Jump to content


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Buppy's Photo

Buppy

Member Since 14 Feb 2009
Offline Last Active Today, 09:25 PM
****-

#2582699 Lines Thread

Posted by Buppy on 18 March 2015 - 11:30 AM

I think Jurco fits just fine on the 4th line. He's faster and more physical than Andersson, and I don't think the drop-off defensively is that drastic. With Helm in the lineup, we don't need Andy to kill penalties. 

 

Tatar-Datsyuk-Cole

Nyquist-Zetterberg-Abby

Helm-Sheahan-Pulkkinen

Miller-Glendening-Jurco




#2580720 Pulkkinen sent back to GR

Posted by Buppy on 11 March 2015 - 11:39 PM

What's your point? We both agree he shouldn't be put with datsyuk. Which was what we were discussing.

Exactly. Would be unfair to the rest of the league. Probably lead to a worldwide shortage of goal netting, he'd wear them out so fast. Then you'd have spoiled Canadian kids stealing mosquito nets from Unicef, and frankly those kids in the Congo have enough problems. #thinkofthechildren




#2580701 Pulkkinen sent back to GR

Posted by Buppy on 11 March 2015 - 06:40 PM

...

 

  Babs gave him several games with Zetterberg and he didn't produce jack squat.  The answer to all our offensively under performance issues can't be "put him with Datsyuk".  He's played with good players and hasn't produced that well.  That's not a good reason to give him more ice time with better players.  And that's not a  good strategy to begin with.  This is the part of the season when we're trying to win games and establish home ice for the playoffs, not worry about the development of rookies. 

 

Edit:  Oh yeah, that blog was especially retarded because it implicitly compared Pulkkinen to Brett Hull (again).  A comparison that is made all too often, and only sounds dumber the more it's repeated. 

Game and a half before Hank got hurt. And he had 6 shots.

 

His gpg is the same as Helm and Franzen, not too far under Zetterberg, better than Weiss, Sheahan, or Glendening. G/60 better than Abdelkader. His fancy stats (however little they may be worth) are among the best in the league. His 82 game pace is 17-18g right now. Tatar had 4g in his first 14 games this year. 2g in his first 14 last year. Nyquist had 4g in his first 14 last year. Helm had 0g his first 14. Abby had 5g. Glendening had 1g. Zetterberg had 4. Cole had 4.

 

He's probably not ready to handle top 6 competition (especially on the defense side), but he is not underperforming.




#2580689 Franzen on IR

Posted by Buppy on 11 March 2015 - 04:01 PM

 

I'll believe a report about his career being in jeopardy when I see one.

 

But still, if there's been 800 - 1000 concussions over the last 10 years based on the 2011-12 numbers, guys cut short of their NHL careers bc of concussions is statistically insignificant. How many have their been? 3 guys? 5? 10?

 

10 of 800 means 1.25% of concussions are leading to shortened careers

 

 

Just because concussions have been sensationalized by lawsuits and former enforcer suicides, doesn't take away from the severity of chronic spinal and shoulder injury. Nathan Horton is latest to have his career end early because of this issue.

 

My issue is the double standard.

 

The reaction to Zetterberg being out is "I hear it's his back again, I hope it's not bad"

The reaction to Franzen being out is "I don't expect to see him play ever again, he should seriously consider retirement"

 

There is a lot more going on there than just the injury.

You're still glossing over a few key elements.

 

One: Few players play at Franzen's age or older. 41 skaters his age or older, 106 who will be 33 or older by the end of this year. 6-15% of the 690 regular skater spots.

Two: He's suffering from post concussion syndrome, which is different from a concussion. I couldn't find any real stats, but I've seen a range from 15-50% of concussions lead to PCS.

Three: It's a repeat of the same injury from last year. Again, no good stats, but most reports say that the likelihood and severity of PCS increases with repeated injuries.

 

So say your 1000 concussions is right, and let's say 20% hit guys in that age range, and 50% of those result in PCS, and 50% of those are repeats...  Now you're down to 50 similar cases. so even just a few of those being career ending is pretty significant, and cause for concern.




#2580594 Franzen on IR

Posted by Buppy on 10 March 2015 - 02:37 PM

Citing Savard, Pronger, and Lindros proves absolutely nothing. The vast majority of players that go through the NHL do not have their careers cut short by concussions, even after multiple.

You spot picked a few bad results out of the hundreds of guys who recover and play

How many of them in their mid-30s, with post concussion syndrome causing them to miss ~4 months in a little over a year?

 

But you do have a point. The perceived threat to his career is probably inflated due to some high visibility cases.




#2579182 LeBrun: Babcock for COY and Holland for GMOY

Posted by Buppy on 06 March 2015 - 04:06 AM

 

Lol.  You get incredibly lighthearted when your arguments start to fall flat.  A far cry from the guy who so vigorously blamed me for the downfall of the NHL awards process.  Wait, did you blame me?  Or just make a vague statement and not so subtly point it at me?

 

Either way, I didn't make any of the arguments you claim I did.  I'm not responsible for NHL awards.  And I'm smart enough to know what plausible deniability is.  If you're going to make up a bunch of things (most improved award), in the future could you spare me the "who me" routine when you get called out on it?

 

Or maybe next time you disagree with me about who should be the NHL Coach of the Year, you should just act decent about it instead of pulling that "this is the kind of thinking" crap.  Then we wouldn't be in this position. 

It was the logic that I was disagreeing with, not your specific candidates. But I'm not going to argue semantics.

 

I don't like the apparent reasoning you used. I don't believe improvement should be such a big factor, because I think a team can still have an excellent, or the best, coach or GM even if they were good the previous season too. You want to debate that, then debate that, not my choice of phrasing.




#2579159 LeBrun: Babcock for COY and Holland for GMOY

Posted by Buppy on 06 March 2015 - 01:56 AM

 

I wasn't appealing to authority.  I was pointing out the fact that you called me (and my thinking) out and oddly not Pierre Lebrun, the person who wrote the article in the OP, mentioned all the same guys I did, and actually gets to vote for those awards.  Why not say "his type of thinking is ruining the awards"?  Since he actually gets a vote.  Instead, it's my thinking.  Seems like you've got an axe to grind, or some hostility or something.  I promise I don't get to vote for these awards, and so you can be assured that my thinking isn't ruining anything.

 

Otherwise, I've said what I'm going to say.  A coach (or GM) of the year award should go to the best coach (or GM) over the last year.  And since I don't believe (my opinion) that any of these guys did absolutely nothing between this last year and this, I'm going to heavily rely on improvement as an indicator, when offering up my (clearly stated) personal preferences. 

I said 'this', not 'your'. Stop trying to play the victim. Also, Lebrun picked Babs and Holland to win, albeit he's doing so for the 'exceeding expectations' reason.

 

But if it makes you feel better I'll henceforth refer to it as "the Lebrun­­ method™"

 

If the Wings are making the playoffs Babs absolutely deserves to finally win this award but the competition is stiff with Laviolette and Hartley. I don't think Holland should be in the conversation, he hasn't done anything in the off-season. Yeah, so far the season has turned out better than expected but I don't think it should go to GM a that haven't done anything. I would give it to Hartley and the flames gm.

Yeah, how 'bout those Flames. Only took two years of tanking to get to a slightly better level of mediocrity than they were at 5 years ago. They actually have a chance to make the playoffs. Remarkable. 




#2579068 LeBrun: Babcock for COY and Holland for GMOY

Posted by Buppy on 05 March 2015 - 08:31 PM

Neither of them deserve it.  They're both good, and consistently good.  But being third in your division, despite being largely healthy, and with no noticeably change in personnel, system, or coaching, isn't exactly extraordinary.  We're a good team.  We were supposed to be a good team. To me, giving it to Babs and Holland would be like giving it to Bowman and Quenneville, Lombardi and Suter, Rutherford and Johnston, or Sather and Vigneault.  All of them are either meeting, or slightly underperforming expectations. 

 

I don't know what goes into the selection process for these awards, so I don't know who will win.  But some good coaches and GMs that have stuck out, to me, are Laviollete (obviously), Maurice, Hartley (ugh), Capuano, Trotz, Chevaldayoff, Snow, and Tallon.

This kind of thinking is what's wrong with these awards. Essentially penalizing the best coaches and GMs for being the best, and rewarding the biggest surprises instead. May as well name it the "GM/Coach of the most improved team" award.

 

So you get guys like Holland and Babcock who've never won these awards, while guys like Capuano and Snow are being mentioned. It's like, "Good job at not sucking as much as you used to!"




#2578093 What's with the "giving players hamster names" obsession?

Posted by Buppy on 03 March 2015 - 09:24 PM

My wife has nicknames for a bunch of players:

 

Zoidberg, Gadzooks, Fornicator, Nyquil, Tater, Frozen, Jerkoff, Pokemon, Cornhole, Dick, Quimby, Wallet...

 

For the most part it's because she doesn't (or didn't at first) know the real names. I think she still doesn't know that it's Weiss and not White.




#2578026 Pulkkinen sent back to GR

Posted by Buppy on 03 March 2015 - 03:55 PM

 

Fair enough.  I'll concede.  He needs to work on getting off better shots, as the blocks and missing attest.  Not necessarily quicker shots. 

To clarify, he's not actually missing the net unusually often. ~22% of shot attempts, which is not out of line with other goal scorers. The low shooting% is factoring only shots that are actually on net. So he's having a slightly high % of shots saved, rather than missing.

 

And also remember it's a small sample size, thus easily skewed. He's had two shots that he put basically right through the goalie, but just didn't bounce quite the right way to make it into the net. Hit a post at least once too. A little more luck and one of those goes in, it bumps his shooting% from 7.5 to 11. It's not like he's shooting 2% for half a year. There isn't really enough readily available information to say his shot selection is particularly poor. Thoguh of course that doesn't mean he can't still work on it. 

 

And I don't think anyone has suggested that Pulkkinen should stay in the lineup, but I don't think he's being sent down because of a lack of production. He was an injury replacement, and now we have someone who should be able to fill that role better. But at some point, you have to put guys in situations where they can grow, even if you might have a better option for the short term. I wouldn't object to going with Pulkkinen over Weiss, even though it makes us a bit worse atm, it may pay off down the road. But I also don't have any problem with him waiting for next season.




#2577860 Pulkkinen sent back to GR

Posted by Buppy on 03 March 2015 - 01:07 AM

I think some people just quote things straight from a cliche book. Say what they think seems like it should be true rather than doing any actual analysis.

 

He has the best shots/60 on the team, 10th best among all forwards in the league in fact (and 4th best 5v5 ZS adj.). The % of his shot attempts blocked is a little on the high side, but not terribly so (and having a shot blocked does not necessarily mean he didn't get it off quick enough). He's not really missing an unusual amount of shots either, so I'd say his aim is fine. The low shooting% is probably from poor shot quality (I would guess Babs has told him to just shoot the puck whenever he can). He's also had a few shots that have gotten past the goalie but just didn't quite make it in. The stats could be skewed by the small sample size, but that goes for the negative ones as well.

 

He doesn't need to work on getting his shot off.

 

Biggest need for him to work on from what I've seen is working with his teammates. Seems often to be unprepared when the puck gets to him, especially on the PP. Needs to work on beating NHL caliber players too. Unfortunately, he can't do either that well in the AHL and we have better options now. But at least he gets to be a major player in GR, and hopefully have a nice playoff run. Next year will be his opportunity to take his game up a notch.




#2576570 Once again blowing a lead and giving up 3 goals

Posted by Buppy on 01 March 2015 - 04:02 PM

Wings are known for defense, wasn't last year a "we're a defensive team first" thing? But the real point is this has been happening more frequently lately, a few games ago the team gave up 3 goals in less than 5 minutes at the end of a period, and I know there have been a couple of games where we blew leads and lost. And yes all teams do that, and yes overall we are doing well but these recent episodes just make me think it might need a little more emphasis on maintaining a lead. My old heart can't take the ups and downs like that 7-6 game the other night where we lost two 2 goal leads if I remember correctly. Any way maybe it's just me but I am a bit apprehensive about it.

You don't remember correctly. It was Dallas that lost the two leads.

 

I don't have any inclination to check, but I suspect if I did I would find that the Wings give up a lead less often than most teams. That it's happened twice recently just skews the memory, as shown by your faulty memory of the Dallas game. 

 

Blowing leads is a problem that needs to be addressed in the same way that allowing goals or failing to score is a problem. You always want to be better of course, but that doesn't mean that every negative thing needs special attention.




#2576460 All Purpose Grand Rapids Griffins Thread

Posted by Buppy on 01 March 2015 - 12:21 AM

Mrazek with a 2nd straight shutout and 3rd in 4 games. Meile up to 3rd in AHL scoring, Ferraro tied for 2nd in goals (though he's played more games than the guys he's tied with). Griffins have won 8 in a row, 10-0-2 in their last 12. The team has really turned things around from the early season struggles.




#2576375 Once again blowing a lead and giving up 3 goals

Posted by Buppy on 28 February 2015 - 07:42 PM

Really what is going on with this team? Today another episode of giving up 3 goals after a lead. it makes me pull my hair out. The old wings  knew how to shut it down with a lead, these guys look like they quit playing after they get the lead and then have to pull a win out of their a**. Anyone else frustrated seeing this trend lately?

 

what can be done to fix this? Who is to blame? Where are my meds? Sick of seeing it.

 

/rant

Our record when leading after 1 and 2 periods is in line with where it's been in the past; better than some years, worse than others. Better than average league-wide. I suspect your premise is flawed. Regardless, momentum is big in hockey, and always has been. 

 

We just finished off our toughest road trip of the season with 9 out of 12 points, despite a couple key injuries. Relax and enjoy it.




#2572862 All Purpose Grand Rapids Griffins Thread

Posted by Buppy on 21 February 2015 - 02:30 PM

Miele isn't really a prospect. He's almost 27, and likely a career AHLer. Might get a few more NHL games, but I'd be very surprised if he gets any with us.