Our whole organization and fanbase thinks our 4th line guys are irreplaceable. Its absurd. Why cant we score when we arent on the pp? We average 163 lbs per forward and we play slow, career 4th liners over fast, young guys. Its pretty simple.
Subtract Miller and Andersson.
Add Athanasiou and Nosek.
Immediate team improvement.
But Miller is so good on the pk. But Andersson is so good at faceoffs. But but but...
We need to FRIKING SCORE!!!
What's absurd is your obsession with Miller.
We have one of the fastest teams in the league, we're having a problem with puck movement, not skating speed. Our smallest line last night was by far our best. Only 4 of our 18 goals have come on the PP. You don't fix our scoring by replacing the 4th line with kids who haven't even shown they can score consistently in the AHL.
Quit with the stupid hyperbole. Miller is a good role player, and no one here would say anything more. 4th line winger is the least important position in the lineup. Even if he was a problem, which he isn't, he is literally the least of our problems.
The 2nd and 3rd lines looked good for once. Unfortunately they couldn't cash in last night, but if they keep playing like that they will. (I'd rather see Jurco on the 3rd, with Glendening bumping Andersson from the 4th though.) I would like to see AA get a shot if Richards is going to be out, give him a real opportunity rather than plug him in a role he's not suited for.
I really don't know how to make this more clear. Our team's goals against average is slightly above average (statistically). And it's negatively skewed by our bad penalty kill (30% of the goals scored against us have been powerplay goals). So our PK is bad. Not our defense. 30% is terrible.
For context, 13% of the goals we've scored have been on the PP. 30% for them. 13% for us.
We also have the tenth most penalty minutes per game (most of which were taken by forwards).
If you're shorthanded all the time, and you're not very good at killing penalties, you A) Don't get shots, B) Get shot on more often, C) Get scored on more (remember that 30%).
Through 5 games, we've been abysmal offensively and on special teams. Our goaltending and defense have both been decent to above average. And that's why we're 3-2. Any attempt to paint some "the defense is just as bad as the offense and special teams" argument is completely ignoring reality.
Through 5 games, the defense is the least of our concerns.
Over the last 3 years around 22% of all goals scored have been on the PP. 30% may look "terrible", and would be if it stayed that way for the whole year, but given it's so early in the year it's meaningless. It's one goal. If your stats can so easily be skewed by just one or two goals, you need to take them with a grain of salt. Shot attempts are a much better indicator at this point since they are much more frequent events. Even that, given how little time we've spent on special teams, isn't very good.
I said in the other thread; pretty much everything has been bad this year. That includes the defense. Maybe not as inept statistically as the offense, but just as bad as special teams, and much worse than the goaltending.
Furthermore, I think most people would include the PK in the broader "defense" category. Certainly possible to be good on one but poor on the other, but they're not exactly separate.
Further-furthermore, there's "defense" in the sense of our ability to prevent goals, which is a product of both our defensemen and forwards (most people I think exclude the goalie from team defense). But I think when it was initially brought up, "defense" was meant in the sense of our group of defensemen, and includes both the defensive and offensive contributions.
Bottom line is we can't hold on to the puck. When we lose it, we have trouble getting it back. We have the same problem at every strength. It means we generate few shots, allow a lot, and take more penalties.
For the 5 games we've played, our defense hasn't been bad. We haven't gotten scored on much, and when we have, a disproportionate amount of the goals (30%) have been powerplay goals.
I agree. One of the ways to get more shots, and stop the other team from taking shots, is to take fewer penalties and be more successful on your special teams. Something we're currently not doing, and which is adversely affecting the team. Much more so than the "bad defense" in fact.
That first part isn't actually true. 2.6 GA is not good. 17th in the league, and compared with recent seasons would also be in the middle of the pack. Our team save% is 12th at 5v5, 10th or 11th all situations (war-on-ice and hockeyanalysis differ slightly). Relative to recent seasons, it's high. In the past three years, only 9 teams have finished with a higher overall save%, and none by much (Wings 92.22 .vs highest 93.34). 5v5, our current 93.7 has been bettered only once: 94.04 by Boston. Shots against are high relative to recent averages (likely inflating the save% some), and shots for is abysmal.
I don't really want to get into the numbers, only 5 games in they're far too easily skewed. Fact is, pretty much every facet of the game has been bad. Our goalies have been excellent and our GF is good thanks to an unsustainably high shooting%. Everything else has been bad, and almost every player has been bad in at least some respects.
The fortunate, or maybe unfortunate, thing is that's it's all related. We have been a terrible possession team thus far. Every issue we have is the result of that. It's far too early to determine if it's a systemic problem, or just a bad stretch. If that gets better, and at least close to what we've done in the recent past, everything else should improve. Save% and GF might drop, but should at least stay pretty good.
Individually, Larkin, Pulkkinen, Nyquist, Quincey, and Zetterberg have been our best possession players. The only ones over 46% 5v5. Kindl, Sheahan and Abby not much below. Not coincidentally I think, those players have accounted for all of our 5v5 scoring. Pretty much the same for all situations. Quincey drops a bit, Richards and Green move up.
Pulkkinen, Nyquist, and Sheahan, despite decent percentages, aren't creating many opportunities. They aren't giving up many either, but just not doing quite enough to break through the defense. Larkin has been our best at generating offense, with Z and Abby a bit behind him. Tatar has been the biggest problem so far, though Richards, Green, and Kronwall all need to improve.
I think it's more an issue of just playing better rather than line combos, but I think we need a shakeup. I can't really come up with a set of lines that looks good to me without Datsyuk. I'd like to see Larkin or Helm with Pulk and Sheahan. Put Nyquist with Z and Abby, but that leaves Tatar and Richards together. Maybe Larkin or Helm could get them going, but that combo has been terrible so far.
I think the requirements for IR is seven days, not games. Don't think there is any game limit. To qualify for LTIR is 10 games and 24 days.
Also worth noting that LTIR isn't really a separate list. It's a cap relief exemption for players on IR for a long time. There's no point in claiming it right now, since we're already claiming Datsyuk. There's no benefit, and all it would do is make Franzen ineligible for a while. Teams never use LTIR unless they need it for cap reasons.
edit: It may not even be possible to claim LTIR for Franzen right now, since we're not even using all of Datsyuk's. Point is, we can't read anything into the "he's only on short-term IR" thing.
I get what you are saying, but Datsyuk and Zetterberg were 2 of our best, if not the 2 best, penalty killers on our team for years. So I will partially agree with you. Let the donkey get beat up 60 games a season. But come March, you want your thoroughbreds in there if you have them. Speed kills on the pk. Helm, Athanasiou, Larkin, and Glendening are going to be the top 4 upfront guys on the pk. I don't want any of these guys getting hit in the face with a puck, but I do want them out there to disrupt the opposing team's pp. Lastly, when is this 2nd line center position for Athanasiou going to open up? Maybe Never. Svechnikov, Larkin, Nosek, Sheahan, Glendening, Helm, Zetterberg, Datsyuk. The Wings are absolutely LOADED down the middle. Move Athanasiou and Helm to the 2 wings of Glendening and have an absolute killer 4th line. Pure speed.
Speed is not that important on the PK. Good first-step acceleration is, and most fast guys have that, but I'd say even that ranks behind good instincts, awareness, tenaciousness, good stick work, and bravery.
AA from all I've heard is just decent defensively, improving but not what he's known for. I might be wrong but I don't think he's even a primary PKer in GR. He'll probably have to start out on the wing, especially if he's up next year which seems rather likely. Probably moves back to center after a couple years if Datsyuk is gone and Zetterberg has declined further. His upside seems to be higher than Sheahan, though I could see Sheahan at #2 with AA #3 at first. Helm has already been switched to wing and probably isn't going back except for injuries. Svech is a winger, might be converted to center but we'll see. Nosek is below AA, probably won't be room for him in Detroit. He's supposedly a good defensive center, more notably two-way than AA from what I've read at least. Could make a good 4th-liner, but more likely I think is he'll be the guy nyquististhefuture will be bitching about us losing in a couple years.
You guys that are just so scared to have Larkin and Athanasiou in the line-up wear me out. I know it might involve trading away some mediocre talent or cutting someone like Ferraro or Anderson but
good Lord how long do you suppress talent before letting it breathe and enjoy watching them on the real team.
I'm so sick of this STUPID argument!!!! If we had Lindros, Gretzky, Lemieux, and Yzerman all 19 years old, half of Red Wings fans, so drunk on Ken Holland's idiotic excuse for not knowing when players are ready = "over ripening", would say they want them getting first line minutes in Grand Rapids. mIt's the dumbest thing I've ever heard! I swear to God I think Drew Miller gives half the fan base free lower bowl tickets to keep everyone saying how every good young player should develop in Grand Rapids three more years!!
Exactly!! Can you imagine Edmonton fans saying McDavid should get first line minutes in the minors vs. 2nd line minutes in the NHL. Why dont people like youth, energy, and speed around here? You think Larkin would have crushed this thinking by now. SMH
Sorry. I just get irritated when common fans talk about a player's "development" as if they actually know anything about it and/or have a hand in it. Larkin played one playoff series in the AHL. Why the hell would you want to "develop" him any further in the AHL? It's clear to the EYE that he is top talent on our team. Athanasiou, Mantha, and Nosek are all showing signs of this, as well. If you watched the camps, watched the preseason, and watch the Griffs games, you can easily SEE this. So why are we burying them in GR? So we can have a career minus 4th line player playing 3,000 straight games for us? No thanks. Bring up the kids and take the trash out!!!
I hardly know where to start.
All players need to develop. ALL. Some are good enough to contribute in the NHL while developing. But other than the very elite few that are capable of being true impact players or those on teams with little talent, most will be better off developing in the minors. It pays to have good, NHL-ready, talent in the minors. At some point you're probably going to need them.
Beside that, it's not a matter of directly comparing a kid to the worst player on the team. You have to consider how the team as a whole is impacted. Larkin pushes Nyquist down, the guy below him down, the guy below that... He has an opportunity to show that he's worth it. If he does, he'll stay up.
Roles matter as well. It isn't Miller, Ferraro, and Andersson that would be replaced by kids. If we stay relatively healthy, Andersson may not play a game for us this year. Ferraro may not get many more. Our kids are far better off playing in GR than sitting in Detroit. If anyone is going to bump Miller it will be Larkin. After that if you want even more kids you're bumping Jurco or Pulkkinen. Miller may take a spot from one of them anyway. It's nice to have guys to eat up the hard defensive minutes so guys like Larkin don't have to. There's a reason every team has guys to do that. Miller and Glendening are currently 4th and 5th in TOI (which will probably surprise the anti-Babcock crowd), pretty much all of it being tough minutes. Would Larkin be as effective if he had to play those minutes? Maybe, and maybe we'll find out before long. But again, Miller is one guy. Only one guy can replace him.
None of the three kids you mentioned were all that impressive in GR last year. Sure they all looked decent in the meaningless preseason, so what. Franzen and Richards (I assume that's what you mean by trash) were both better in the NHL last year than any of the kids were in GR. Odds are they'll be better this year than any of the kids could be, even though they aren't young or fast or energetic. Odds are Jurco and Pulkkinen will be better this year than any of the kids could be.
If we're not healthy, the kids will get a shot. And if that happens, we'll be glad we can call up AA, Mantha, and Nosek instead of Meile, Aubry, and Tvrdon.
1 Cole was a 36 yr old ufa to be with a history of injury problems, we all basically knew he was one bad hit away from being done (just so happened with our luck to occur when he was a redwing) .... Because of that I don't think he should of cost us as much as he did , 2nd round pick would of been enough in my eyes you anyways .... I think we can all agree though Jim nill is no idiot and he knew that in asking for janmark he was getting someone with good potential
2 regardless of how good our prospect pool is nylen was a top prospect when we dealt him so let's not pretend he was s*** now , yes we can afford his departure and that's not even up for debate just saying when could of used him In a package to get a dman .... Someone mentioned green , maybe your right he wouldn't of been here if we got that dman , then again maybe we would of dealt a Quincey if we got that dman along with green ... We'll never know
And last on this ... Yes I know I'm in the minority here and that's just fine , it's my opinion ... Just don't like giving up top kids with potential for garbage that's all ... There's no doubt in my mind this season or next some hard deals will have to be made , just hope we get some fair return back...
1. Again, he'd been mostly healthy for 4 1/2 seasons. Where is this "one bad hit" notion coming from? Also, a 2nd round pick would have been worth more than Janmark + Backman. Hell, still would be.
2. I don't think anyone is pretending he's s***. He just made an NHL roster, that would be silly. Not sure I would call the 4th or 5th forward a top prospect, but whatever. Sure, hypothetically he could have been used for something better. That's the problem with hypotheticals. No matter what anyone does, hypothetically something else could have been done that was better.
And lastly, Cole was not garbage. You even said yourself you wanted him.
Doesn't hurt us cause we got so many great kids coming , doesn't mean we should just give them away for old damaged goods (would of benefited us putting him in a bigger deal for a dman, he was listed as a top 5 prospect at the time I believe)
Yes it's unfortunate he got hurt but everyone knew Cole was a risk before we got him(in fact he was my number 1 trade option cause if he didn't get hurt it could of paid off AND it wouldn't cost much, was wrong about that last one )
So you acknowledge that is didn't hurt us, and you acknowledge that Cole was a good option...
That trade was pretty much the blueprint for what you want in a deadline deal. We gave up two prospects who were running out of options and were never going to get a shot here for a guy who filled a need plus a conditional pick (which I think you may have forgotten about). Saarijarvi alone is probably worth more to the Wings than Janmark and Backman together, just because of the extra time we have before we need a spot for him.
Also, not sure how Cole was a risk. He'd missed 7 games the previous year, but prior to that hadn't missed any time since 2010.
No good defensemen were traded at the deadline. Wisniewski maybe, or Franson, probably the best. But that likely would have meant no Green this year. We still have more parts than we have room so that mythical trade for a top-4 defenseman is still possible without hurting our future.
Sucked that Cole got hurt and couldn't help us more, but that also meant we got the pick. But that was a good trade.