Jump to content


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

kipwinger's Photo

kipwinger

Member Since 31 May 2011
Offline Last Active Today, 09:47 AM
***--

#2546204 11/2 GDT : Red Wings 2 at Sabres 3 (SO)

Posted by kipwinger on 02 November 2014 - 07:11 PM

I think they should try (just for a few shifts) to switch Helm and Sheahan.  Have Sheahan with Franzen and Jurco and Helm with Tatar and Nyquist.  That second line seems like they'd be hard to get the puck from, and the third line would fly. 




#2546201 11/2 GDT : Red Wings 2 at Sabres 3 (SO)

Posted by kipwinger on 02 November 2014 - 07:09 PM

abs is so lucky to play with dats and Z

 

He's holding his own this year.  I think in the past he's been the recipient of their good play, but this year he's really contributing to that line...not just riding their coattails.  I never saw it coming and bitched quite a bit about Abby being on the top line.  I was clearly wrong about that.  This is me officially eating crow. 




#2546180 11/2 GDT : Red Wings 2 at Sabres 3 (SO)

Posted by kipwinger on 02 November 2014 - 06:55 PM

I.E  D,Byfuglien

 

I disagree on that one.  He is big, no doubt.  But with defensemen, 50 pts. seems to be the magic number and Byfuglien's done it three times as a d-man.  I don't love the guy or anything, but that's a lot of points from the back end (like, Keith Yandle type points from the blueline).  If Myers was anywhere close to that I might understand the hype.  But he's long way off. 




#2546175 11/2 GDT : Red Wings 2 at Sabres 3 (SO)

Posted by kipwinger on 02 November 2014 - 06:45 PM

I've been saying that about Myers since the rumors started.  He's not that good.  He's only an average defenseman.  If he was 6'1 and 205 lbs. but did everything else exactly the same nobody would be impressed by him at all.  For whatever reason hockey fans are mesmerized by "bigness" regardless of whether or not the biggie has much talent. 




#2546158 11/2 GDT : Red Wings 2 at Sabres 3 (SO)

Posted by kipwinger on 02 November 2014 - 06:30 PM

Anybody else think that the "euro twins" should really be the "euro triplets"?  Kronwall plays so well with D and Z.  He reads them just as well as they read each other. 




#2545649 10/29 GDT - Red Wings 4 @ Capitals 2

Posted by kipwinger on 30 October 2014 - 09:41 PM

Bob Hartley would also be an interesting choice

 

Are you implying that you'd be ok with Bob Hartley as the coach of the Detroit Red Wings?  Bob Hartley? 




#2544740 Rating the Defense through 6 games

Posted by kipwinger on 27 October 2014 - 11:58 AM

Let's just agree to disagree on this one... I don't think a defenseman in the middle of the diamond makes sense at all, that is the last place I would put Smith. The player in the middle is who you want directing traffic, and can make the quick one touch passes and can also be a trigger man.

 

I also disagree that Smith wouldn't be capable of manning the point, even if he were the last man back in the diamond. He has improved his defensive game immensely and is much smarter with the puck. Even if he does make a mistake, he is our fastest defenseman, so the chance of him recovering is much higher than any of the other d, in my opinion.

 

Either way, I'm done with this. I just want our power-play to improve. It's clearly not getting it done now, whether that's on the system they're using, the coaching strategies or the personnel, who knows...

 

I like the idea of trying Smith on the PP point (I mean, what could it hurt) but it's not going to work unless Babs' is going to let him use his wheels to make plays.  Utilized in that way Smith could be dangerous.  Utilized in the traditional "point shot-rebound-goal" strategy I think he's not much of an improvement because he's got a decent wrister, but not a noteworthy one timer.  But again, Babs would have to let him wheel and deal to be effective, which I can't see happening. 

 

I also agree with you that there's not really a problem with trying him on the PP despite his defensive gaffs.  Subban and Wisniewski are two players who come to mind who are awesome on the PP despite being shaky defensively (at times).  I'm not sure why we can only use guys who are defensive studs...though I suppose that's not too different than the rest of our game.  At times I think we're so petrified by the thought that the other team might get a scoring chance that creating any of our own becomes a secondary priority. 




#2544239 Lines Thread

Posted by kipwinger on 24 October 2014 - 01:59 PM

How many points does Helm have to not score on the wing before everybody realizes he's not good on the wing?  If the fact that he blew about six scoring chances last night doesn't convince people that he can't take a pass, I don't know what will. 

 

To reiterate.  Helm.  Is. f******.  Terrible.  On.  The.  Wing.

 

Terrible. 




#2544232 10/23 GDT : Penguins 3 at Red Wings 4 (OT)

Posted by kipwinger on 24 October 2014 - 01:21 PM

Babcock is a funny man :P

 

Babcock, on why he doesn't try Brendan Smith on power play: "I’m not getting into every detail why I play everyone and why I don’t. That’s the beauty of being the coach. You get to decide. You guys get to speculate why I don’t do things."

 

 

Sooo...no good reason then?




#2544173 Lines Thread

Posted by kipwinger on 24 October 2014 - 09:18 AM

 

 

Big decision coming up when Franzen comes back who is the odd man out? Nesty/Jurco I would assume Jurco sents he can go through waivers

 

God I hope they don't demote Jurco.  Nestrasil isf****** garbage.  I have no idea why anybody thinks he'd get claimed off waivers (not that you're saying this, but I've had the 'don't want to lose Nesty for nothing' discussion about 200 times this week).  They need to get that kid out of the lineup.  He's clearly not ready to play in the NHL and is just another one of Babcock's pet projects. 




#2543469 Rating the Defense through 6 games

Posted by kipwinger on 22 October 2014 - 09:19 PM

Our zone coverage has been really good.  Our passing and transition game from the back end has been horrible, to the extent that our beat writers were discussing our "turnover problem" by about game 3 of the season.  Two of our loses are directly attributable to massive defenseman turnovers that led to goals.  Also our defense has produced a combined 7 points, so anybody ready to pat them on the back for "creating offense" should think again.  So let's not sing kumbaya just yet eh boys?




#2543399 10/21 GDT - Red Wings 1 at Canadiens 2 (OT)

Posted by kipwinger on 22 October 2014 - 01:21 PM

Everyone that is crying that we didn't have enough offense is stupid. Yes, two goals won't win you MOST games but SOMETIMES it's enough to win a game. This is hockey, you guys know that it's not always going to be high scoring. We scored two goals yesterday in a very TIGHT game. You've never seen a hockey game end 1-0 or 2-0? It happens!! Yes of course we could have took advantage of the Power Play but we didn't. Bottom line is we scored more than they did and we should have won. You're not going to win many games when goals are taken away from you. Absolute bull call and took away a highlight goal away from one of the best players in the game. I seriously want to crush Montreal so bad the next time we play them.

 

You're right.  We are stupid.  I've changed my tune; from now on I'll form my impressions based on what should have happened. 




#2543372 Weiss

Posted by kipwinger on 22 October 2014 - 09:36 AM

 

Maybe because the coaching stuff expected more from him (including pre-season ?). ) It doesn't matter how much money a player is making if he doesn't perform Babcock won't play the guy, simple.

 

Is that what's going on? 

 

Because Babcock and Holland's own comments suggest that he's not playing because they want to bring him along slowly, but that they've impressed by his attitude and hard work. 

 

This seems like another installment of "Frank speculates on something but plays it off like fact". 




#2543364 10/21 GDT - Red Wings 1 at Canadiens 2 (OT)

Posted by kipwinger on 22 October 2014 - 08:59 AM

If we continue to play soccer, every bad call will affect us. If we are up 6-2 or down 7-1, who cares if a ref blows a call. We don't have an elite goaltender. We have a good goaltender, but not an elite one. You have to have an elite goaltender if you wanna play soccer.

 

 

I understand the point you're making, but lets not get carried away.  I don't want to win or lose by 4 goals a night.  That's not going to get you into the playoffs.  But 50% of the 10 games last night were decided by two or more goals.  So it's not like offense and defense are mutually exclusive.  I'd just like to be reasonably sure that if we're down by a goal we've at least got a chance to come back, and if we're up by a goal we've at least got a shot at being able to score again.  As it is, I have no faith in either of these things.  And the only way anybody seems to be able to justify our current approach is by pretending we live in a fantasy world were refs don't occasionally make bad calls.

 

Was I the only one last night that KNEW Montreal was going to get the next goal and tie the game?  I would have bet anybody on LGW if they had waged Detroit would score again before Montreal scored to tie it. 




#2543360 Weiss

Posted by kipwinger on 22 October 2014 - 08:42 AM

Filppula wanted out and I think TB will regret that deal. He's never had 2 back to back healthy productive seasons.

 

What's the over/under on "healthy, productive, season"?  Because I'll take your bet.