Jump to content

Buppy's Photo


Member Since 14 Feb 2009
Offline Last Active Today, 02:43 AM

#2242997 Cherry rips Holland

Posted by Buppy on 08 January 2012 - 09:04 PM

Sigh....I'll bite.

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.

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".

In 08 our forward with the most hits in the playoffs was Datsyuk. In the regular season we were 25th in the league in hits. 13th in hits/game in the playoffs. 1st in playoff hits was New Jersey, then Anaheim, who both lost in the 1st round. In 02, we were 26th in the regular season and again 13th in the playoffs. So far this year we are 24th, ahead of Boston, Chicago, and San Jose. Last year we were 19th, ahead of both Boston and Vancouver. Columbus, Dallas, and Carolina were all in the top 5 in hits last year and missed the playoffs.

Abby is a gritty, physical player. Gets in on the forecheck, finishes his checks. Defensively responsible, wins battles down low, drives the net, etc. He is a lot like Drake, except for the near mythical proportions Drake has taken on since the Cup win. Helm and Cleary are still Helm and Cleary. Miller and Eaves also play hard, battle down low and in the corners, play good defense, etc. Emmerton and Conner aren't very physical, but Hudler was also in our bottom 6 in 8. McCarty played mostly in place of Maltby, then in place of Cleary when he moved up to take Mule's place. Not much of a net gain in physicality, especially considering he only played about 6 minutes a night.

In the 08 regular season we had Draper, Drake, Maltby, Kopecky, Sammuelsson, and Downey. This year we have Helm, Abby, Bert, Miller, Eaves, and Emmerton. In 08, those guys combined for 397 games and 538 hits. This year, our 6 have 246 hits in 188 games. Using last years numbers (but this year for Emmerton), it's also 397 games, and 632 hits.

There is no correlation between toughness and winning. We were soft in 08, were soft now. We can still win. Of course, it would be great if we could be just as good while also being tougher. It would be great if we could be just as good, and everyone was also a better goal scorer. Or just as good and 15% faster.

Sure, there are players that are as good as some of our players who can also fight or are more physical. No one is suggesting that we should avoid those players. I for one am not even saying those players are that hard to find. I would even like someone physical for the top 6 (I think our bottom 6 is fine).

What I have a problem with is the veiled (or sometimes open) insinuation that replacing someone like Miller with a similar player who can fight is what will put us over the top. It's silly.

#2242697 Cherry rips Holland

Posted by Buppy on 08 January 2012 - 04:42 PM

People are so funny. Toughness is relative, and the Wings have been one of the softest teams in the league for all of our recent Cups. The way some people talk about the Cup years now, you'd think we led the league in majors, as opposed to being last or close like we really were. I'm sure if we win the Cup this year, in a few years we'll see folks reminiscing about the toughness of Bert, E, and Abby.

So we haven't won a Cup without an enforcer. How many times have we (or any other team) actually had a season without one?

How about this. In 98, we beat Washington in the Finals. Washington was last in the league in majors, we were next to last. In 02, we beat Carolina. We were last, Carolina was next to last. In 08 we were last, Pittsburgh was 10th. (I don't have the stats for 97, but I'm pretty sure we were near the bottom.)

There is no correlation at all between toughness or fighting and playoff success. Some tough teams win, some soft teams win.

#2241684 Wings to host NHL Winter Classic within next 2 years

Posted by Buppy on 04 January 2012 - 10:51 PM

Ford Field. First ever outdoor game played indoors. Now that would be something different.

#2241481 Season-Long Lines Thread

Posted by Buppy on 04 January 2012 - 02:47 AM

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.

Try watching Bert with some objectivity. Same with Nyquist and Smith.

#2240655 Gorges wins lottery !

Posted by Buppy on 02 January 2012 - 02:07 AM

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.

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.

Habs fans may love Gorges, but they haven't had Lidstrom on their team for the last two decades making all their other defensemen look like crap in comparison. They don't have Stuart, Kronwall, or White. Their best defenseman has missed the better part of the last three seasons.

Ericsson is in only his 3rd full season, and he is far better than most fans here give him credit for. He's not as physical as he should be for his size, and he doesn't have great poise with the puck which can result in turnovers when he's pressured. He won't block shots and he doesn't have a great grasp of when he should and shouldn't jump in on offense. But he's pretty sound positionally, strong along the boards, a pretty good skater, makes a good pass when he has time, and if he can figure out how to use his shot he could be a solid point producer. He has the kind of size you have to pay a premium for.

Gorges doesn't have ideal size, or any particular talent on offense. He plays a simple, solid game. He's an excellent shot-blocker, but he's nothing special overall. He's not even Brad Stuart. He's more important to his team, so it justifies the salary more. Marketwise though, if E is over paid, so is Gorges.

#2240614 Your favorite DRW memory of 2011

Posted by Buppy on 01 January 2012 - 09:23 PM

I liked game 5:

  • Nev likes this

#2240603 Gorges wins lottery !

Posted by Buppy on 01 January 2012 - 08:54 PM

this season gorges has around double the hits, triple the blocked shots, and 6 more minutes of icetime/game than ericsson. he's also taken less minor penalties even with the significantly higher icetime.

One more hit, actually. In one more game, with far more ice time. Gorges is a far better shot blocker, but other than that they are pretty similar.

#2235891 Can Conner reasonably be sent down?

Posted by Buppy on 14 December 2011 - 10:55 AM

We currently have an open spot, so we won't have to send anyone down until Eaves gets back.

Conner has looked good so far, but so did Emmy in his first few games. Right now, I'd have him above Emmy, but that could change in the weeks before Eaves is ready, or we could have more injuries.

It's too early and the sample size is too small to make long term plans with Conner. I think he's earned a spot in the lineup for now. Assuming he keeps it up, I think Emmy, Miller and Homer will rotate with Mursak once he comes back.

#2233115 Realignment decided - 4 Conferences

Posted by Buppy on 05 December 2011 - 11:23 PM

Eastern conferences have a 7% better chance of making the playoffs? EFF THAT BS.

It's not random selection, so it's not really 7% better chance. Larger pool size just means a better chance of the larger conference having more good teams. It's about as likely that the 5th-place team in one of the 7-team conferences will be better than the 4th in one of the 8-team.

I'm kind of torn. I liked divisional playoffs and the rivalries created, and I like playing the first two rounds close to home (or at least no further than Dallas/Winnipeg). But this method creates such a large chance of someone getting screwed.

Much better if they just went with the 4 conference winners + 12 wildcards.

#2232417 Filppula is "too nice".

Posted by Buppy on 03 December 2011 - 10:24 PM

I just don't see the appeal of trading flip. Hes a homegrown wing, with great defensive responsibilities and puts up good points. I just don't know what you'd expect to get in return that would be better than what flip offers, whether hes having a good season or average season. Hes the kind of playmaker that makes his linemates better, just like dats and Z, but not quite at their level. For his salary, I think it would be foolish to trade him - especially given the red wings success.

The appeal is that he's a valuable asset who could be used to bring back someone who fits the team needs better. I don't want to see him traded (and I doubt he will be, as someone would have to make Kenny a pretty sweet offer), but if we could use him to get Parise (without adding too much more) it would be foolish NOT to.

Though unless he's part of a package to add another star-caliber player, it would be pretty foolish the way he's played so far this year.

#2228847 Jiri Hudler Appreciation Thread

Posted by Buppy on 22 November 2011 - 09:16 PM


Ah yes. react sooner. Such poor judgment of Hudler to not react quicker than immediately. And such slow reaction speed, in that he didn't make it to the puck that he would have had to be skating towards before the faceoff to stop from exiting the zone. Or the fact that Richards was going full speed, and was within a couple feet of Hudler, by the time Hudler had a chance to react. As for defensive positioning; take a look at the replay and watch how Hudler forces Richards to go around him. The simple fact that Richards was going full speed while Hudler was standing still when the play started pretty much defined the result. Hudler had no chance because he wasn't expecting Cleary to hand the Kings a nice breakout pass, and therefore didn't position himself in "Cleary prevent" formation.

Surprising that you haven't blamed Zetterberg for not winning the faceoff cleanly enough. With you it's always everyone except Hudler.

Cleary was battling for the puck after the faceoff, and swept it back to the D, like he's supposed to. Obviously not perfect, but he was still doing his job.

Kronwall hung back to cover the late man, as he's supposed to in that situation. You could argue they should have switched roles, but from their actions it's obvious neither played felt that was the correct play.

Howie stayed with the shooter, did not over-commit to anything, as a goalie should. He just couldn't react quickly enough.

The fact is that goal was the result of Richards being a lot faster than Hudler. They both started moving when the puck dropped, and as you say Hudler started backing up almost immediately. It's not like Richards was shot out of a cannon or started sprinting up ice three seconds before the faceoff. Hudler was at a disadvantage because he needed to turn around, but he still had two steps on Richards at their blue line, and Richards was past him by ours. And if you want to say that Hudler had no chance due to the disadvantage, then the correct play by Hudler there would be to step into Richards and take him out or at least hold him up enough to ensure Kronwall gets possession. Most likely an interference penalty, but 4v4 is better than giving up a breakaway opportunity.

Not saying it was terrible by Hudler. Mostly it was a good effort from Richards to take advantage of a slower player playing a position he isn't accustomed to.

#2228605 Eaves = Doghouse?

Posted by Buppy on 21 November 2011 - 10:15 PM

He's been a "Healthy Scratch" A LOT over the last 2 seasons. There's got to be something more to him not getting the playing time that other guys get. His approach to the game must be inconsistent to the approach of other Red Wings that work their ass off (Lidstrom, Helm, Datsyuk, etc.). I was just wondering if anyone knew the scoop.

The only "something more" is that he isn't as good as most of our forwards. Emmerton is a center, Miller's playing great, Bruno has to play some time... Everyone else is better, or at least offers more potential even if they haven't been great so far. Same goes for previous years, most of our forwards have been better leaving Eaves to rotate in and out when we're healthy.

We have to scratch two forwards every game right now. Patty just needs to make the most of his opportunities or wait for injuries or someone like Miller or Emmy to start playing poorly.

#2228290 Do They Deserve It?

Posted by Buppy on 21 November 2011 - 02:29 AM

Would anyone be UNhappy if the Red Wings replaced Holmstrom and Bertuzzi with Selanne and Parise?

Anaheim and New Jersey, I suspect.

#2227200 Make this team better

Posted by Buppy on 18 November 2011 - 04:45 PM

The way for us to be better is for Datsyuk and Zetterberg to play better. 5g/18p in 17 games is just not near good enough. Double those stats and we're probably 12-5 or 13-4, at or near the top of the league.

Juggling role players would do nothing. Adding a sniper would help, but if Pav and Hank continue to struggle it won't be enough, especially if we gave up Flip or Franzen considering they have been our best forwards this year. Defensemen, team defense, and goalie have all been good. Bottom 6 has been good. We could use more from Cleary/Huds/Homer, but that's a minor issue and likely corrected by Pav and Hank improving.

Stars are supposed to make the supporting cast better, not the other way around. The only thing we really need is for our stars to be stars.

#2225422 Ryan Miller's opinion on Milan Lucic

Posted by Buppy on 14 November 2011 - 11:18 PM

To the bold, that's why it's a "charging" penalty. If it were anyone other than a goalie that's not even a penalty.

To the underlined, this is made up. You have no basis for concluding he wanted to injure Miller. Try and use this logic to prove someone's intent in a court and see how well that logic holds up. Also, to note, Miller did not just leave the game when the hit happened. He played another 26 minutes of ice time, surely was evaluated at the first intermission, and cleared to keep playing, until leaving after the 2nd. Lucic is not a weak hitter and if this guy wanted to injure Miller with a hit he would have certainly done plenty of damage. Miller's injuries came from the fall, not the hit -- somehow, he was capable enough to swing his stick at Lucic in response, and he's damn lucky he didn't connect or that would have got him a suspension.

It is not reasonable to just say someone had an intent to injure.. prove the intent. Hitting Miller is not proof of an intent to injure without making synonymous hitting someone with intending to injure. An intent t injure is not an intent to hit, it's an intent to injure someone. Seriously, it's hard to fathom what the difficulty in discerning the two is. The only proof here is that it's a charging penalty.

You realize there is a provision in the charging rule allowing for supplementary discipline, right? You keep saying it was a charging penalty as if that means it shouldn't have been a suspension.

You're right that you can't prove intent. However, you can infer intent by looking at the actions and the likely result. A hard hit on someone in a vulnerable position is reasonbly likely to cause injury, therefore it is reasonable to infer that intentionally hitting (hard) a vulnerable player is intent to injure.

Regardless of what you or others think of the rule, the fact is goalies are not fair game. That means we can reasonably assume Miller did not feel (and should not have had) any need to protect himself from a hit. In my opinion, because goalies have that protection and therefore do not expect to be hit like that, goalies should always be considered vulnerable. So in my opinion, any hard, intentional hit on a goalie should be considered intent to injure and warrant a suspension.

I understand that it is subjective and not everyone will subscribe to the same logic. However, remember that a lack of 'proof' of intent is not proof of no intent. Also remember that this is a hockey league, not a court of law. We're not talking about sending someone to jail. We don't need to meet so strict a burden of proof.

This was a chance for the league to prove they are willing to suspend a star player (besides Pronger) as well as deter future actions they obviously do not want to see in game (goalies getting hit). In my opnion, Shanny missed on this one.