Jump to content


kipwinger's Photo

kipwinger

Member Since 31 May 2011
Online Last Active Today, 10:00 PM
-----

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Are the Wings a Contender?

Today, 02:34 PM

So you take an article that credits Babcock's coaching with increasing the Wings chances to win, and spin it that he's the "worst culprit" of playing for the loser point? :lol:

Honestly some of the statistical stuff is beyond me in that article, but it reaches an understandable conclusion. Babcock has required his forwards to be defensively responsible for a while now, and often errs on the side of that responsibility over offensive potential.

This team no longer has the firepower to open things up offensively. And their blueline is pretty thin so it requires a total team effort to limit shots.

Certainly more than we had last year, but where exactly is all this offensive potential that's not getting utilized?

 

The team, as a whole, is more offensively capable that it was two or three years ago is my point.  I'm not sure how to quantify it, but a team with Bertuzzi, Abby, Franzen, Zetterberg, Datyuk, Filppula, and sometimes Cleary as a top six certainly SEEMS like offensively capable that one with Datsyuk, Tatar, Nyquist, Zetterberg, Abby, and Franzen.  Plus, our third line is pretty obviously more offensively capable with Weiss, Jurco, and Sheahan.  So why is the current incarnation shooting less?  Perhaps because they're almost entirely focused on playing defense?


"Best team" says nothing specifically about offensive talent. And 5 or 6 years is going back a bit too far.

It also completely ignores the defensive corps, which plays a huge role in generating offense. The Wings have more offensive talent up front than they'd had the last few seasons, but not so much on the blue line. They're not great at moving the puck out of their own end and absolutely terrible at getting any shots through from the point.

When you misrepresent the article as saying "no shots against and no shots for," of course it sounds like a recipe for overtime.

 

The charts in the article SPECIFICALLY represent "shots for AND shots against" as a whole.  And this year's team is shooting less, and holding their opponents to MUCH fewer shots.  I'm not sure how I'm misrepresenting anything. 

 

If you're not shooting, and you're not letting the other team shoot much, then you're going to go to a lot of overtimes. 

 

Why are you being so combative about this?


In Topic: Are the Wings a Contender?

Today, 02:18 PM

So you take an article that credits Babcock's coaching with increasing the Wings chances to win, and spin it that he's the "worst culprit" of playing for the loser point? :lol:

Honestly some of the statistical stuff is beyond me in that article, but it reaches an understandable conclusion. Babcock has required his forwards to be defensively responsible for a while now, and often errs on the side of that responsibility over offensive potential.

This team no longer has the firepower to open things up offensively. And their blueline is pretty thin so it requires a total team effort to limit shots.

 

I think you're misunderstanding. I'm not trying to knock his coaching.  We're winning, what do I care?  BUT, the stats don't lie, and one of your premises isn't correct..namely that the team no longer has "firepower". 

 

Babcock himself has said this is the best team he's had since 2009, and between Tatar, Datsyuk, Franzen, Z, Nyquist, Jurco, Sheahan, and Weiss he's got considerable more offensive potential than he's had in the last 5 or 6 years, yet the stats show that our "shots for" is considerably lower than it was during that period.  We're shooting less than we did two or three years ago, with WAY more talent. 

 

What I'm saying is that we've got an offensively capable team, and yet we're playing a system that is so geared toward defense that the offense is shooting MUCH less than when we had less offensively capable teams.  It's clearly working, as we're winning games and holding teams to very few shots.  But you can't deny that no shots against, and no shots for, is a recipe for overtime, no?


In Topic: Are the Wings a Contender?

Today, 02:08 PM

In the end it's probably a good plan for a team just outside of the top tier teams.

 

Sure.  But I'll be sure to take all those "I can't stand Columbus (or Nashville, or whoever), all they do is trap and play for overtime" comments with a grain of salt from now on.  Particularly since we've got A LOT more offensive potential that we're intentionally not utilizing in order to play this system. 


In Topic: Are the Wings a Contender?

Today, 01:44 PM

Worth a read, even if you're not big on possession stats:

 

Shot suppression - Babcock's secret weapon [Winging It In Motown]

 

I was going to write a post about this and forgot. 

 

We hear people complaining all the time about certain teams, or certain coaches, playing for "the loser point" or just trying to get to overtime. 

 

Doesn't this stand as evidence that Babs is perhaps the worst culprit?  I mean, I don't really care as long as we're making the playoffs, but it definitely seems like there's a deliberate strategy to subordinate the offensive potential of the team in favor of a air tight trap.  Nobody scores, everybody goes to overtime. 

 

What say you?


In Topic: Quick Announcement Regarding Spam PMs.

Today, 01:24 PM

Whoops.  I had one earlier but just deleted it.  

 

Same.