I think Bab's is pulling the sports psychology long-con. No matter what Weiss does, it's not good enough. Oh you scored 2 goals? Call me when you score 3, 4, 5 etc.
Then one day, just when Weiss can't grit his teeth and fight for it at 110% on the 4th line any longer, Zetterberg and Datsyuk both go down with injuries.
First shift on the 1st line Weiss goes coast to coast, performs a triple sow cow, and then rockets the mother of all slappers into the goalies logo pushing the goalie and the puck into the back of the net.
Babs lights a cigar behind the bench.
At least that's how the colorful story book in my head plays out.
Agreed. I'm guessing it has a lot to do with our blueline. If you look at who gets the fewest offensive zone starts on the team, it's Miller, Andersson and Glendening by a country mile. Even trustworthy guys like Zetterberg and Datsyuk start in the offensive zone 60% of the time. Kindl and Lashoff, unsurprisingly start in the offensive zone 70% of the time.
I think that line is vastly under-appreciated. It's the only line that has been intact all season and consistently worked.
Also, we've lost some games. True contenders (e.g. Kings, Blues, Bruins) don't lose games. Shawn Thornton was available, but Ken Holland is an idiot and so he let him go to the Panthers. Do you think it's a coincidence that the Panthers have beaten us twice? Thornton and Mitchell and Bolland give them toughness and leadership and character, something the Wings completely lack.
I don't have a problem with the newer analytics themselves (admittedly I'm still sorting out what all the stats measure). The problem I have is how routinely they're misused and misinterpreted, including this article.
They call Sheahan Detroit's best shot suppressor, then point out he starts more than 62% of his shifts in the offensive zone. So in one sentence they've drawn a faulty conclusion from the statistics and even included the reason why they're wrong.
Very likely Sheahan isn't Detroit's best shot suppressor. When you start the vast majority of your shifts in the offensive zone, that means your opponent has to go a long way to register a shot attempt. Glendening on the other hand, starts in the offensive zone less than 33% of the time. Two-thirds of his shifts, he's starting in front of his own net, so there's going to be a lot more shot attempts from his opponent.
Then in subtler ways, they often use language that draws conclusions not supported by the stats. It's not that Sheahan himself only "allows" 37.7 shot attempts per 60 minutes of play. It means that when Sheahan is on the ice, the other team only gets 37.7 shot attempts per 60 minutes of play. That's it. But people constantly make the logical leap that the statistic says something specifically that a player is doing on the ice. That's a HUGE difference.
I think it's interesting that Babs is starting to specialize his players zone starts. A few years ago I remember reading an article about players zone starts by team. Detroit was the closest to an even 50%. Meaning Datsyuk, Franzen, Hudler, Filppula, Helm, Ericsson, everyone, was required to play both O and D. Now we see guys like Luker being used heavily as a defensive weapon.
He's a right-shot winger in the prime of his career who scored 30 goals for the Oilers. (He got lucky. He'll never score 30 again. But still.) He plays with an edge, likes to agitate, goes to the dirty areas, is a pain in the ass to play against - but he's also skilled enough to be considered a goal-scorer. I'd like him as a gritty complementary winger with good scoring upside. His cap hit's good, he's only signed for one more year past this year, so it wouldn't be a major investment. It'd be a late first-rounder for a guy who could add a dimension to our forward corps that we're somewhat lacking. At the very least, he'd give us some more scoring depth. Basically, I'd take Perron over a kid who's seven years away from playing big, meaningful minutes for the Wings (i.e. the kid we would, and will, take with our first-round pick).
I know - "We should use that first-round pick on a defenseman, not David frickin' Perron." I just have zero faith that that's going to happen. We're not getting Myers, we're not getting Yandle, and we won't move a first for a rental (Green). We're going to sit on the pick, because "there's no hockey store." That makes me a sad panda.
The one thing I "like" about not getting Perron is his hips are a major issue. He might be one big hit away from being borderline useless.
...But we all know he's going to be huge for the Pens, because of course he will.
I've seen you mention this before. Personally I've never seen that side of David Perron. Sure he's not your typical soft finesse player, he's a good two-way winger who finishes his checks, but plays with an edge? agitates? dirty areas? pain in the ass? I wouldn't use any of those phrases to describe him. I think you have David Perron mistaken for David Backes.
Acquiring Perron doesn't address a need for us. It would be a move for the sake of making a move. And that's why it'd be dumb.