Jump to content


Buppy's Photo

Buppy

Member Since 14 Feb 2009
Offline Last Active Jul 12 2014 03:03 PM
****-

#2016172 Sharks sign RFA Niklas Hjalmarsson

Posted by Buppy on 17 July 2010 - 12:30 AM

That's exactly it. Don't act like I am bitter when I had no problem with Hossa leaving and would have enjoyed having him stay on the team, especially last year.

And I wouldn't consider it a homer bias if I had said these same things when Hossa was here (which I did) and am more of a fan of Hossa than I am Datsyuk (which I am).

Significantly better? The guy has done significantly WORSE.

Because I judge Datsyuk as an elite all around player and not just a playmaker. Unless you disagree and consider Hossa to be primarily an assist man?

And when it comes down to it Hossa does worse when it comes to producing goals, the thing that he was supposed to do on Detroit as a WINGER. The last two years he was solid defensively but was not a great offensive contributor. Datsyuk in 09 was not having a good year (funny how you ignore that I mention that) offensively but did very well on a struggling Detroit team in the playoffs.

1. There is a difference between bias and bitterness. You can argue bias with me but don't say "oh you are bitter" without anything to show for it, especially when there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
2. I never said Hossa was a choker, just a weaker playoff player than Datsyuk. And especially weaker than Franzen, the man who Holland essentially picked in front of him. Money well spent in my opinion.

No one is disputing that, but I don't see how that will help when Hossa is having trouble scoring goals in the playoffs. Especially with a team that relied soley on its depth to win the cup in the first place.


Well, I'm not going to dig through all your old posts to nail down your every opinion. Your comments (and the other comments from other posters) that I was responding to in this thread strike me as biased and bitter. I'm sorry if that offends you. I guess I expect someone accumstomed to the internet to show a little thicker skin. Oh well.

And to clarify some points:

You mentioned that Hossa had only once scored more than .5 gpg in the playoffs. My repsonse was that that is an unfair standard. It is unfair because for one .5 gpg is significantly higher than his career regular-season average of .436, and also because it completely ignores his other contributions. My comment on Datsyuk's assists was an example of how you were unfairly judging Hossa. Hossa, like Datsyuk, is an elite all-around player. He does more, much more, than just score goals.


And I didn't ignore your comment on Datsyuk performance in '09. I only bothered to address it indirectly because you also added an excuse for it immediately after the comment. It seems you cannot say anything bad about Datsyuk without immediately following up with a mitigating compliment or excuse, and cannot say anything good about Hossa without a follow-up criticism. Now that it seems that isn't working out, you take the argument further afield by bringing up Franzen...for what purpose beyond criticizing Hossa?

'Bitterness' does not necessarily mean you wanted him to stay. That can also stem from blaming him for our loss in the Finals. Or it could just mean an extra bias against him for choosing Chicago, or just being a former Wing, even if you accept that it wasn't feasible to keep him. I think there is plenty of evidence that you an others in this thread are judging Hossa by a notably specific standard in order to purposefully paint him as negatively as you can. To me, it seems a bit more than simple bias. Motivated bias I would say. Again, sorry if that offends you.

And one more time I'll say that I was not comparing Datsyuk and Hossa. I agree that Datsyuk is a better player. The point was that Datsyuk does not score as well in the playoffs as he does in the regular season. Someone was suggesting that Hossa was not a very valuable player because his scoring drops in the playoffs. I contend that that is no more true than it is in regards to Datsyuk, who ,statistically, struggles even more in the scoring department. So someone did indeed dispute Hossa's value, stating something to effect of 'Kane-Toews and not much else' and dismissing Hossa's value pretty much entirely. That's how this debate got started in the first place.

But I do notice once again your inability to allow something that might reflect favorably on Hossa to pass without an associated criticism. Yeah, you obviously don't have anything against the guy.


#2016054 Sharks sign RFA Niklas Hjalmarsson

Posted by Buppy on 16 July 2010 - 08:17 PM

If you can't have a discussion about a subject without attempting to attack another person's character then don't bother responding to me.

I also believe Datsyuk underacheived in the 09 playoffs, but had a cup hangover and TWO great playoffs (not even including 07) to show for himself. Hossa has had one playoff year in which he scored at least .5 gpg and that was with a 100 point superstar playmaker to center him.

Wait...I'm attacking someone's character by suggesting they are bitter over Hossa leaving or claiming they have a homer bias?

And now for Hossa to have a successful playoff he has to score goals at a significantly better rate than he has in his career regular season? Seems a little unfair of a standard. Pav has averaged 0.65 apg in his career regular season. He's never once managed that rate in the playoffs, much less exceeded it. Why doesn't that matter to you?

You're full of excuses to explain away Pav's scoring troubles. I'm sure someone who cared could do the same for Hossa. But they won't give you a Cup for having a good enough excuse. Neither player scores as well in the playoffs as they do in the regular season. That is an indisputable fact.

That you can't make that simple admission without couching it in excuses, while simultaneously refusing to even consider the possibility that Hossa is anything other than a playoff choker is just plain biased. I'm sorry if that offends your character, but that's what it is.

My original assertion was that Hossa is one piece giving chicago a very good top 6 forward unit. I stand by that.

More than likely because the guy has loyalty to the organization for so many years and just does so many different things for us as Hossa just leeches for a Cup. Hey, its a little more honest I suppose. We love Pav.


I don't remember anyone criticizing Hossa for being a leech or mercenary when he came to Detroit. Well, except Penguin fans. Wonder why that is...


#2016022 Sharks sign RFA Niklas Hjalmarsson

Posted by Buppy on 16 July 2010 - 06:45 PM

Well shouldn't Hossa have played close to his potential considering the amount of motivation and rest the guy had in comparison to his peers (Datsyuk had been in a WCF and SCF the previous two years while Hossa played a whopping 4 games in the 07 playoffs). Datsyuk at least had the excuse of complacency and fatigue from winning a cup the year prior and playing almost two full post-season runs.


Datsyuk has been over a ppg twice the last 3 playoffs. Hossa has once while playing with the best player in the world as his centerman. All the while Datsyuk is much better defensively and one playoff was playing with a very bad charlie horse iirc.

Datsyuk is not as big of a choker in playoffs as Hossa is especially when you take into account the last 3 years, Hossa has played with the team he think will win the cup and should've been by far and away teh best player on the ice, but he hasn't been. Not even close


Datsyuk's numbers were driven down by his injury during the '06 playoffs and by the team's general inability to get pucks past Michelin Man in '03. They were further reduced by his injury last playoff season. Datsyuk was healthy in '07 and '08, and he was nigh-unstoppable in those playoffs; he was also quite good in this past April-May.


This is what I'm talking about. You'll all make any excuse in the world to explain Datsyuk's scoring troubles in the playoffs, but in Hossa's case the only possible explanation you'll consider is 'lazy and sucks'. You even deny him credit for his best season, attributing all his success to Crosby. The bitterness is obvious, even a little funny.


#2015597 Sharks sign RFA Niklas Hjalmarsson

Posted by Buppy on 15 July 2010 - 08:37 PM

It seems pretty obvious to me that Hossa'a slide is much worse than Datsyuk's slide. Doesn't mean that you have to agree. Personally, I'm glad Hossa isn't on the Wings. Despite your repeated attempts to make them equal. As far as I'm concerned, he was paid way too much to get knocked on his ass repeatedly. Again, you don't have to agree. Maybe a multi-million dollar, back-checking mercenary is worth as much as homegrown magician to you. Free country. But I wonder which player would impact the Wings more by being out of the lineup? Pretty sure you know the answer to that.

When's the last time Datsyuk almost cost his team a very important (basically life and death) playoff game with a selfish decision?


And it's pretty obvious to me that you have an irrational dislike for Hossa because he left. There were a lot of factors for our loss in the finals two years ago. But you just want to make Hossa the scapegoat because he left. You don't have to admit it.

Datsyuk, statistically speaking, is relatively worse in the playoffs. That's a simple fact. My original response was to someone saying that no one else came close to Hossa's drop-off from regular to post season. I pointed out someone who is not just close but in fact worse.

I was never comparing Datsyuk to Hossa. I was comparing their relative drops in production. You're the one that wants to make it a "who's better" argument. Both players score less in the playoffs. That is a simple, undeniable fact. That is all I was saying.

Now you just want to jump in and say something bad about Hossa, while exempting Datsyuk from criticism for exactly the same thing. That's what makes you a homer and bitter little cry ass over Hossa leaving. But whatever, free country.


#2015500 Sharks sign RFA Niklas Hjalmarsson

Posted by Buppy on 15 July 2010 - 06:48 PM

I would rather not, considering Datsyuk is paid to be an elite defensive playmaker, and Hossa is paid to be an elite defensive goal scorer. Which of those have you seen more of the past three years?

Sure I would love to have Hossa on this team, but the guy was unable to produce offensively for Detroit and Chicago. Also considering he has had much more to play for than virtually all of his teammates the past two years.


Datsyuk has averaged nearly 30 goals a year over the past 6 seasons. He's much more than just a playmaker. Likewise, Hossa is more than just a goal scorer, averaging over 40 assists for his last 6 seasons. Both are paid to be elite two-way players. That's what they both are, but both struggle some scoring in the playoffs compared to their regular seasons. Over the past three years I'd say they're pretty close to even.

It doesn't take a genius a simply watch both players and see that Datsyuk is the more reliable player. Numbers aside, Datsyuk is simply better in almost every category. Especially in the playoffs. Hossa is on is ass swimming 10X more than Datsyuk.

Accusing people of being "jilted-lover-cry-ass-Penguin-fans" just because they acknowledge that Datsyuk is obviously the better playoff performer in recent years is silly. It just makes you sound like a jilted-cry-ass-Hossa-fan.


Yes, Datsyuk is a better overall player. That wasn't the point. The point was that Datsyuk also struggles to score in the playoffs relative to his regular season production. That is an undeniable fact. It is also a fact that his relative struggles are even worse than Hossa's. As is often said about Hossa, he's paid to produce and he hasn't. Yes, he contributes in other ways, but so does Hossa.

You saying that Datsyuk has been obviously better, and the double standard of praising Datsyuks non-scoring contributions while ignoring Hossa's is what makes me call you a jilted lover. You're a blatant homer. You're mad at Hossa because he left. If Datsyuk had left you'd be saying the same things about him.


#2015476 Sharks sign RFA Niklas Hjalmarsson

Posted by Buppy on 15 July 2010 - 05:53 PM

Minus his 2002 season as a rookie on the third line his ppg is much better.

Their last three years:

Datsyuk ppg: 264/244 1.08 45/50 .9
Hossa's ppg: 188/203 .92 56/64 .875

He still has been at almost a ppg pace the last three years despite his poor 09 post-season. This coming off a great cup win giving him two total for the career. Hossa was without a cup, signed a one year deal in order to get that same cup, scored 40 goals in the regular season, and talked about wanting a long term deal while playing against his former team. He severely underacheieved and in the goal scoring department suffered as well.

Also considering Datsyuk has been able to perform brilliantly offensively without 100+ point playmakers centering him (which was Hossa's only ppg post-season), I would say he is a bit more reliable in the playoffs than Hossa.


And there's still a bigger difference between Datsyuk's regular and playoff performance. And while Datsyuk does do things other than score, so does Hossa. Stop acting like a bunch of jilted-lover-cry-ass-Penguin-fans about Hossa. Both struggle scoring in the playoffs compared to the regular season. Both contribute a lot in other areas; defensively, creating opportunities, and pressuring the opposition. Both are elite players, and any team would love to have either one of them.


#2014965 Sharks sign RFA Niklas Hjalmarsson

Posted by Buppy on 14 July 2010 - 04:17 PM

...

Before you say that most players numbers drop in the playoffs, look at other players numbers. Nobody comes close...


Datsyuk
Regular season:
592 points, 606 games: .977 ppg
Playoffs:
76 points, 110 games: .691 ppg


#2012816 So Franzen was the best player in the playoffs

Posted by Buppy on 08 July 2010 - 07:29 PM

So we are assuming that if Franzen hadn't touched the puck, Datsyuk still would have got it and made something happen? Interesting logic.

Mule earned every point he got.


Depends on your definition of 'earned'.

Personally, I think the title of 'best player in the playoffs' requires a little more than one incredible game. He was good, but nothing special for the majority of his shifts. Pav and Hank both had more impact than he did, and Flip, Nick, Jimmy, and Stuie were all pretty close.


#2012801 So Franzen was the best player in the playoffs

Posted by Buppy on 08 July 2010 - 05:51 PM

Mule was pretty good, but not the best by far. It was only his preformance in the last 2 games that even moved him ahead of Filppula into 3rd best forward on the team IMO.

He had a third of his points in one game, and at least half the remaining points were less 'making plays' than 'touching the puck prior to Pavel making something happen'.


#2008393 The new TBL

Posted by Buppy on 01 July 2010 - 03:46 PM

Not to break up the Stvie love-fest, but he really hasn't done anything yet.

Ellis is a solid move I think, not convinced the other two are all that great. Not bad moves, but not great either. A 4 year deal for St.Louis is a bit risky, but it is a decent price and he's not showing real signs of declining. Meszaros isn't a terrible player, and his contract wasn't that bad. And with the weak FA crop this year, it won't be easy to replace him.

He still has too much work to do to make any judgement yet.


#2005497 2010 NHL Draft Thread

Posted by Buppy on 27 June 2010 - 05:03 AM

No one is saying that, but you pointed out yourself how many gems we've found. That 8.7% may be only a little better than the average, but it doesn't account for the quality of the games played, just quantity. My point was never to say any 7th rounder will be a superstar, simply you shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the possibility.


My original response was to someone questioning our 7th round pick, as if we should have targetted someone different. As if we had any likely shot of filling some need or there were other players out there with a better chance of succeeding in the NHL. I was pointing out with a little pithy exaggeration that it was a 7th round pick, and there is only a small chance that said player will ever get a sniff of the NHL.

My follow-up analysis confirms that. Moreover, it goes a ways towards debunking the myth that our late round picks have any abnormal tendency toward success. The quality of our late successes may or may not be better than average. I don't feel like doing that much research. But it's still only about a 1 in 10 chance for a 4th round or later pick to really make the NHL. Pretty much right on league average.


#2004783 2010 NHL Draft Thread

Posted by Buppy on 25 June 2010 - 08:13 PM

Forbort and Doughty will be a hell of a pair in a few years.


#2004293 Savard to waive no trade clause

Posted by Buppy on 24 June 2010 - 09:39 PM

Nah, we'll just bring back Jiri clucking Hudler, he'll bring us back to Stanley! How many back injuries has Zetterberg had? How many injuries has Franzen and Kronwall had? It's ok to throw all of our cash at them, but its not cool to trade for 80-100 point producer with LESS injured seasons than Hank and Mule, becuase Hudler can get 50 points? I may have very limited medical knowledge, but lets give $6M to a man with a bad back, yes Zetterberg, that makes lots of sense. Holland rolled the dice on Zetterberg staying healthy (which failed last season) so why not roll the dice on a 100 point player?


Here's the Slappies Lines

Hudler - Hudler - Hudler
Hudler - Hudler - Hudler
Hudler - Hudler - Hudler
Hudler - Hudler - Hudler
Hudler


He's entering the point in his career whree his production will probably start to decline. He makes more than a million more than Hudler, that money would have to come from somewhere. He doesn't fill a real need for this team. At best he would generate slightly more offense than Hudler. He's much older and would thus need to be replaced sooner. We don't really want another player under contract until he's 40.

Even if you don't factor in the injury, it's not that promising of a trade. Savard would not make us a real powerhouse/Cup favorite. Filppula would make a lot more sense, but even then it doesn't make us that much better. If we were to trade Flip or Happy, especially if it meant taking on more cap, it would have to be for someone who could score 30-35+ goals to make any sense.


#2004146 Sounds like the wings are looking for size

Posted by Buppy on 24 June 2010 - 04:23 PM

The wings aren't hurting for 4-6 spot forwards or 3/4 Dmen, we need someone who will step up when Dats and Z start to fade. We don't have a great player in the system that we can all look to and say 'this is our blue chip forward prospect' so I still believe thats what the wings need to look for, even if there is a chance they get burned. You don't win cups without some risk.


We don't have anyone that looks capable of filling the void left by Nick and Rafi either, and both of them are older than Pav and Hank.


#2001787 Nice little article on our 2010/11 lines...

Posted by Buppy on 20 June 2010 - 05:25 PM

He was playing on the 3rd line in that regular season. He still put up 40 points. In the postseason, he was one of the best players on the team. He had 15 points and his +/- was absurdly high (+17).

Of course, these are things that people like you will continually omit in argument; you know they'll weaken your case, and so instead of admitting that you have a weak argument, you simply don't include important info and hope that nobody else will either. Good work.


3rd line?

Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Hossa, Franzen. 1:45/game on the PP. Even playing on the third line was with players like Flip, Hudler, and Sammy.

He had a poor year. He was not fighting through injuries all season. He was not stuck with poor linemates. He just had a poor season (in relation to what we were hoping to get from him). For the record, I'm not saying he's a poor player, or that we should get rid of him if we could. I said he was not fighting injuries 2 years ago, and still had a bad year. Those are facts. I said he, or someone else, will get stuck on the third line and their production will suffer for it. (Something you apparently agree with from your statement about Cleary... even if it wasn't accurate.)

Of course, these are things that people like you continually omit. You make emotional statements without any factual foundation or research to support your arguments. Rather than admitting you have a weak argument, you don't bother to check if you even have an argument, nor try to understand what it is you're arguing against. Good work.