Jump to content


haroldsnepsts's Photo

haroldsnepsts

Member Since 11 Feb 2004
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 11:59 PM
***--

#2228597 Crosby coming back

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 21 November 2011 - 09:43 PM

2 G 2 A 8 SOG +3 67% on Faceoffs.


Welcome back... ya ******.


EDIT: And that's in 15:54 TOI.


#2228592 Crosby coming back

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 21 November 2011 - 09:36 PM

:blink:

Here, for you:

http://shop.nhl.com/...goryId=11757677

don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out...

It's a bold statement Wings fans don't like to hear, but seriously, who's better than Crosby on the Wings? Who has a better resumé?

Maybe Datsyuk if you want to argue defensive play and Selkes? Assuming he stays healthy, he has 9 years to close that gap defensively, and he's already better in every offensive category. Crosby is 24 years old. At that age Dats was just starting in the NHL and hadn't scored more than 12 goals in a season.

I don't like him, but there's no denying how friggin good he is. Like I said, that just makes him even more annoying.


#2228341 Brendan Smith watch thread

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 21 November 2011 - 11:55 AM

I feel like he has the speed and the ability to compete at this level. So if 3rd pairing right now is all he gets, any time in the NHL is better than any minutes in the AHL. He got his first point (although a little weak) but he still go it. He needs to stay on the 3rd like right now. He's still got a long way to go and I think he'll only finish developing by staying in the NHL and getting more minutes the better he plays.

Agreed. I'm sure there will be growing pains, but he's shown he can play at this level. He doesn't need over-ripening, because the Wings could use his offensive instincts.

It's hard to believe the Wings went from a panic-inducing empty blueline when Rafalski retired this offseason, to another logjam on defense.

I dont' see how Commodore is going to make it into this lineup unless there's a ton of injuries.


#2228252 11/20 GDT : Red Wings 4 at Ducks 2

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 20 November 2011 - 11:14 PM

Another good showing from the Wings. They bent but didn't break.

I won't say he's back just yet but it's the best looking game from Zetterberg in a long time. Bert looked good on the line with Pavel and Mule too. It seems like he's gripping the stick a little tight, but he really was doing the right things out there, as cliche as that sounds.

Another awesome game from Jimmy. And I like Ericsson chatting with Stuart after the game as they skate off the ice. I'm guessing he was offering to buy Stuart dinner for bailing him out with that empty netter. :P

Smith continues to impress.

And can someone please punch Koivu in the mouth? He apparently gets a free pass from the refs and makes the most of it with crosschecks and hooks.


#2227873 11/20 GDT : Red Wings 4 at Ducks 2

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 20 November 2011 - 12:38 PM

The puck started going in for Datsyuk yesterday. Here's hoping it does for Zetterberg today.

Against the Kings Z did have a really nice backhand shot that looked like the Zetterberg of old. Hopefully he keeps it up.


#2227834 11/19 GDT : Red Wings 4 at Kings 1

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 20 November 2011 - 01:01 AM

babcock has favorites and non favorites. hudler can average a point per game for a month and then one bad game he will be on the fourth line. ericsson can suck all year and get a 3 million dollar raise.

I don't want to derail the thread any further with tinfoil hat theories about Babcock's player obsessions.

Wings won 4-1 and had one of their best efforts all season. You guys have fun bashing Ericsson though.


#2227825 11/19 GDT : Red Wings 4 at Kings 1

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 19 November 2011 - 11:56 PM

Miller 11 TOI
Holmstrom 10 TOI
Hudler 8 TOI

or Cleary 18 TOI
Franzen 17 TOI
Filppula 16.5 TOI
Helm 15 TOI

Is Miller better than Holmstrom and Hudler? Is Cleary better than Franzen, Filppula, and Helm? Just because someone plays more than someone, it doesn't mean they are better.

This is more of a case of Babcock mismanaging the team. Babcock, over the years, has shown that he has a weird obsession with certain players, regardless of their performance.

But if it makes you feel better, Kindl + Smith > Ericsson.

Actually your entire post makes me feel better.

Kindl had probably his worst game of the season and played less than 11 minutes as one of six defenseman. Even Smith had more even strength TOI. But you're seriously arguing that Ericsson's having nearly double the TOI of Kindl in spite of being an inferior defenseman is because of a weird obsession Babcock has with E? AND you try and disprove my argument by using forwards, and even then their ice time is only a couple minutes apart?

I feel pretty good about where I stand.

The little equation is cute though.


#2227790 11/19 GDT : Red Wings 4 at Kings 1

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 19 November 2011 - 09:18 PM

His decision to give so much ice time to Ericsson is one of the few disagreements I have with Babcock's coaching style.

If you consider that Ericsson isn't as awful as most people make him out to be, his ice time pretty much makes sense.

Ericsson's contract is another issue altogether.


Back to the original point, it's not that I dislike Kindl. It honestly is that if Smith keeps playing well, it's more likely to take away from Kindl's ice time than Ericsson's. In his two games in the NHL, Babcock already gave Smith more ice time than Kindl.

Kindl is better on the PP and more offensive minded than Ericsson, but he's not as good in that area as Smith. At the same time he's not as good as a stay at home guy and on the PK as Ericsson, and he doesn't have as good of a first pass as either one of them. So he could end up in no man's land.

But all this is based on Smith playing as well as he has the past couple games, which seems unlikely for a rookie. He's bound to have his ups and downs, but he's looked great so far.


#2227361 Bottom Six Philosophy?

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 19 November 2011 - 01:06 PM

i love how everyone loves to rag on drew miller, yet the guy is +7 this year! i am not about to say plus/minus is everything. but think about it at the most basic level, if the bottom 6 is such a weakness, then wouldn't they all have bad plus minus ratings because they are giving up too many goals against? yet none of them do. bruunstrom is -2 in 4 games and bertuzzi is -1 in 11 games. thats it for bottom 6 guys. everyone else is even or plus. and heck, bertuzzi was last on the entire team 2 years ago so -1 ain't half bad for him!

i know people love to rip on plus minus, but to me it points to this basic premise: what games out of the 8 losses can be attributed to bottom 6 play? i would argue none of the losses have really been their fault nor have they even been significant factors in most losses. also, if having a more physical bottom 6 is essential, what games were lost because of a lack of physical play? the wings losses are because they are s*** on the PP and have not gotten solid play from their top 6. i really don't think a bottom 6 guy making some big hits is going to get dan cleary's head out of his ass...

i would love to imrpove the bottom 6. i would love to improve lots of parts of this team. but they aren't the problem. i dont even think they have underperformed. i would love to see a guy like brandon prust on this team, but i really don't think it would have improved the wings record at all.

I don't think anyone is ragging on Drew Miller. I like Miller. But with Eaves and other similar players in the lineup, it seems like the Wings could've used someone who brought other qualities in his roster spot.


#2227228 Bottom Six Philosophy?

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 18 November 2011 - 07:25 PM

Re-signing Miller was the big head scratcher to me once they signed Eaves. Why not go get a bottom six guy who provides something different other than a nearly identical player?


#2227142 Jonathan Ericsson Watch Thread

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 18 November 2011 - 01:44 PM

Hmm... did the same person say these two things?

I was actually just quoting you, pointing out your hypocrisy. Apparently negativity and player bashing is acceptable when it's someone you don't like.

I'm touched that you went and dug up my old posts though. It's good to know my hard work doesn't go unnoticed.

Ericsson was doing no such thing. There wasn't a single person in the area he moved into, and he left the entire left side of the net utterly wide open. It was yet another case of him being boneheaded.

Yes he was. Watch the replay. Vlasic wasn't his man. He helped out Helm, then went over to the slot and was watching Desjardin and Murray. He shouldn't have gone to the left side of the net because Helm was covering that, ineffectively.

Like I said, Ericsson was about #4 on the list of responsibility for that goal. Helm got overpowered inthe corner, Hudler and Smith looked confused as to who had who, Hudler lets Vlasic skate away unchecked behind the net, then Helm didn't cover the left side of the net well. For Ericsson to be at the left side of the net he would've run into Helm, been guilty of running around in his own end, and left two players wide open in the slot. It wasn't his responsibility.

I'd put Hudler most at fault, for peeling off his coverage of Vlasic, I'm guessing because he thought Smith would pick him up. Still, he shouldn't have let the puck carrier go unchecked behind the Wings net. It was lazy defensive play on his part.


#2227099 Jonathan Ericsson Watch Thread

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 18 November 2011 - 11:29 AM

This will most likely end up being a thread in which to rag on Ericsson.

Tonight, he yet again suffered a hideous lapse of awareness. It's beyond me what he thought he was accomplishing by watching Vlasic and drifting into the slot.

That's exactly what it will be, which is almost certainly why you created it.


I guess it's easier just to be negative than be optimistic.


And on the play you mention, Hudler, Helm and Smith did a poor job covering their assignments and got outworked or outmuscled. Yet you key in on Ericsson, who was actually moving to the slot to cover Desjardins and Murray after he went over to help Helm.

Ericsson is overpaid and likely won't earn his contract, but if you're going to rip on his play, that goal is a poor choice because he's about 4th in line for being responsible.




Edited because I couldn't spell Desjardins.



#2226520 Do They Deserve It?

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 17 November 2011 - 08:20 PM

People have been leaving Bertuzzi alone? What threads have you been reading??

Datsyuk and Zetterberg are the teams two star players and get almost 20 minutes of ice time a night. Of course the expectations are higher on them than Bert and Holmstrom.

Though I think you're barking up the wrong tree with Homer. He only plays 13 minutes a night, but has been among the better guys on the ice. Unlike many of the forwards this season, Homer goes to the tough areas of the ice, wins puck battles in the corners, and goes to the net. Obviously his skill set is limited, but it's probably not a coincidence that he hasn't been sitting out as much as Babcock made it sound like he would at the start of the season.

Also, Homer only had 26 points in 2002, so that's an odd year for you to pick. But Homer's been a pretty consistent 40 point guy most seasons.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love for the Wings to have a pure goalscorer on the top line, preferably one with speed. But of the current problems with this team, I wouldn't put Holmstrom in the top ten.

As for Helm, he can open up the whole rink with his speed, but he has hands that are marginally better than Draper's.


#2226486 Datsyuk knows he has been awful.

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 17 November 2011 - 06:23 PM

Wish Zetterberg would admit hes been horrendous as well.


Zetterberg is just as puzzled by his own scoring issues.

“Absolutely. I’m the same as Pav,” Zetterberg said.
“You’re trying to do everything right, working hard in practice, working hard in games. Hopefully it will turn around.”


http://www.mlive.com...pavel_dats.html


#2226291 Datsyuk knows he has been awful.

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 16 November 2011 - 06:19 PM

It actually works out to around a 51 point pace, doesn't it?

Saying he's awful (even if he says it about himself) needs a big asterisk after it, as in awful *for Pavel Datsyuk.

But I don't think linemates are much of an excuse. Last season people were talking about how he's the best player in the world. Linemates shouldn't have that big of an impact when you're dealing with a star player, which Datsyuk is.

And it's not like he's had a bunch of great feeds that don't get converted. Sure that's happened on occasion, but more than points, he just doesn't look like himself this season. He doesn't have the puck on a string like he used to. And he's had a lot of turnovers (for him).

Hopefully it's just a funk and he'll break out of it very, very soon.