pre-season. He didn't have the best performance of all defensemen on the team... Nope. 4 assists, 10 shots on goal, 4 blocked shots and 13 hits in 4 games averaging 19 minutes a night...

He played extremely well. Exactly what management wanted to see. Not a single person watching those games (except of course for Buppy and CRL) thought there was any way Hicketts could possibly be sent down after that showing.

They had to make room for this kid, right? Wrong. He was sent back down and struggled big time. Probably because he was disinterested and felt he should be in Detroit. Should he have been? Yes. Was that the right attitude? Not at all.

You can say, that was pre-season and he was playing against weaker competition and regular season is a different beast, etc. All true, but everyone else also played against the same weaker competition, but yet Hicketts was one of the most impactful players on the ice in each of the 4 games he played.

Fast forward to January 22nd when he finally got the call to play in his first NHL game in New Jersey. He played 15 minutes that night, was a +1, and played very well, despite not putting up any points. I was in Detroit watching that game on the big screen at the MotorCity Casino Hotel Viewing Party with hundreds of Wings fans. I remember everyone saying how good Hicketts looked and how he was there to stay. Even Larry Murphy said after the game how much he loved Hicketts' game and that he should have been up long before that night. I was pretty excited to see him play live the following night against the Flyers, my first game at the LCA. He was sent back down that following morning... They inserted Ouellet back in (who is clearly a better player...)

He didn't get called up again for another 2 months on March 27th against the Pens. He yet again played extremely well, putting up 2 assists, 6 blocked shots, 1 hit, in nearly 18 minutes, playing on both specialty teams. He played the following 3 games, before getting sent down for the last 2 games of the season.

He played 5 games last season, leading the entire team with a +5. He put up 3 assist, 2 shots on goal, 12 blocked shots and 9 hits. The only negative on his stat line is the 5 giveaways and only 1 takeaway. He averaged over 17 minutes a night, playing on both specialty teams units.

Of course I got dragged back into this. And you're right, I am going to say this isn't about Hicketts once again, because it's not. If Hicketts got traded tomorrow, I wouldn't give a s***. But when we have a 21 year old that has proven every opportunity he has gotten that he belongs on the team, has outplayed players on the team, he should be on the team. Period.

Again, I don't see Hicketts ever being anything more than a bottom pairing defenseman. However, we have several bottom pairing defensemen on this team as bad or worse than Hicketts. That's my issue. 

Couldn't have stated this any better. I think it may be time to just ignore the "negative brigade."

[Buppy 1,720]

2 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

No, you're absolutely right. Hicketts wasn't held back. He never proved anything in training camp / pre-season. He didn't have the best performance of all defensemen on the team... Nope. 4 assists, 10 shots on goal, 4 blocked shots and 13 hits in 4 games averaging 19 minutes a night

...

Again, I don't see Hicketts ever being anything more than a bottom pairing defenseman. However, we have several bottom pairing defensemen on this team as bad or worse than Hicketts. That's my issue. 

Played so amazing yet you still don't think he's any good. Clearly you know there's more to evaluating a player than stats in a handful of games.

[SwedeLundin77 460]

11 minutes ago, Buppy said:

Played so amazing yet you still don't think he's any good. Clearly you know there's more to evaluating a player than stats in a handful of games.

You're splitting hairs because I or you or anyone else aren't any better at evaluating talent. We see what we see and dig into the stats as best we can. Krs and I just happen to believe that Hicketts has proven he should get a shot on the team now. It's an opinion, nothing else. You and CRL act like we are calling Hicketts an all-star defenseman when we've both clarified that we believe he's a 5/6 guy. Doesn't change the fact that he was one of the more impactful players in the handful of games he played last season, proving that he deserves a longer look this upcoming season. Every team needs 5/6 guys and rebuilding teams need to give their young guys when they've shown they are ready, a chance to continue to show they are ready in an extended capacity, no matter what line they may end up on.

14 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

There is talk that Vancouver has offered Bo Horvat and pick #7 to the Wings in exchange for Larkin and pick #30.  Tough call for Kenny there.

I think that's a definite no. Horvat is a few years older and I don't believe (correct me if I'm wrong) he's as dynamic a player as Larkin is. I feel like Larkin's ceiling is higher. It is nice, if true, that offers are coming in and it shows Vancouver's willingness to part with the #7

[Datsyukian-Deke 722]

39 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

There is talk that Vancouver has offered Bo Horvat and pick #7 to the Wings in exchange for Larkin and pick #30.  Tough call for Kenny there.

Source?

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 hour ago, Buppy said:

Played so amazing yet you still don't think he's any good. Clearly you know there's more to evaluating a player than stats in a handful of games.

Exactly. I don't think Hicketts is anything special, but I still think he's an upgrade over several other players on the team. Why is that so difficult to understand?

Hicketts played better than all of our bottom pair defensemen he was "competing against" in training camp / preseason, but yet still got demoted. Why? Because it was the "easy move". He could clear waivers. Others that didn't play as well, couldn't. Management and coaches always say "we want competition", "we want them to make our decision for us", "we want these young players to make a statement so we can't send them down". Hicketts made that statement and he still got sent down.

1 hour ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

There is talk that Vancouver has offered Bo Horvat and pick #7 to the Wings in exchange for Larkin and pick #30.  Tough call for Kenny there.

This would never happen. Not because it's not close to being a fair trade, but because Larkin is the one player that Detroit are not trading unless it's a massive overpayment. Larkin is being groomed and will eventually become the next Red Wings captain.

[amato 3,210]

If that rumor is true, it’d be more of a starting point probably? What would be acceptable to you guys?

Horvat + 7 for 30 + AA is probably not enough. Maybe Mantha? Not sure I’d do that though. 

What about 30, 2019 second, AA? They’d probably want one of our seconds this year and thensome though. But having 6 & 7 this year would be amazing. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

7 minutes ago, amato said:

If that rumor is true, it’d be more of a starting point probably? What would be acceptable to you guys?

Horvat + 7 for 30 + AA is probably not enough. Maybe Mantha? Not sure I’d do that though. 

What about 30, 2019 second, AA? They’d probably want one of our seconds this year and thensome though. But having 6 & 7 this year would be amazing. 

Remove Horvat, change the team to Chicago (8th overall) and I'd do it...

[mackel 679]

6 hours ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

There is talk that Vancouver has offered Bo Horvat and pick #7 to the Wings in exchange for Larkin and pick #30.  Tough call for Kenny there.

I'd do that in a New York minute.

[Buppy 1,720]

4 hours ago, SwedeLundin77 said:

You're splitting hairs because I or you or anyone else aren't any better at evaluating talent. We see what we see and dig into the stats as best we can. Krs and I just happen to believe that Hicketts has proven he should get a shot on the team now. It's an opinion, nothing else. You and CRL act like we are calling Hicketts an all-star defenseman when we've both clarified that we believe he's a 5/6 guy. Doesn't change the fact that he was one of the more impactful players in the handful of games he played last season, proving that he deserves a longer look this upcoming season. Every team needs 5/6 guys and rebuilding teams need to give their young guys when they've shown they are ready, a chance to continue to show they are ready in an extended capacity, no matter what line they may end up on.

No, I'm acting like you're saying he was treated unfairly in being left off last year's roster. Though I'm not sure you and Kr are saying the same thing. Seems you're talking about next year, while the rest of us are talking about last. 

I'd agree that Hicketts should get a shot next year, and he will, just as he had a shot last year. You just have to remember that "a shot" is not the same thing as "guaranteed spot on the roster". 

 

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Exactly. I don't think Hicketts is anything special, but I still think he's an upgrade over several other players on the team. Why is that so difficult to understand?

Hicketts played better than all of our bottom pair defensemen he was "competing against" in training camp / preseason, but yet still got demoted. Why? Because it was the "easy move". He could clear waivers. Others that didn't play as well, couldn't. Management and coaches always say "we want competition", "we want them to make our decision for us", "we want these young players to make a statement so we can't send them down". Hicketts made that statement and he still got sent down.

Unsurprisingly, you missed the point. When you are evaluating Hicketts you are clearly considering factors besides his play in a few preseason games, but then you say that those games should have determined the roster. It's hypocritical. Why shouldn't the team also look at other factors when determining the depth chart?

Or is that you just can't accept that the team could draw a different conclusion from yours? Doesn't it make a whole lot more sense to think that management just has a different opinion than yours when it comes to how good these players are? There are far too many exceptions to give any credence to the "veteran bias" narrative. While there is no doubt a hesitance to give up assets in favor of a kid who only "might" be about the same, that demonstrates nothing more than awareness of the uncertainty in judging prospects. Takes more than a handful of games for a marginal prospect like Hicketts to work himself into a "tie" with an established player. He shouldn't have sucked so bad in GR last year. He would have been called up sooner, maybe stuck around longer, and maybe we wouldn't even be debating his position for next year. Or maybe he'd be another Russo and we'd already be done with him. 

But he's likely done enough in his few games that another good camp could easily move him ahead of at least Ouellet. (Fair chance we've just seen enough of Ouellet regardless.) If he's not on the roster next year, it will most likely be because one of more of the other kids jump ahead of him. And everyone will ignore that kid and continue to act like Hicketts is getting screwed because he's a kid.

[Buppy 1,720]

40 minutes ago, amato said:

If that rumor is true, it’d be more of a starting point probably? What would be acceptable to you guys?

Horvat + 7 for 30 + AA is probably not enough. Maybe Mantha? Not sure I’d do that though. 

What about 30, 2019 second, AA? They’d probably want one of our seconds this year and thensome though. But having 6 & 7 this year would be amazing. 

AA or Mantha + 30 wouldn't be enough to get the #7 alone. I don't know if it would even get Horvat alone. He's better than either of them, and younger. 

Larkin +30 is at least worth considering. Larkin is already better, and could yet take another step towards "elite", whereas Horvat probably peaks slightly above where he's at now. So the question is would the #7 be enough of an impact over who we'd get at 30 to be worth the downgrade? 

If even Mantha +30 + one of the other (or maybe both) early picks would get Horvat + 7, I couldn't say "yes" hard enough. That's why it would never happen of course.

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 hour ago, Buppy said:

Unsurprisingly, you missed the point. When you are evaluating Hicketts you are clearly considering factors besides his play in a few preseason games, but then you say that those games should have determined the roster. It's hypocritical. Why shouldn't the team also look at other factors when determining the depth chart?

Or is that you just can't accept that the team could draw a different conclusion from yours? Doesn't it make a whole lot more sense to think that management just has a different opinion than yours when it comes to how good these players are? There are far too many exceptions to give any credence to the "veteran bias" narrative. While there is no doubt a hesitance to give up assets in favor of a kid who only "might" be about the same, that demonstrates nothing more than awareness of the uncertainty in judging prospects. Takes more than a handful of games for a marginal prospect like Hicketts to work himself into a "tie" with an established player. He shouldn't have sucked so bad in GR last year. He would have been called up sooner, maybe stuck around longer, and maybe we wouldn't even be debating his position for next year. Or maybe he'd be another Russo and we'd already be done with him. 

But he's likely done enough in his few games that another good camp could easily move him ahead of at least Ouellet. (Fair chance we've just seen enough of Ouellet regardless.) If he's not on the roster next year, it will most likely be because one of more of the other kids jump ahead of him. And everyone will ignore that kid and continue to act like Hicketts is getting screwed because he's a kid.

What else do we as fans have to evaluate players on other than the games, interviews and articles? He obviously proved he was worthy of at least an opportunity early on in the season ahead of Ouellet based on his play during those preseason games.

So what do you think was the reason management decided to send him down? Do you think he had a bad attitude? Doubt that. Came in to camp out of shape? Doubt it. Or maybe it was like I said, just the easy way out. Send the waiver eligible player down because we can.

I'm sure you're going to disagree, but I still say he deserved a look earlier last season and every opportunity to make it this season (along with other players). If they don't want players to play their way onto the roster, maybe they should stop saying things like I previously mentioned and what Blashill just said in a recent interview about the roster being "wide open"...

[Buppy 1,720]

2 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

What else do we as fans have to evaluate players on other than the games, interviews and articles? He obviously proved he was worthy of at least an opportunity early on in the season ahead of Ouellet based on his play during those preseason games.

So what do you think was the reason management decided to send him down? Do you think he had a bad attitude? Doubt that. Came in to camp out of shape? Doubt it. Or maybe it was like I said, just the easy way out. Send the waiver eligible player down because we can.

I'm sure you're going to disagree, but I still say he deserved a look earlier last season and every opportunity to make it this season (along with other players). If they don't want players to play their way onto the roster, maybe they should stop saying things like I previously mentioned and what Blashill just said in a recent interview about the roster being "wide open"...

Of course fans base opinions on simplistic and usually biased evaluations of limited data. That's why fans shouldn't make roster decisions or constantly act like they'd make better roster decisions than people who have won championships in roster-decision-making.

I don't think I (or anyone here) could come up with a truly accurate list of criteria used to make a proper evaluation, but generally speaking I would say real game-situation physical abilities, puck skills, decision making, off-ice habits, and history at lower levels. The sum of all of that (plus whatever I missed) for Hicketts would be, in the opinion of management, somewhat below Jensen at least, and certainly below any of the actual vets. (Ouellet is debateable. It's plausible enough that the team would rather have Hicketts play in GR than sit in the pressbox in Detroit, even if they thought he was better. But let's not argue that this proves your point. It's conjecture, Ouellet isn't a vet, and you're not arguing for Hicketts to be a healthy scratch anyway.) 

You say "just the easy way out" as if it makes any sense. It doesn't, nor does it actually fit the data. Too many exceptions. Just a couple years ago we waived Frk and Pulk to give waiver-exempt AA a spot. Larkin walked on at 19. Like half the roster earned their full-time spots while still exempt. 2013 with a rookie Smith and a fairly new Kindl, Brian Lashoff still managed to push veteran Ian White out of the lineup, and later that year we brought Dekeyser straight out of college. In fairly short order we dumped Kindl and sent Lashoff back in favor of Ouellet and Marchenko, with the latter soon being jettisoned to make room for Jensen. I'd bet there will be some waiver-exempt kid on the roster next season. Maybe more than one. There is no evidence that the team is at all unwilling to move fringe players when they think they have a better option.

The only logical conclusion is that the team just doesn't agree with your assessment of Hicketts relative to our other defensemen. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

5 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

What else do we as fans have to evaluate players on other than the games, interviews and articles? He obviously proved he was worthy of at least an opportunity early on in the season ahead of Ouellet based on his play during those preseason games.

So what do you think was the reason management decided to send him down? Do you think he had a bad attitude? Doubt that. Came in to camp out of shape? Doubt it. Or maybe it was like I said, just the easy way out. Send the waiver eligible player down because we can.

I'm sure you're going to disagree, but I still say he deserved a look earlier last season and every opportunity to make it this season (along with other players). If they don't want players to play their way onto the roster, maybe they should stop saying things like I previously mentioned and what Blashill just said in a recent interview about the roster being "wide open"...

Because he wasn't hands down better than anything we already had. And as a 21 year old 5'8" Dman it was probably better for his development to play another year getting bigger minutes in the AHL.

As I've already stated, this kid is getting pushed on to the roster way faster than more qualified Dman we had in the past. I love how everyone conveniently ignores that. That's not because he's overly talented, it's because the Red Wings find themselves without talent.

You guys admit he'll never be anything for more than a 5/6 Dman, yet you're upset that he didn't play over our other 5/6 Dmen last year. Think about that for for more than 2 seconds.

[SwedeLundin77 460]

44 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Because he wasn't hands down better than anything we already had. And as a 21 year old 5'8" Dman it was probably better for his development to play another year getting bigger minutes in the AHL.

As I've already stated, this kid is getting pushed on to the roster way faster than more qualified Dman we had in the past. I love how everyone conveniently ignores that. That's not because he's overly talented, it's because the Red Wings find themselves without talent.

You guys admit he'll never be anything for more than a 5/6 Dman, yet you're upset that he didn't play over our other 5/6 Dmen last year. Think about that for for more than 2 seconds.

We have and you’re wrong on this one. But that’s okay, you’ll get used to it.

[krsmith17 7,191]

7 hours ago, Buppy said:

Of course fans base opinions on simplistic and usually biased evaluations of limited data. That's why fans shouldn't make roster decisions or constantly act like they'd make better roster decisions than people who have won championships in roster-decision-making.

I don't think I (or anyone here) could come up with a truly accurate list of criteria used to make a proper evaluation, but generally speaking I would say real game-situation physical abilities, puck skills, decision making, off-ice habits, and history at lower levels. The sum of all of that (plus whatever I missed) for Hicketts would be, in the opinion of management, somewhat below Jensen at least, and certainly below any of the actual vets. (Ouellet is debateable. It's plausible enough that the team would rather have Hicketts play in GR than sit in the pressbox in Detroit, even if they thought he was better. But let's not argue that this proves your point. It's conjecture, Ouellet isn't a vet, and you're not arguing for Hicketts to be a healthy scratch anyway.) 

You say "just the easy way out" as if it makes any sense. It doesn't, nor does it actually fit the data. Too many exceptions. Just a couple years ago we waived Frk and Pulk to give waiver-exempt AA a spot. Larkin walked on at 19. Like half the roster earned their full-time spots while still exempt. 2013 with a rookie Smith and a fairly new Kindl, Brian Lashoff still managed to push veteran Ian White out of the lineup, and later that year we brought Dekeyser straight out of college. In fairly short order we dumped Kindl and sent Lashoff back in favor of Ouellet and Marchenko, with the latter soon being jettisoned to make room for Jensen. I'd bet there will be some waiver-exempt kid on the roster next season. Maybe more than one. There is no evidence that the team is at all unwilling to move fringe players when they think they have a better option.

The only logical conclusion is that the team just doesn't agree with your assessment of Hicketts relative to our other defensemen. 

I agree that we as fans shouldn't pretend to know better than management. But I also don't think we should just assume, just because they're managers, that every decision they make is the right one. I don't think I know more than Holland, and I certainly don't think I could do a better job than him as a general manager. But I'm not so blind and naive to think he never makes mistakes. I give credit where credit is due, but also criticize when I feel it's warranted.

Of course we can't see all the behind the scenes stuff that goes into evaluating players. But based on what we can see, and articles I've read from people that actually do see "some" of the behind the scenes stuff, I think Hicketts should have been at least given an opportunity out of camp last year. He certainly should be given every opportunity this year, assuming he performs at the same level in training camp.

Maybe Hicketts surprises and becomes a Krug type player for us in the next couple years. Maybe he falters and becomes a career AHLer. No one knows for sure what Hicketts will be at the NHL level, I just want him to be given an opportunity. I'm sure he will be... eventually.

[Datsyukian-Deke 722]

You can tell it’s the off-season when we have 3-4 pages straight of Hicketts chat 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

9 hours ago, SwedeLundin77 said:

We have and you’re wrong on this one. But that’s okay, you’ll get used to it.

Wrong about what? Or do you not have a counter argument?

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

I agree that we as fans shouldn't pretend to know better than management. But I also don't think we should just assume, just because they're managers, that every decision they make is the right one. I don't think I know more than Holland, and I certainly don't think I could do a better job than him as a general manager. But I'm not so blind and naive to think he never makes mistakes. I give credit where credit is due, but also criticize when I feel it's warranted.

Of course we can't see all the behind the scenes stuff that goes into evaluating players. But based on what we can see, and articles I've read from people that actually do see "some" of the behind the scenes stuff, I think Hicketts should have been at least given an opportunity out of camp last year. He certainly should be given every opportunity this year, assuming he performs at the same level in training camp.

Maybe Hicketts surprises and becomes a Krug type player for us in the next couple years. Maybe he falters and becomes a career AHLer. No one knows for sure what Hicketts will be at the NHL level, I just want him to be given an opportunity. I'm sure he will be... eventually.

First bold: You keep bringing up this season. Everyone agrees he's going to get his shot this year... Not that he should get a shot, that he's going to get his shot. There's no argument to be had, so I don't why you keep throwing it in, we're talking about this past season exclusively.

Second bold: My eyes can't roll any harder. You're acting like he's not being given any opportunity and that he won't be on the roster full time in a few months, when it's pretty much confirmed he will. AGAIN, Hicketts path to the NHL has been one of the fastest we've seen for a Red Wings defender. And that's a defender that you admit probably won't ever climb out of a bottom pairing roll. Based on that fact there should be no need to rush this mans career, yet it is being rushed anyway! There's literally nothing to complain about...

 

 

Edited June 17, 2018 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[SwedeLundin77 460]

29 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Wrong about what? Or do you not have a counter argument?

Hard to follow? We've already laid out our argument for Hicketts getting a shot. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Just now, SwedeLundin77 said:

Hard to follow? We've already laid out our argument for Hicketts getting a shot. 

Which I've addressed. You're not addressing my counter point, just saying "wrong"

[Andy Pred 48 337]

Libor Sulak will be the 6/7 D man this year. He played well in Finland last year had a good WC playing plenty of mins and is a very mobile player, he may need time in the A to adjust to the smaller ice pad but I think we have a steal here, and he will save the front office a lot of cap $’s

Edited June 17, 2018 by Andy Pred 48

[kipwinger 8,522]

Ummm...I don't really want to go back and read all this Hicketts stuff so I'm just going to assume that some people REALLY want Hicketts on the team, and some people (correctly) think he's not very good.  I'd only add that he was resoundingly outplayed by Hronek last season in the AHL and still got a call up, where he was gifted minutes he didn't earn (Blashill even acknowledged this) and scored enough powerplay points to make some folks overlook how abysmal he looked at even strength.  He got badly outplayed in the AHL last season by Lashoff and McIlrath, so I'm not sure why anyone thinks he's better than Ouellet or Jensen. 

And we're leaving out the obvious fact that despite his supposed "grit" or whatever, the plucky little pluckster from Kamloops is one Tom Wilson forecheck away from death at the NHL level.  He's neither big, nor quick, nor overly skilled.  He's the Rudy Ruettiger of hockey, and while it makes a good story folks need to remember that Rudy never played an NFL game. 

Edited June 17, 2018 by kipwinger

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

12 hours ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

 

If Hicketts doesn't come in faster this year, he will go the way of the dinosaur.  He was behind the play A LOT last year.

My concern would be if he can maintain that style of play over a full season at the NHL level with bigger, faster, and stronger opponents, At some point, tenacity and hard work can no longer overcome lack of skill.

Edited June 17, 2018 by Neomaxizoomdweebie

[krsmith17 7,191]

6 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

First bold: You keep bringing up this season. Everyone agrees he's going to get his shot this year... Not that he should get a shot, that he's going to get his shot. There's no argument to be had, so I don't why you keep throwing it in, we're talking about this past season exclusively.

Second bold: My eyes can't roll any harder. You're acting like he's not being given any opportunity and that he won't be on the roster full time in a few months, when it's pretty much confirmed he will. AGAIN, Hicketts path to the NHL has been one of the fastest we've seen for a Red Wings defender. And that's a defender that you admit probably won't ever climb out of a bottom pairing roll. Based on that fact there should be no need to rush this mans career, yet it is being rushed anyway! There's literally nothing to complain about...

I don't think it's a given that he will be given an opportunity this season. And to be honest, I don't even care if he is. What I care about, and what this is all about, is IF he proves himself in training camp / preseason (the way I think he did last year) and isn't given an opportunity, that's when it would bother me. I just hate that this organization keeps talking about how a player needs to "steal a job", when in my opinion, Hicketts did that last year and wasn't rewarded.

My argument isn't that Hicketts should be on this roster, I could care less about that. My argument is that after his showing last year, he should have at least been given an opportunity. If he had started the season on the roster and struggled, whatever, send him down. I am not at all invested in Hicketts as a player. If he succeeds and becomes a bottom pairing defenseman, great. If not, no big loss.

Svechnikov is in the same situation as Hicketts going into this season. He's on the bubble and needs to steal a job, correct? What if he comes into camp, plays great, puts up 6-7 points in 4 preseason games (more than any player on the team), and gets sent down? Would fans have any reason / right to complain about that?