Jump to content

kickazz's Photo


Member Since 02 Feb 2013
Online Last Active Today, 02:44 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Glendening signs 4-year, $1.8m AAV extension

Today, 02:11 PM

That's not true because both Helm and Sheahan are considered defensive forwards with higher defensive zone starts than the top 6 and their numbers are far better than Glendening. 


Far better. Would you like me to post another chart or is it going to end up in another excuse driven post? 


Why bother I guess. I've said my piece. Last year when WIIM posted it we all called them crazy. At this point Mlive has caught on and I'm sure the rest of the press will follow suit. 


BTW what does bad team mean? We were one of 8 teams to make the playoffs in the east. That's a bad excuse. In the chart I posted of top toughest usage forwards,  Auston Watson and Mikka Salomaki both play for Nashville (7th seed). Bryon Froese plays for the Maple Leafs (Lol). I feel like you're completely ignoring charts and figures people are posting for you without even reading jumping to conclusions of denial. Unless you can actually look at the points I'm trying to make, and read the information on the charts (and realize those other players are also on "bad teams"), this is pointless. I'm basically arguing with someone who refuses to look at data. 

In Topic: Glendening signs 4-year, $1.8m AAV extension

Today, 02:01 PM

This is a bad hockey team and the data reflects that more so than a single player. What a strange coincidence, every player that isn't used defensively has outstanding numbers and every defensive player has terrible ones. I guess that can only mean those guys are trash and Jurco and smith are elite. If you ran your team based off these stats you wouldn't have a good team

It's likely a "bad" hockey team because of player misusage. What a stranger coincidence that we did worse last year than we did with Babcock with basically a better team on paper (Dylan Larkin + Mrazek). Oh that's right, Babcock didn't play guys like Glendening 24 minutes a night against Ovechkin and if he did, he put him on a line with Datsyuk to mask his weaknesses. 


But carry on believe what you gotta believe. 

In Topic: Glendening signs 4-year, $1.8m AAV extension

Today, 01:55 PM

Again just because he doesn't generate shots doesn't mean he isn't good defensively. Wings defensive zone style is to sit back and allow outside shots and get into lanes. If Glendening had great possession numbers the way he is utilized he'd be Zetterberg in his prime. Giving up a lot of shots doesn't mean you're not doing your job defensively. To say Glendening isn't good defensively is to go against every knowledgeable coach he's ever had

You can really see who on this board goes to Winging it in Mowtown... As soon as you realize those people on that site are nothing but fans you become humbled and realize you're not more knowledgeable than NHL coaches and managers. I'm not going to just cast off all advanced analytics but the data is so skewed on a team to team basis. If we were a Stanley cup contender this data would be alarming. This is a bad hockey team and the data reflects that more so than a single player. What a strange coincidence, every player that isn't used defensively has outstanding numbers and every defensive player has terrible ones. I guess that can only mean those guys are trash and Jurco and smith are elite. If you ran your team based off these stats you wouldn't have a good team

Lol. First it's not WIIM. It's quite clear you have decided to brush away any fact given here and run the same narrative OVER AND OVER again. The original article came from Mlive that Krsmith posted. 


http://www.mlive.com...gs - MLive.com)


Second, when all things are equal I showed you a graph of top 15 tough usage forwards in OTHER teams and still in denial. Cool. Seriously if you can't come up with a good argument and keep going on about "well I don't believe numbers" blah blah blah then that's fine. If you have nothing to show for your argument then this conversation is useless. I'm giving you basic stats and you're still stuck on anti-advanced stats narrative.


Basic simple, goals against, shots against, ice time. 

In Topic: Glendening signs 4-year, $1.8m AAV extension

Today, 01:23 PM

He's used like a premier shut down forward on this team. Probably one of the most utilized shut down centers in the league. For him to have glowing stats the way he was used he'd have to be the best defensive forward in the league and a star player. Glendening has tough assignments night in night out. For his possession numbers to be great he'd have to be outplaying top line players every night and therefore be a superstar. He plays the tough minutes so Z and co don't have to and last I checked our defensive game was one of the only respectable parts to our game last year

Literally the wings were a team that was bad at everything but defensively were decent but we blame our defensive forwards all off season

This is starting to become one of the most used and incorrect arguments for Glendening. The whole "well he plays tough minutes that's why his numbers are bad".


Let me show you other players in the league who also play so called "tough minutes". The title of this graph is a dead give away btw. 




Take a look. Out of 15 players in the league who are subject to "tough minutes" Glendening ranks amongst the bottom at shot generation. What's his excuse? There is no excuse. He's just not a good shutdown forward. I'm moving on from this narrative that Luke Glendening is a good defensive forward.


He simply isn't. Kruger, Desjardins, Watson, Nystrom. Majority of the people on that list have better shot attempts than Glendening and similar defensive zone starts. And before anyone says, "it's because our coaches prefer to play safe". That excuse doesn't work when you look at other defensive forward on our team. 


This guy ranks bottom in shots against when short handed, ranks bottom in GOALS AGAINST when short handed. Ranks towards bottom shot generation amongst other players in the league who have just as much defensive zone starts as him.


I think I'd rather us move on from using Glendening for this role and move onto using Sheahan and Helm. Or like I said earlier, give Frans Nielsen the defensive shutdown role just as Zetterberg was in from 2006-2013.


If people want to ride on the "Well Luke Glendening works hard and Holland, Babcock and Blashill all praised him so he must be good" narrative then by all means. But even the simplest stats, eyeball tests and obviously advanced stats are racked against this argument. 


Anyways no point. 5 more years. Hopefully rookie coach learns from his mistakes sooner rather than later. 


The top two overusage issues on this team are:


1. Henrik Zetterberg

2. Luke Glendening 

In Topic: Official 2016 Detroit Red Wings Offseason Thread

Yesterday, 10:22 PM

He wasn't moved off center because he's wasn't good at it. We've lacked wingers and had a bunch of lower line centers so Helm played wing. To me, his ability to play in many situations is one of his strengths.


Helm's not a top 6 winger. haven't seen anyone argue that. 

Precisely. Something I've noticed with the Red Wings is we've had really crappy luck where we lack top 2 centers but are filled with bottom 2 centers. Have plenty of top 9 wingers. Our lack of top 2 centers basically forced Zet to switch to Center and maintain the position which means we no longer had a good/elite winger for Datsyuk (ironically Helm became Datsyuk's winger with Tatar when Franzen went down). Helm was switched to Wing because we have too many Sheahans, Anderssons, Ferraros and Glendenings. Basically bottom 2 line centers. And none of those guys can play winger that well. Maybe Sheahan but not really. 


This goes hand in hand with my bitching in the other thread about Glendening. We are using players in positions because we are forced to or maybe too stubborn to, rather than being able to use them at their best.


I'd say Helm is our best third line center if given the opportunity again. And I'd rank him as a top third line center in the league. I don't know about being the best in the league. Maybe it's possible. 


It could be proven (to an extent)with math freak data but then people would get into the whole "dial-up", "blah blah advanced stats suck, I'm staying ignorant to it" conversation again :)