Red Wings players / prospects on loan

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 hour ago, kipwinger said:

I've been saying for a while that I think he'd be good in the "Bertuzzi" type role, being the complimentary winger to a shooter. I think Veleno would be good opposite Zadina and a higher end center. A line of Zadina and Veleno flanking Kent Johnson or Matt Benier would look pretty good as a 2nd line.

I still think long term Veleno is better suited and will be a center for the Red Wings.

[kipwinger 8,524]

2 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

I still think long term Veleno is better suited and will be a center for the Red Wings.

I’m sure you do. Why do you suppose his offense exploded after he got moved to the wing? 

[krsmith17 7,191]

2 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I’m sure you do. Why do you suppose his offense exploded after he got moved to the wing? 

Because he's still young and developing... He was starting to take off before being moved to wing, but playing a position with less defensive responsibility has allowed him to play more of an offensive role. That doesn't mean he's better suited in that role long term though.

Did you also think Larkin was better suited on the wing after a very strong rookie season on Zetterberg's wing? Do you think Larkin would have put up 45 points in his rookie season, if he were playing center?

Why do you suppose his offense has "exploded" at all, with his "limited offensive ability"?

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

4 hours ago, The 91 of Ryan said:

In theory you're correct. But in practice it does nothing. How many Americans are putting on a new mask with every trip? Every interaction? Every day? How many bother to ever wash their mask? How many go into a store then immediately touch the mask that's supposed to stop droplets with their bare hands upon leaving?

Mask wearing is asinine unless everyone is going to be extremely thorough and disciplined. Warning: about 99% of the population isn't doing anywhere close to enough to have this practice make any sort of sense. Even the numb skulls like you I guarantee are re-wearing used masks everyday, even if you won't admit it.

And Sweden has proved this. Despite no restrictions and uncommon mask wearing there infections and deaths are lower than ours.

We're dealing with an influenza that is so far less infectious than the common cold or common flu. It's killed .001% of the American population. Survival rates are extremely high for over 95% of Americans, with only folks who are chronically ill or 85+ under any real threat. There is no reason to change our behavior because of this. There is no reason to enforce mask wearing. There is no reason to restrict business or travel.

Influenza happens. This is nothing special. You folks are morons.

 

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/12/22/sweden-coronavirus-covid-response/

Your sole outlier, Sweden, is crumbling.

Seatbelts lose efficacy if not properly worn either. And yet no one is advocating for their removal.

The problem with your argument is that you're saying that if some people are doing harm to themselves by not properly protecting themselves, then there's no point in doing it at all. That's wrong.

If someone is foolish enough to not wash or replace their masks on a regular basis, then the only person they're hurting, is themselves. That isn't even the primary reason for wearing masks. It's to protect others. Dirty or clean, that person's mask is still functioning as a barrier to transmitting the virus to others. So it's still doing its job.

And I actually do change my mask, multiple times a day actually. I only wear disposable 3 ply surgical masks so that I don't have to worry about washing or cleaning them. 

And I love how you keep pointing to your numbers. Every pandemic starts with low numbers. At one time, Cholera, Smallpox, and the Spanish Flu only infected and/or killed a small percentage of people too.

And if you really believe what you're saying, walk into your nearest ICU and tell all of the doctors and nurses there that "influenza happens". See how that works out for ya.

BTW, influenza and corona are 2 entirely different viruses. Oops.

[kipwinger 8,524]

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

Because he's still young and developing... He was starting to take off before being moved to wing, but playing a position with less defensive responsibility has allowed him to play more of an offensive role. That doesn't mean he's better suited in that role long term though.

Did you also think Larkin was better suited on the wing after a very strong rookie season on Zetterberg's wing? Do you think Larkin would have put up 45 points in his rookie season, if he were playing center?

Why do you suppose his offense has "exploded" at all, with his "limited offensive ability"?

Larkin played wing the whole year. His offense didn’t explode. Veleno, on the other hand, wasn’t scoring well at all and then he moved to the wing and then he started scoring. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

4 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Larkin played wing the whole year. His offense didn’t explode. Veleno, on the other hand, wasn’t scoring well at all and then he moved to the wing and then he started scoring. 

What's your point? Larkin was able to put up strong offensive numbers as a 19 year old rookie because he was playing on Zetterberg's wing. If he were the 2C behind Z, he most definitely wouldn't have put up close to those numbers.

Why did Larkin, a player that played his entire career at center, play on the wing his first couple seasons transitioning to the NHL? And why did he move back to center?

Veleno has played his entire career up until this point at center. His style of play is very much suited to play center. The Red Wings will most definitely want him to play center. He will most likely be an NHL center.

[kipwinger 8,524]

45 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

What's your point? Larkin was able to put up strong offensive numbers as a 19 year old rookie because he was playing on Zetterberg's wing. If he were the 2C behind Z, he most definitely wouldn't have put up close to those numbers.

Why did Larkin, a player that played his entire career at center, play on the wing his first couple seasons transitioning to the NHL? And why did he move back to center?

Veleno has played his entire career up until this point at center. His style of play is very much suited to play center. The Red Wings will most definitely want him to play center. He will most likely be an NHL center.

My point is that Joe Veleno is nearly 21 years old and can’t score in the SHL unless he’s moved to an easier position. 

Larkin,on the other hand, was moved to the wing for one season to ease his transition to the NHL as a 19 year old. The NHL. The hardest league in the world.

Veleno will be 21 yo in a week and he can’t stick at center on one of the worst teams in the SHL. If he’s such a good center why can’t he play there on one of the worst teams in the 3rd or 4th best hockey league in the world? 

[krsmith17 7,191]

7 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

My point is that Joe Veleno is nearly 21 years old and can’t score in the SHL unless he’s moved to an easier position. 

Larkin,on the other hand, was moved to the wing for one season to ease his transition to the NHL as a 19 year old. The NHL. The hardest league in the world.

Veleno will be 21 yo in a week and he can’t stick at center on one of the worst teams in the SHL. If he’s such a good center why can’t he play there on one of the worst teams in the 3rd or 4th best hockey league in the world? 

Maybe he was taking time to transition to his third league, third country in three years... Maybe he would have been scoring as a center at this point, had he been left there. Like I said, he was starting to play better prior to the switch, which was the reason for the promotion in the first place.

There's no doubt Larkin was a better prospect, further along in his development. That doesn't mean Veleno won't figure it out, and won't become a solid NHL center.

[kipwinger 8,524]

21 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Maybe he was taking time to transition to his third league, third country in three years... Maybe he would have been scoring as a center at this point, had he been left there. Like I said, he was starting to play better prior to the switch, which was the reason for the promotion in the first place.

There's no doubt Larkin was a better prospect, further along in his development. That doesn't mean Veleno won't figure it out, and won't become a solid NHL center.

He didn’t get promoted. He’s a second line winger. He started as a second line center. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

46 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

He didn’t get promoted. He’s a second line winger. He started as a second line center. 

Nope. He was playing third line center, and got promoted to second line wing.

[kipwinger 8,524]

36 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Nope. He was playing third line center, and got promoted to second line wing.

I’ll take your word for it. So Veleno hasn’t played higher than 3rd line at center on a terrible team that’s missing its number 1 center (Handemark)? And almost all of his points came after he was moved to wing. And you think that means he’s “better suited” at center? Okay man. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

6 hours ago, kipwinger said:

I’ll take your word for it. So Veleno hasn’t played higher than 3rd line at center on a terrible team that’s missing its number 1 center (Handemark)? And almost all of his points came after he was moved to wing. And you think that means he’s “better suited” at center? Okay man. 

Absolutely. Try watching him play rather than stat watching. What are the attributes that make up a good center? Skating, hockey IQ, faceoffs, defensive awareness. Veleno is an elite skater, has high hockey IQ, and is good on faceoffs. He's not so great defensively *yet*, but that can be worked on, and will certainly have to be for him to play center at the highest level. The tools are there. He'll get there.

Handemark is usually listed as the 1C, but the top two lines (Handemark / Westerholm) get around the same ice time. I was going to say that Handemark was the 1C and Westerholm was the 2C in my last post, but I thought you would push back based on point totals. I know how much you love point totals... Anyway, point being, if that's the case Veleno was promoted from 3C to 1W on Handemark's wing. Once Handemark got injured, Malmo picked up Howden, and Veleno has since been playing on his wing.

Veleno has been playing on the top line, and been one of the top players for the past few weeks, on a team starved for offense. It's clearly working, so why would the coach change anything? This won't change anything for Yzerman and the Red Wings organization though. I'm sure they still sees Veleno as a center, and they will continue to develop him as such.

[kipwinger 8,524]

7 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Absolutely. Try watching him play rather than stat watching. What are the attributes that make up a good center? Skating, hockey IQ, faceoffs, defensive awareness. Veleno is an elite skater, has high hockey IQ, and is good on faceoffs. He's not so great defensively *yet*, but that can be worked on, and will certainly have to be for him to play center at the highest level. The tools are there. He'll get there.

Handemark is usually listed as the 1C, but the top two lines (Handemark / Westerholm) get around the same ice time. I was going to say that Handemark was the 1C and Westerholm was the 2C in my last post, but I thought you would push back based on point totals. I know how much you love point totals... Anyway, point being, if that's the case Veleno was promoted from 3C to 1W on Handemark's wing. Once Handemark got injured, Malmo picked up Howden, and Veleno has since been playing on his wing.

Veleno has been playing on the top line, and been one of the top players for the past few weeks, on a team starved for offense. It's clearly working, so why would the coach change anything? This won't change anything for Yzerman and the Red Wings organization though. I'm sure they still sees Veleno as a center, and they will continue to develop him as such.

Why would the coach pick Veleno to play on the wing if he's so good at center? And why, if he's so good at center, does he score more on the wing? And why, if he has all the attributes of a good center, wasn't he higher than a 3rd line center?

And knock if off with the "try watching the player and not the stats" crap. Literally your ENTIRE argument for Cholowski is based on his stats. You only don't care about stats when they paint a different picture of Veleno than the one you're trying to sell. Veleno isn't even a top six center on a terrible team in the 3rd or 4th best league professional league in the world. He's a 21 year old, 2nd year pro, and he can't crack the top six as a center on a really bad team. It's probably about time you just faced facts, he's probably going to play on the wing in the NHL if he wants to be in the top six.

Edited January 8, 2021 by kipwinger

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 hour ago, kipwinger said:

Why would the coach pick Veleno to play on the wing if he's so good at center? And why, if he's so good at center, does he score more on the wing? And why, if he has all the attributes of a good center, wasn't he higher than a 3rd line center?

Why did Blashill "pick" Larkin to play on the wing if he was so good at center? And why, if he was so good at center, did he score more on the wing? And don't give me s*** about Larkin was younger. It's irrelevant. He still started out as a winger, and evolved into a center, like most young players. Larkin was also a much better prospect, further ahead in his development.

20 years old is still very young in the development of a young hockey player. I don't know why he's playing wing in Malmo, but he played center in Grand Rapids, and he will play center in Detroit. You're the only person that seems to think Veleno is better suited on the wing long term. And it's kind of confusing considering how much you value centers over wingers...

1 hour ago, kipwinger said:

And knock if off with the "try watching the player and not the stats" crap. Literally your ENTIRE argument for Cholowski is based on his stats. You only don't care about stats when they paint a different picture of Veleno than the one you're trying to sell. Veleno isn't even a top six center on a terrible team in the 3rd or 4th best league professional league in the world. He's a 21 year old, 2nd year pro, and he can't crack the top six as a center on a really bad team. It's probably about time you just faced facts, he's probably going to play on the wing in the NHL if he wants to be in the top six.

My ENTIRE argument for Cholowski might be based on stats if I never watched him play. That's not the case though. I've never missed a game he's played in Detroit, and I've seen a good many he's played in Grand Rapids. Very little of my argument for Cholowski has to do with stats. It's based on his play and even more than that, current circumstances with him and the team.

[ely s 457]

Veleno was the second line center, then switched to first line LW and played wing on the second line yesterday

[kipwinger 8,524]

2 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Why did Blashill "pick" Larkin to play on the wing if he was so good at center? And why, if he was so good at center, did he score more on the wing? And don't give me s*** about Larkin was younger. It's irrelevant. He still started out as a winger, and evolved into a center, like most young players. Larkin was also a much better prospect, further ahead in his development.

20 years old is still very young in the development of a young hockey player. I don't know why he's playing wing in Malmo, but he played center in Grand Rapids, and he will play center in Detroit. You're the only person that seems to think Veleno is better suited on the wing long term. And it's kind of confusing considering how much you value centers over wingers...

My ENTIRE argument for Cholowski might be based on stats if I never watched him play. That's not the case though. I've never missed a game he's played in Detroit, and I've seen a good many he's played in Grand Rapids. Very little of my argument for Cholowski has to do with stats. It's based on his play and even more than that, current circumstances with him and the team.

Larkin didn't score more on the wing. His career high NHL season was at center. Larkin didn't evolve into a center lol. He was always a center, played wing one season to ease his transition to the NHL as a 19 year old and never played there again.

Veleno, on the other hand, is a 21 year old (in a few days) second year pro who needs to be moved to the wing in order to crack the top six of the worse team in the SHL. And only then did he start scoring at anything close to a reasonable rate. Those are the facts.

Your argument about Cholowski IS based solely on his production. You're just saying differently now because it's convenient. How do I know? Because NOTHING about his underlying usage, possession metrics, or anything else suggests that he's "offensive" and yet you keep saying it. I'd love to hear you argue that Cholowski is an "offensive defenseman" without using his mediocre stats, if you really believe that your whole point of view doesn't depend on them.

Just now, ely s said:

Veleno was the second line center, then switched to first line LW and played wing on the second line yesterday

Not according to Malmo's lineups that are posted publicly on twitter before every single game. I went through them all yesterday after KRsmith corrected me when I called him the 2nd line center. There is not a single instance in which he was listed as the 2nd line center. He was the 3rd line center. You're wrong (as I was). After being moved to the wing he did indeed play on the top line for a while, but as of yesterday's game he was listed as the 2nd line RW.

[kipwinger 8,524]

As a 19 year old rookie, Dylan Larkin wasn't good enough at center to crack a playoff caliber NHL roster over top three centers Pavel Daysuk, Henrik Zetterberg, and Brad Richards. As a result he played one season on the wing.

As a 21 year old 2nd year pro, Joe Veleno isn't good enough a center to crack the top six of the worse team in the SHL despite being behind several other centers who have never played a single NHL game. And so he was moved to the wing.

Only @KRsmith would act like these two things are similar.

Edited January 8, 2021 by kipwinger

[ely s 457]

3 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Not according to Malmo's lineups that are posted publicly on twitter before every single game. I went through them all yesterday after KRsmith corrected me when I called him the 2nd line center. There is not a single instance in which he was listed as the 2nd line center. He was the 3rd line center. You're wrong (as I was). After being moved to the wing he did indeed play on the top line for a while, but as of yesterday's game he was listed as the 2nd line RW.

he was listed as the second line center most of the time according to stats.swehockey.se  

but it doesn´t really matter anyway, he is a good player and he will become a good NHL player, I don´t know if he will be our second line center or third line, even a winger, who cares. He´s got all the tools. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

10 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Larkin didn't score more on the wing. His career high NHL season was at center. Larkin didn't evolve into a center lol. He was always a center, played wing one season to ease his transition to the NHL as a 19 year old and never played there again.

Larkin scored 45 points in his first season on the wing, then 32 points in his second season at center. I'm pretty sure 45 is more than 32. By your dumbass logic, Larkin should have went back to the wing after that second season because he very obviously struggled to produce at center...

Larkin was always a center and played one season on the wing to ease the transition. Veleno has always been a center and has played, up to this point, 10ish games on the wing. And according to you, this indicates that Veleno isn't cut out to be a center... LOL

17 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Veleno, on the other hand, is a 21 year old (in a few days) second year pro who needs to be moved to the wing in order to crack the top six of the worse team in the SHL. And only then did he start scoring at anything close to a reasonable rate. Those are the facts.

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah... Let's repeat everything for another few hours, shall we?...

18 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Your argument about Cholowski IS based solely on his production. You're just saying differently now because it's convenient. How do I know? Because NOTHING about his underlying usage, possession metrics, or anything else suggests that he's "offensive" and yet you keep saying it. I'd love to hear you argue that Cholowski is an "offensive defenseman" without using his mediocre stats, if you really believe that your whole point of view doesn't depend on them.

By watching him dumbass... He skates well, and moves the puck well. He makes good decisions on the power-play, can get pucks through lanes, on net and on sticks.

Literally all I'm saying is that he's better than 33 year old Marc Staal and 32 year old Alex Biega, and deserves another look on the 3rd pair and 2nd PP unit, and you're, for whatever reason, all up in arms about it...

23 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Not according to Malmo's lineups that are posted publicly on twitter before every single game. I went through them all yesterday after KRsmith corrected me when I called him the 2nd line center. There is not a single instance in which he was listed as the 2nd line center. He was the 3rd line center. You're wrong (as I was). After being moved to the wing he did indeed play on the top line for a while, but as of yesterday's game he was listed as the 2nd line RW.

Yeah, because the lineup sheet never lies... I'll take ely's word for it (someone that lives in Europe (Sweden?) and watches the games) over someone that thinks he knows everything by looking at game sheets and stat lines...

[krsmith17 7,191]

5 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

As a 19 year old rookie, Dylan Larkin wasn't good enough at center to crack a playoff caliber NHL roster over top three centers Pavel Daysuk, Henrik Zetterberg, and Brad Richards. As a result he played one season on the wing.

As a 21 year old 2nd year pro, Joe Veleno isn't good enough a center to crack the top six of the worse team in the SHL despite being behind several other centers who have never played a single NHL game. And so he was moved to the wing.

Only @KRsmith would act like these two things are similar.

Dylan Larkin, a legit number one NHL center.

Joe Veleno, a high end center prospect.

Only kipwinger would act like these two things are similar.

Imagine thinking Malmo, "the worst team in the 4th best league" know what's better for Veleno's development than Steve Yzerman and the Detroit Red Wings...

[kipwinger 8,524]

6 minutes ago, ely s said:

he was listed as the second line center most of the time according to stats.swehockey.se  

but it doesn´t really matter anyway, he is a good player and he will become a good NHL player, I don´t know if he will be our second line center or third line, even a winger, who cares. He´s got all the tools. 

Cool bro. The team said he was the 3C, I don't really care about some website.

[kipwinger 8,524]

12 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Larkin scored 45 points in his first season on the wing, then 32 points in his second season at center. I'm pretty sure 45 is more than 32. By your dumbass logic, Larkin should have went back to the wing after that second season because he very obviously struggled to produce at center...

Larkin was always a center and played one season on the wing to ease the transition. Veleno has always been a center and has played, up to this point, 10ish games on the wing. And according to you, this indicates that Veleno isn't cut out to be a center... LOL

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah... Let's repeat everything for another few hours, shall we?...

By watching him dumbass... He skates well, and moves the puck well. He makes good decisions on the power-play, can get pucks through lanes, on net and on sticks.

Literally all I'm saying is that he's better than 33 year old Marc Staal and 32 year old Alex Biega, and deserves another look on the 3rd pair and 2nd PP unit, and you're, for whatever reason, all up in arms about it...

Yeah, because the lineup sheet never lies... I'll take ely's word for it (someone that lives in Europe (Sweden?) and watches the games) over someone that thinks he knows everything by looking at game sheets and stat lines...

LTDR. Yawn.

Let me paraphrase: Something, something, Veleno not being good enough to play center in the SHL is actually really good for him. Also, fans know the lineups better than the teams who make them.

 

5 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Dylan Larkin, a legit number one NHL center.

Joe Veleno, a high end center prospect.

Only kipwinger would act like these two things are similar.

Imagine thinking Malmo, "the worst team in the 4th best league" know what's better for Veleno's development than Steve Yzerman and the Detroit Red Wings...

Now Larkin is a legit 1C huh? On multiple different occasions you've said he better suited to be a 2C on a contender. Which is it? 

Edited January 8, 2021 by kipwinger

[krsmith17 7,191]

9 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Let me paraphrase: Something, something, Veleno not being good enough to play center in the SHL is actually really good for him. Also, fans know the lineups better than the teams who make them.

Something, something Veleno isn't good enough to play center, despite playing his entire career at that position, minus one weird season overseas...

Also, I've seen our 3rd line listed as our 2nd line many times over the years. Also, also "2nd lines" sometimes get more minutes than "1st lines", and "3rd lines" sometimes get more minutes than "2nd lines"...

13 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Now Larkin is a legit 1C huh? On multiple different occasions you've said he better suited to be a 2C on a contender. Which is it? 

I've literally argued that Larkin IS a legit 1C many, many times here. I'm one of the few here that think he is... Try to keep up.

[ely s 457]

as I stated in a former post, you keep forgetting that Veleno got a bit on a rollercoaster ride when he left NA to join a team on a different kontinent, different country, language, system and ice sheet on relative short notice in the midst of a pandemic. I don´t know where all the negativity about our prospects is coming from, but I don´t find it helpful. I try to see the positive things in players and Joe Veleno has a lot of them. He seems to find his game, is shooting more, is growing confidence, his team is winning recently with him scoring again in the last two games. Malmö is 10th in the moment. So maybe you give him a little more time to prove you wrong.

[kipwinger 8,524]

4 minutes ago, ely s said:

as I stated in a former post, you keep forgetting that Veleno got a bit on a rollercoaster ride when he left NA to join a team on a different kontinent, different country, language, system and ice sheet on relative short notice in the midst of a pandemic. I don´t know where all the negativity about our prospects is coming from, but I don´t find it helpful. I try to see the positive things in players and Joe Veleno has a lot of them. He seems to find his game, is shooting more, is growing confidence, his team is winning recently with him scoring again in the last two games. Malmö is 10th in the moment. So maybe you give him a little more time to prove you wrong.

 

I'm not being negative. I was correcting you about your misconception over Veleno being the 2C for Malmo. The team says otherwise.

I've said many times that Veleno could be a 3C in the mold of Jordan Staal, or could play in the top six as a winger. Only fanboys think those projections are negative.

8 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Something, something Veleno isn't good enough to play center, despite playing his entire career at that position, minus one weird season overseas...

Also, I've seen our 3rd line listed as our 2nd line many times over the years. Also, also "2nd lines" sometimes get more minutes than "1st lines", and "3rd lines" sometimes get more minutes than "2nd lines"...

I've literally argued that Larkin IS a legit 1C many, many times here. I'm one of the few here that think he is... Try to keep up.

Veleno isn't even good enough to play center on his current (bad) team. Justin Abdelkader played center his whole career until he got to the NHL too. So did Helm. So did Franzen. So did a whole bunch of guys. Only difference is that they didn't get exposed until they got to the NHL. For Veleno it's happening a little earlier.

You argue both sides of points all the time. That's nothing new. And then when you called out for being wrong about one side, you embrace the other. For instance, you've literally said that Filip Hronek would both be be a "bust" and a "top four" defenseman in the past.