What do I win?
They'll do captains again:
I'd guess Alfie and Chara, assuming they get in.
- Ram likes this
Jump to content
Posted by Buppy on 17 January 2012 - 10:53 AM
If we were adding a player like Parise or Ryan, they would be our future (Parise would be a risk, but we have the capability of re-signing him). It would be well worth giving up a couple of our top forward prospects for someone like that. We'd likely have to give up Flip or Mule, which may look bad right now, but probably benefits us in the long run.
What people want is for us to give up a s*** player for a exceptional one, and no team is going to make a trade for that. I would hope that Holland would NOT trade our future away. We have cap space, but what we don't have right now are prospects in the system that are exceptional players. I don't see the next Dats and Z in the system. I don't see the next Lids in the system either. I see good players, but no one who is going to light it up. When Z and Dats are gone, what are the Wings going to do if they traded away their future today?
Just something to think about. We have far too many people who believe that trading our future away right now is the way to go. We need to be more careful especially in the salary cap era.
Posted by Buppy on 16 January 2012 - 11:17 AM
Posted by Buppy on 12 January 2012 - 03:51 AM
I notice you didn't actually admit we were soft in 08, nor that we can win now. You got the histrionics covered though.
Ill give it a try since youre trying to act like anyone who likes tough hockey cant use rational.
First of all, there are a few (not a tonne) that think that adding a fighter would really hinder the team. I'm here nor there, not really a fan of bringing in a Colton Orr 3 minute a night player personally, I wont speak for the ones that are. There are also a large amount that are ridiculously attached to the current team for whatever reason and think that a team that has went out second round 2 years in a row now doesnt need any changes. In the playoffs both years Miller and Eaves never ramped it up, they simply arent warriors out there like we've had in the past.
There are also a lot of people who may not think that it would really hurt to add a Tim Jackman/Matt Martin/Prust/Clarkson or whoever but they also say it would have no real impact and thats where I think they are wrong. Some people simply dont see it as a real part of the game with a real impact, I would say anyone who has played at an even somewhat high level would disagree (Babcock for example). Whereas guys like me, argue with people who say Drew Miller has as much impact on a game as these guys, which I simply think isnt true, a lot of people will read a stat sheet and see 5 or 6 more points and say that hes the best option out there.
Detroit has never been the toughest team when they were winning, but they were always the most balanced which this team lacks right now. Back in the late 90s, they never had the most fights but always had the personnel that when the going got tough, they could handle that area of the game pretty easily, even if they werent fighting they were playing a much more physical brand of hockey. Despite what Kipwinger will say, back then Maltby was a pretty physical guy and a premiere pest in the league, Mccarty was always tough, Kocur could handle anyone and the top 6 had Shanny. That team could handle brawls like they had with the Avs and still score goals. They could step up for their team and take on those situations and coming out ahead afterwards.
Even in 2008, a third line of Drake Draper Cleary is pretty physical (Drake was a machine in the playoffs) and rookie Helm with no responsibility except to run around full tilt and smash guys. Having balance is what matters, the wings can score goals now but can they wear down a defense? I sure dont think so, do they have a guy willing to spark the team with a big hit or fight consistently every night because he has a mean streak? Nope. All Detroits cup teams had a couple guys like that, this team is lacking. Those cup winning teams would never let their goalie do the fighting for themselves, unless it was against Roy. This team now had Howard donig it every other night it seemed. When a goalie is putting together a Vezina like season, there is no way he should be getting hit, its called team chemistry. If your goalie jumps a guy, you drop your mitts grab the guy and pound him, even if you were the one that pushed him into the goalie and know the goalie was in the wrong? WHy? Because hes your goalie and you stick up for him
This team doesnt do that, guys like Miller skate around show a glimpse of skill every now and then, same with Eaves but do nothing that great. They "PK", meanwhile our PK isnt that great. I'm sick of seeing a dead team have noone that can spark it when the skill isnt working, I'm sick of seeing Howard fight his own battles and I'm sick of having Commodore being the only one who will go to the aid of a teammate.
Hopefully something like Moen for Miller at the deadline can happen and at least itll be a step in the right direction
Posted by Buppy on 12 January 2012 - 01:39 AM
I think you're missing the point. The study is just on the effects of "a fight" in the game. A fight invloves both teams. There's no distinction made between who wins the fight or who starts the fight.
There's a table which distinguishes home-team v away-team statistics, and there's about a 50% chance of shooting more over the next three minutes compared to the rest of the game after a fight (ie "momentum") for both teams.
Overall these results suggest that fighting by itself does not significantly help a team score more goals or win more games...
Posted by Buppy on 11 January 2012 - 03:11 PM
CONCLUSION: Overall these results suggest that fighting by itself does not significantly help a team score more goals or win more games, but it can often increase short-term momentum (i.e. the RATE at which they are getting shots) for one or both teams. Statistically speaking, if fights happen randomly it will take about 60 fights to equal one win, but if their timing is managed by the coach it could take as few as 30 fights to equal one win. PowerScout has uncovered many other factors that can provide a much greater contribution to winning than fighting, such as having a good penalty killing unit.
Posted by Buppy on 10 January 2012 - 03:50 AM
No one's saying they have no effect. But there's a wide gap between useless and essential.
If fighters have zero effect on a team's ability to win a Cup, why do they still exist in the league? Why do players like that try to be extra physical and intimidate if (according to people on this board) it has absolutely no effect on good players (like the Wings roster)? Why are these type of players still signed and iced to this day if they are useless towards winning?
Maybe you guys are on to something and the rest of the hockey world is just too dumb to figure it out.
McCarty was playing due to injuries to Kopecky, Maltby, Franzen, and Homer. When we were healthy, McCarty was in the pressbox watching our 4th line of Hudler-Helm-Maltby. Yeah, that line was tough.
Downey wasn't sent down in 08, he was replaced by Mccarty in the lineup who would still scrap but was a bit better skater, not to mention a real feel good story for the team to eat up. So I guess an enforcer was playing when games mattered.
As for the "myth" about winning with a grittier bottom 6.... its pretty obvious that when the wings played in 08 they had their grittiest bottom 6 that could wear other teams down. Drake Draper Cleary was the third line, Helm Mccarty Hudler the fourth line. 5 of the wings bottom 6 that year were very gritty players. The next year playing with a very skilled Sammy Flip Hudler third line, the wings fell short.
You all keep saying it's not about fighting, just "toughness". You keep saying we're too "soft" to win the Cup with this roster, but you can't point to one element outside of fighting that suggests our current roster is any more "soft" than previous Cup winners.
I'm not saying fighting=chamionships. I'm not saying the Cup is ours if we get a guy like Moen. There are so many other factors that play into a teams success than just grit. Although I will say we've got to be able to physically combat our opponent in a long playoff series. We played decent against Anaheim in 2007, but they just seemed to out-muscle us to loose pucks a lot of the time. We need to be able to physically keep up with those kind of teams. Regardless of what the role players do, the snipers need to play consistently. The defense needs to be able to play consistently. The penalty kill needs to be able to get a few kills if it comes down to that. There needs to be balance. You can't have a team full of goons alone and expect to win a Cup. You can't have a bunch of finesse guys that won't go to the trenches to win a puck battle and expect to win a Cup. You can't have a team that fails to effectively kill penalties and expect to win a Cup. You need a team that has a balance of finesse, grit (winning puck battles down low, separate man from puck, block shots, just play physically as a team), defensive prowess, and a solid goaltender. Your role players have to show up occasionally on the score sheet. Take a look at a few role players for Boston last year in the playoffs:
Chris Kelly-13 points in 25 games
Dan Paille-6 points in 25 games
Gregory Campbell-4 points in 25 games
In addition to the skilled guys putting up offensive numbers:
David Krejci-23 points in 25 games
Patrice Bergeron-20 points in 23 games
Brad Marchand-19 points in 25 games
Nathan Horton-17 points in 21 games
These guys have to show up to win a Championship. Hell, Drake put up 4 points in the '08 postseason. Not a lot, but contributions from the role players are key.
I'd love to be proved wrong. I'd be ecstatic if we won the Cup this year with the roster we have right now. I just don't see it happening, based on the last few early playoff exits with virtually the same roster. And again, the Cup isn't automatically ours if we find a Moen, there needs to be a healthy balance of what I listed above to be a Cup contender.
Posted by Buppy on 10 January 2012 - 01:56 AM
Posted by Buppy on 08 January 2012 - 11:54 PM
Posted by Buppy on 08 January 2012 - 09:04 PM
Well, I think this is exactly about some people trying to correlate fighting to winning. Of course, there isn't one, so the enforcer slappies have to duck behind vagueness like "grit". They insinuate that there's some special, intangible "toughness" that can't be measured or specified in any way, but is possesed by all Cup winners, and lacking everywhere else. Anything contradictory is dismissed as "not what I mean by toughness".
There isn't anybody saying fights=championships. In 2002, we had guys like McCarty, Maltby, and Draper who were all physical and defensively responsible, while chipping in offensively. Shanahan was gritty and offensively skilled as well. All were physical, as in getting in on the forecheck and wearing down the defense. Finishing all of their checks. These guys won puck battles down low. They all drove the net. At the same time, Yzerman, Fedorov, and the finesse guys played on a consistent basis. There was a healthy balance of finesse and grit.
In 2008, Drake, Maltby, and even Helm and McCarty were the ones winning puck battles down low. Driving to the net. Getting in on the forecheck and wearing down the defense. Blocking shots. These kind of grinders are needed, IMO to get through gruesome playoff series. Again, our finesse guys played consistent. Again, there was a healthy combination of finesse and grit.
I'm not giving credit to Dallas Drake for our championship in 2008, but guys like him help us physically compete with other teams in long playoff series.
Many will say "Oh well we were one game away from the Conference championship series with a really soft team". I didn't realize that was good enough around here. There is room for improvement on this team.
Posted by Buppy on 08 January 2012 - 04:42 PM
Posted by Buppy on 04 January 2012 - 02:47 AM
Try watching Bert with some objectivity. Same with Nyquist and Smith.
the problem is that we only have one big guy that can do anything with the puck (mule). so one of the top two lines is going to be without. nyquist, who's faster, could be swapped with hudler.
being strong and strong with the pick are two different things. i think bert's awful doing anything with the puck. he kills a top 2 line. and what offensive instincts?? - constantly going offsides?
that or swap eaves out for emmerton.
i think he'd benefit more from a guy that can participate with the puck in nyquist.
i think conner got reassigned to gr today.
you must've not seen him play.
Posted by Buppy on 02 January 2012 - 02:07 AM
Yeah, yeah. Only Wings fans can overrate their players. And Wings fans never underrate our players. Wings fans are idiots, except when we hate Ericsson...then we somehow know more than Kenny and Babs. I know your schtick.
good catch on the hits.
as far as "pretty similar", maybe in some stats...but as far as contract value, not at all. gorges is considered by many habs fans as their best defensive defenseman. they are mostly all excited about this signing. he's considered a leader and a shutdown defenseman. some of them would even like gorges to be considered for the captaincy.
ericsson, on the other hand, is brutal defensively and has done almost nothing to show that he is worth that contract. nearly all wings fans thought the contract was ridiculous.
comparing these two players is something that would be done by someone that has only watched one of them play.