Jump to content


kipwinger's Photo

kipwinger

Member Since 31 May 2011
Offline Last Active Today, 10:20 AM
***--

#2564880 Are the Wings a Contender?

Posted by kipwinger on 20 January 2015 - 12:55 PM

An opinion cannot be wrong, hence it being an "opinion"... An estimation of the quality of worth of someone or something. You can throw as many stats at me as you want, I'm going by the product I see on the ice. Smith is the better option for the second pairing, while Quincey would be a great shut-down third pairing guy.

 

Yup, I said Quincey surged ahead of Smith in ALL those areas in just one week... It was very clear in what I said that I was specifically talking about points, as in the one extra goal he got, and the four extra assists... Is it really that impossible for you to fathom that Smith could have potentially got that plus some if he were paired with DeKeyser for the past month rather than babysitting a rookie?... Give me a break...

 

Christ, are you really saying that just because you hold an opinion it "cannot be wrong"? You're definitely smarter than that.  

 

An opinion can absolutely be wrong if the preponderance of evidence suggests the opposite, as it does in this case.  Because there's an objective truth here.  Opinions can't be wrong when the choices are subjective (e.g. I like red better than blue tshirts).  If you said "I like Smith better", I couldn't argue.  That's your subjective opinion.  But you said "Smith IS better".  Which is not an opinion, its a demonstrably false statement. 

 

That's like saying my "opinion" isn't wrong if I say Steve Yzerman was better offensively than Wayne Gretzky.  "Well...um...I don't care what the stats say...umm...it's my OPINION". 

 

You're wrong dude.  Get over it.  One day Smith MAY be better than Quincey, but as of right now the universe of evidence proves otherwise, regardless of your opinion. 




#2564870 Are the Wings a Contender?

Posted by kipwinger on 20 January 2015 - 12:08 PM

Smith is better than Ouellet now, and I believe Smith will be better than Ouellet in the future. I'm not, nor have I ever been as high on Ouellet as most fans. I don't think he's close to our top defense prospect. I've watched a ton of Griffins games over the past few years and Ouellet has never done anything to impress. I'll admit that his hockey IQ seems to be high, and he does everything above average, but nothing he does, points to him being better than a bottom pairing defenseman at the NHL level.

 

I think Smith is a second pairing defenseman now and he has the potential to be a really good one in a year or two. I think Sproul is the only other defense prospect that we have (other than Backman, and he's gone back to Sweden...) that has a legit shot to be a top 3/4 defenseman.

 

As good as the DeKeyser / Quincey pairing has been does anyone actually think that it is better than the DeKeyser / Smith pairing? I sure don't, but we're all entitled to our own opinion...

 

No, I don't think Smith and Dekeyser would be better.  Quincey is better than Smith in nearly every objective measure for a defenseman.

 

Quincey has more goals.

Quincey has more assists.

Quincey plays on pk.

Quincey has more hits.

Quincey has FEWER give aways.

Quincey has more blocked shots. 

Quincey shoots more.

Quincey has a higher shooting percentage.

Quincey has a higher Corsi. 

Quincey starts in the offensive zone less often.

 

Smith has FEWER penalties (by two). 

Smith has MORE takeaways (by a lot). 

 

Other than those two areas, Smith is not better than Quincey in any measureable way.  And that's not an opinion buddy.  That's a FACT.




#2564696 1/18 GDT : Sabres 4 at Red Wings 6 (Z w/Hat Trick)

Posted by kipwinger on 18 January 2015 - 11:20 PM

Those pun titles keep getting zetter and zetter. 




#2564240 All Purpose Grand Rapids Griffins Thread

Posted by kipwinger on 18 January 2015 - 04:18 PM

Sproul was our best defender for a while there, playing great hockey, while paired with Paetsch. The past few games he has been paired with Brennan Evans and he hasn't looked near as good. A lot can be said about the veteran presence of a guy like Nathan Paetsch, he makes whoever he is paired with, that much better. There's no question that Marchenko is our most consistent, and definitely most NHL ready defenseman. He is more of a shut down defender but can put up some points as well. He doesn't shoot very often, despite having a pretty decent shot, he is also a very underrated passer. He leads the Griffins defense in points, despite getting very little power-play time, spending most of his time at even strength and penalty kill.

 

Mantha hasn't been playing as well as many had anticipated, but he's right where I figured he would be at this point. I said that I think he will start to pick it up after Christmas and I still expect that to be the case. He has been playing much better as of late, although he did have a pretty forgettable game last night, with a couple horrendous turnovers. The thing that I still see Mantha lacking, is what he was labeled for in his draft year, up until he supposedly proved everyone wrong in his final year of junior. He lacks compete level. Often times he will give the puck away and then show little to no effort in trying to get it back. He doesn't back check the way he should, and until he improves his defensive game, I don't see him making the jump to the NHL. I'm sure Blashill has had talks with him and I'm sure he will get it straightened out, but until then, he will remain down in Grand Rapids.

 

I agree with your assessment of Marchenko.  He's a "shutdown defender" in the way that Dekeyser is.  Which is to say that he's not known for his offense, and he definitely prioritizes his defense and plays a safe game.  But he's also an effective puck mover and is really good at getting the puck up the ice.  I actually think he'll put up more points at the NHL level than he does in the AHL when he's surrounded by more first rate finishers. 

 

Edit:  As far as Mantha goes, I think he struggles from the same thing that Jurco does.  He's a big guy, and at the pro level will be expected to play a big man's game.  But until he came to GR, he played a skilled, finesse game, despite his size.  He's basically learning how to be a power forward at the pro level and the learning curve is steep.  Once he figures out the power forward's game (i.e. where to be on the ice, how to play without the puck, etc.) he'll be fine.  But until now he's always played the way a center has to play at the pro level (carry the puck and make plays on individual effort). 




#2564151 Franzen on IR

Posted by kipwinger on 17 January 2015 - 11:30 PM

This last post of mine was unwarranted.
 
Sorry Kip for the assinine comment on my behalf ;)


Lol. I thought you were just talkin trash. I understood it, and still understand it, as gamesmanship. No apology necessary.
Also. You should have punned on ASSinine. Just saying.


#2564112 1/17 GDT : Predators 2 at Red Wings 5

Posted by kipwinger on 17 January 2015 - 09:34 PM

Excellent win, and two wins against two really good teams.  Keep it up boys.

 

Also, in my opinion that was the best game Mrazek has played as a Wing.  He's had other games where he was flashier.  But he faced a reasonable amount of shots tonight against a good offensive team, and weathered a few long dry spells to stay in it.  I liked it. 




#2563880 Franzen on IR

Posted by kipwinger on 17 January 2015 - 11:28 AM

...I'm just not above a cheap laugh.

 

And God bless you for that.  High brow humor is the worst!




#2563855 Franzen on IR

Posted by kipwinger on 16 January 2015 - 11:57 PM

What I appreciate most is how organically it happened.  You could tell that it was a clear evolution of thought from "Kip's an ass" to "I'll write ASSociation because puns are ironic and funny" to "it's a pun free for all!". 

 

You're right.  Booze is probably involved now that I think about it. 




#2563852 Franzen on IR

Posted by kipwinger on 16 January 2015 - 11:32 PM

I never expected this to turn into a pun thread.  Does that mean it's a success or a failure?




#2563812 1/15 GDT : Red Wings 3 at Blues 2 (OT)

Posted by kipwinger on 16 January 2015 - 04:41 PM

Were reallyy not that far ahead.
And Boston's getting back in the swing of things after an abysmal start.

It was good to see us get a win vs st. Louis, because they've been dominant lately.
But they also went through around ten games where they lost seven or eight this season.
Nashville's been pretty consistent this year.
So I'm looking forward to seeing how we play against them.

 

I'm not trying to take anything away from the win last night.  It was a good win against a good team.  I'd like to see more of that.  Because for a while we weren't doing that at all.  I'm just a little sick of people explaining away marginal performances (i.e. losing in the shootout to Toronto, Colorado, Buffalo, Florida, etc.) by saying "well if it weren't for the shootout we'd be better".  No we wouldn't.  We'd MAYBE have more points, but it doesn't mean we'd be better.  The fact that you're consistently going to overtime against bad teams is proof enough that you're not "better".  I'm also sick of the "well we're only three points out of first" argument.  At one point, a year ago, we were leading our division.  By the end of the season we barely squeaked into the playoffs and got humiliated in the first round.  And all you've got to do is compare the teams we played in the last two months, with the teams we play in the next two months to see just how little our record currently means. 

 

The only way for this team to prove it's good, or a contender, or whatever, is to consistently beat good teams.  That's it.  And if you don't consistently beat good teams, or do lose to bad ones consistently, then getting rid of the shootout record or counting up points won't make a bit of difference. 

 

It's a little bit like the Carolina Panthers in football.  Sure they made the playoffs, but what does that mean?  They had a losing record entering the playoffs.  Anybody with a brain knew that they weren't good just because they made the playoffs. 

 

Like I said, hopefully last night was the start of something good.  A turn around.  We sure looked really good.  But I've got to see that kind of effort, consistently, before I think this team is going to make any noise from here on out. 




#2563775 Franzen on IR

Posted by kipwinger on 16 January 2015 - 01:00 PM

I agree Kip, but there is ONE Leaf that I would love to have... Cody Franson. I think he is the one bright spot on that loser team... :cool:

 

There are a few of their players I think are good.  But I've got to be "all in" on this.  So I'm calling it.  No Toronto losers.  None.  Even the ones I like.  They'll leave their loser germs on the equipment in the training room and before you know it all our guys will have loser.  Next thing you know we'll be extending crappy defensemen to 7 million dollar deals and blaming everything on our top line wingers. 

 

Not on my watch. 




#2563769 Franzen on IR

Posted by kipwinger on 16 January 2015 - 12:20 PM

I don't want anybody from Toronto.  They're tarnished with "loser".  I don't want our players catching the loser bug too.  I'm sick of losers.  I'd rather keep our guys.  Our veterans are winners.  Our kids are winners.  The only guys who aren't winners are Weiss, Quincey, and the fourth line...and see how that's working out for them lol. 




#2563416 Are the Wings a Contender?

Posted by kipwinger on 15 January 2015 - 08:02 PM

No, we are not a contender this year in my opinion. Box out our forwards and forecheck the heck out of our D and most teams take us out in the first or maybe second round. I'm enjoying watching the kids get better and my veteran favs this year so I'm not a hater or anything. I, like most here just think we need some ingredients to really contend. The equivalents of Mac, Shanny and Lids would do it in my opinion.

 

Oh, is that all?  Just a power forward and two hall of famers?  Lol.

 

I'm just kidding with you.  I agree.  We're a decent team, but we're not a contender.  I've said elsewhere, we don't beat good teams and we're only .500 against crappy teams lately.  Our offense is not existent most nights, and our blue line defense well but does nothing else well. 

 

Like krsmith17 said in another thread, I think we could be a contender in the next couple of years but a couple solid acquisitions.  But not this year.




#2563348 1/15 GDT : Red Wings 3 at Blues 2 (OT)

Posted by kipwinger on 15 January 2015 - 02:42 PM

Washington doesn't qualify as a good team in your book? I don't think they are elite or anything, but I don't think it is a stretch to put them in the same category as Vancouver.

 

I dicked that whole post up and combined several thoughts into one, which made it all wrong lol.  These were...

 

1)  We need to beat good teams.

2) We haven't played a lot of good teams lately so it's hard to gauge ourselves.

3)  St. Louis is a good team, so it should be a measuring stick game.

 

To answer your question though, yes.  Washington is a good team.  I was completely forgetting about them (despite actually going to that miserable game). 




#2563324 Franzen on IR

Posted by kipwinger on 15 January 2015 - 09:36 AM

No one was saying it was literally impossible.

 

It was, however, impossible to keep Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Franzen, Filppula, Cleary, Homer, Draper, Maltby, AND Hossa, and the defense and goalies, and ice a full roster.

 

Right, Holland didn't want to replace all his mid-tier guys with unknown guys or depth players like Bowman did with Versteeg, Byfuglien, Niemi, and Ladd.  I get why Holland let Hossa go.  My problem is that since 2010, the narrative has become "Holland chose Franzen over Hossa".  Which is bulls***.  Holland chose to keep this core team from the 2009 Cup run intact, rather than blow it up just to keep Hossa.  When you put it that way, it seems a little bit more reasonable.  Which was my point all along.