Jump to content

kickazz's Photo


Member Since 02 Feb 2013
Online Last Active Today, 01:01 AM

#2621984 Who is the better player Zetterberg or Toews. Prime vs. Present

Posted by kickazz on Yesterday, 11:43 PM

There's been a lot of discussion of this on two different threads and it always seems to pop up here and there so I thought I'd create it's own and put this argument to rest via poll and discussion. 


Who do you think is better in their respective prime Toews or Zetterberg?


Who do you think is better currently? 


Try to eliminate the bias that you probably hate the Blackhawks and love the Red Wings. And pretend like Z and Toews were on different teams. Neither on the Red Wings nor Blackhawks. (Help remove bias)

#2621948 Voracek gets rich! over 8mil per

Posted by kickazz on Yesterday, 04:27 PM

I'm probably in the minority here but I think Stamkos has already hit his peak pre-injury. My opinion is that he comes close to replicating his numbers (90 point range) but I'm not sure if he will surpass his previous season highs.


If he has another 70 point season his contract will be lesser.

#2621915 Jonathan Quick on snipers, including Datsyuk

Posted by kickazz on Yesterday, 12:38 PM



Z's a decent sniper, he's got a hell of a slapshot and backhand. But I'm not surprised he wasn't mentioned. He's been on a downward trend for the last 2 years or so and his goal scoring is bad.


The Pav stuff Quick mentioned gave me goosebumps <3. So true. 

I was watching some Ovie highlights and it's so easy to forget how frickin good of a sniper he is. Slap, wrist or snap his shot is sooooo powerful it's ridiculous. Def top 5 all time imo. 

#2621890 Jonathan Quick on snipers, including Datsyuk

Posted by kickazz on 30 July 2015 - 10:05 PM

Toews is not overrated. He's like zetterberg. He's got superior
Defense, puck control skills, vision, and competitiveness, and above average everything else. He's just not flashy, which makes everybody go gaga but doesnt make someone one iota more "elite". Kopitar is the same way.

I agree about the type of player he is. I just take issue with giving him more credit about certain parts of the game than he deserves. He's not a "sniper" as this article's subject is imo. Nothing that Quick mentioned about him really convinced me how Toews is an elite sniper. All he said was that he is "constantly moving, constantly working".. just sounds like unrelated praise to me. Which is fine but not truly related. I guess it was good to use Toews in the article to segway into the Toews/Kane chemistry. The Kane stuff he mentioned was right on point; he does go between the stick and legs A LOT and get's goals quite a bit with it. 

#2621870 Jonathan Quick on snipers, including Datsyuk

Posted by kickazz on 30 July 2015 - 01:54 PM


Or is it really that he's a great player getting his props, and people are trashing him because they simply don't like him? It's not like one guy is constantly saying "Toews is amazing, top 5 player", it's pretty widespread that he's being praised, which makes me think it's most likely true. Especially when it's current players saying it.

Or not.


Toews is one of the best leaders in the league and one of the best complete forwards. However; his offensive ability is no where near the level of guys like Ovie, Stamkos, Crosby, Datsyukian vision, Kane stickhandling, Perry, Getzlav, Thornton's vision (before he started sucking this past year), Malkin, and many others.


Notice how in the article he mentions "Kane and Toews". Yet it mostly talks about Kane specialties which are very unique. Toews is mentioned as "constantly moving, constantly working" etc. Those are some very generic words that could be applied to lots of players in the league. None of the stuff mentioned about him really stands out to me as related to "Elite Snipers 101" as the article is titled.


Toews is a hot commodity and is often times mentioned for the sake of being mentioned. He's emerging into the face of this league. This happens in tons of sports, it's nothing unusual. 

I actually respect Toews. I just don't like it when players are overrated for things they shouldn't be. 

It was the same thing when Yzerman told the media that "Toews is a better player than I ever was". I mean really? Lol


Everyone knows thats bs. Toews himself basically said it (in a nice way).

#2621687 Mitch Callahan

Posted by kickazz on 28 July 2015 - 09:27 AM



Nice shirt.  


I'd love to see her and Abdelkader in a fight.   

Abdelkader would get rekt 

She would wreck McGrattan.

#2621631 Line combos for 97, 98 Cups?

Posted by kickazz on 27 July 2015 - 03:07 PM

Scotty Bowman was the king of line changes

combo changes *

#2621613 Holtby Asking for $8M

Posted by kickazz on 26 July 2015 - 03:28 PM


Well I guess it depends I'm sure NHL teams are already having those ultra HD TVs and a ton of them to study films, slow-mos and all that stuff. I don't think knowing exactly each and every detail of a game will help much it would only make the video sessions longer = less time for the real important stuff (on-ice-training) but maybe I'm wrong and they are fine with it.



Statistical analysts are hired to do this work. It's not like the coach is expected to be the one that does the math lol. This has no effect on on-ice training like you say. All it does is give them information on how to better utilize their players in specific situations. 

#2621589 Holtby Asking for $8M

Posted by kickazz on 25 July 2015 - 07:42 PM

If I'm the GM and have to decide if I'm trading the advise of a professional scout or a mathfreak with MacBook pro excel sheet I don't even have to think twice about it. The thing with analytics is also that all of a sudden bloggers think they are experts when in fact all they are is excel and very talented mathguys with a ton of time on their hands. Orr sad it best it's a joke.


It's actually not as simple as you're trying to make this argument out to be. It's not just one or the other. The advance stats go hand in hand with scouting. 

Scouts do their thing, GM/coaches work with advance stats to optimize their team play. 

This is the era hockey is moving into. 

Whether, you me or dupree like it or hate it. 

#2621567 Holtby Asking for $8M

Posted by kickazz on 25 July 2015 - 03:39 PM

yeah screw math; whoever said 2+2 = 4 is full of it because sometimes it can equal 5

#2621442 Pulkkinen re-signs.... 1 year deal

Posted by kickazz on 24 July 2015 - 09:59 AM


What's being pointed out are certain posters perception of his flaws. Whether that perception is actually reality is the big question. You are entitled to your opinion that he has flaws, just as krsmith17 is entitled to his opinion that his flaws are being overblown. Personally I have not watched enough AHL games to truly have a strong opinion on the matter. I will say this though, people on here have a tendency to exaggerate things, and once a narrative is created for a player, its very hard to break that narrative (ie. Quincey sucks).



The funny thing is, some of us (like myself) are pointing out flaws and leaving it at that, but others who are making excuses or countering the argument regarding Pulk's 'flaws' are making it out to be as though we're claiming Pulk sucks. If you look at some of the other threads this trend is already being posted by the pro-pulk posters as a defense mechanism in the debate that's been going on. 


"Didn't you hear? Pulk sucks" - sarcasm from the pro-pulk posters is what helps push made up narratives and really prevents holding up adult-like debates.


It's never a bad thing to bounce off ideas and opinions but getting personal about it or defensive to the point where your statements are full of fallacies and ridiculous defense mechanisms (i.e using sarcasm to say "People are saying Pulk sucks").. well therein lies the problem and cause of the exaggerations you mention. 


People get too damn sensitive. 

#2621437 Jim Devellano on Mantha's play: "Very disappointing"

Posted by kickazz on 24 July 2015 - 09:50 AM

Won't it be too late?  This is the biggest problem I have with Devellano's comments.  Sure, be disappointed, but why devalue your prospects in the media when there are all sorts of EXCUSES you can use to deflect the disappointment...

Some of our posters would be perfect replacements for Devellano and his minuscule brain. 

#2621364 Jim Devellano on Mantha's play: "Very disappointing"

Posted by kickazz on 23 July 2015 - 03:52 PM

So he broke his leg in training camp, took extra long to get back to 100% (if he even got there) and then he still tallied 33 points in 62 games, and you are saying despite all this, he still should've held down a "top spot" in the AHL and therefore he is a bust and a disappointment? I think you, amongst other put way too much expectation on these kids...Mantha, disappointing, Pulk, sucks too one dimensional, who's next, Larkin? AA? I mean come on, they all aren't going to step right in to the next level without developing more...may as well trade them all.



...is it too soon to say tank it? We have no future, close the franchise.

Never too soon to say Tank it. 


They all suck.



#2621297 Preliminary Red Wings Training Camp Roster

Posted by kickazz on 23 July 2015 - 10:48 AM

I don't think he is ready for the grind of an 82 game season at the highest level, against the best players in the world. He would absolutely benefit from a full season in Grand Rapids, and I'm very confident that he will get that...

82 game in the NHL might do bad for his development. 


Jurco got screwed big time. I blame the org for that. He should have been in the AHL last year. His confidence level is a mess right now.


But he's got to move on from last year and somehow play liek an NHL player this year and move on. 


I honestly feel liek Nyquist and Tatar was very lucky to be in the AHL all those games that they were. When they were called to play here full time they came booming.


It worked out for both parties. 

#2621250 Babcock's already losing it?

Posted by kickazz on 22 July 2015 - 08:43 PM

Kickazz, so are you saying I made up that link that I posted? I maybe edited it to support what I was saying? Please tell me, because you would be dead wrong. I simply searched and that is what I found, was it my fault it was only the last part of the interview? I see you conveniently left out the last part of the interview to support what you said, unlike my link that didn't even have the first part of the interview on it. PLUS if you actually read my post I did say that an MLive article said Babs pushed for him, so I wasn't entirely dispelling what you said, but the article I read stated that his agent called him, not Holland and not Babcock.  Now your article says that Commie in return called babcock to find out if he had a chance, and babs told him ya.


Either way, I think we can both agree that during training camp, once again Commie fell out of babs favor and that is why his career ended up the way it did and once your in hot with Babs, you are toast.  Just like my original statement, ie. Legwand, Modano, Tootoo, Weiss, etc...etc...


So, even though your article had more information, you still failed to quote the part where Babs wound up treating him like s***, no matter what he told him in July. I believe that Commie should have gone with his gut to say no.




but honestly, do you really think that Babcock would answer him by saying, No, I don't want you, only Holland does, if you sign you will not get a chance to play...do you think that would fly with his GM?  I honestly believe Babs was willing to give Commie the chance, but always had in the back of his mind what was really going to happen...the first oops and that was the end. And as we see, it now was.

You answered your own question to me. 


This is your flaw. You look at one thing and automatically assume its the truth when most of the time it's just gossip and rumors. In this day and age even for the simplest things you need to swift thru evidence upon evidence before you can make claims. The problem is you have these biased attitudes towards players or coaches and you make it your reality. You're looking for ways to prove that Babcock was a bad coach and you're looking for ways to prove that Franzen was a useless hockey player by pushing these theories on these forums without sources and when you do have a source it tends to be wrong. 


Secondly, I didn't leave anything off conveniently because that was a STRAW MAN FALLACY on YOUR part. I never claimed  that Babcock didn't play Commodore or make him cry like a baby. Those are known facts and quite honestly who the hell cares? Commodore was a terrible player. I'm glad Babcock was smart enough to scratch him rather than play the usual dumb loyalty card like him and Holland did with Dan Cleary. Aren't you against Cleary being on the roster? So now all of a sudden you're all about sympathizing for Commodore and critiquing Babcock for not being loyal to Commodore but you complain about Cleary being on the roster? 


And you better bet yer a** that players will be in a coaches dog house if they don't live up to expectations. That's how the world of sports is. Bust your a** and earn it, nothing it given to you on a platter.