Jump to content


Echolalia's Photo

Echolalia

Member Since 21 Mar 2007
Online Last Active Today, 11:33 PM
**---

#2584348 Losing Streak affecting Babcock's Decision?

Posted by Echolalia on 24 March 2015 - 05:02 PM

 

I'm going to address two of your points...

 

1.  "I firmly believe Quenneville is the beneficiary of the skill on his team, and he doesn't bring much to the table". 

 

Who's better, Toews, Kane, and Keith or Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and Lidstom?  If you answer the latter, as I suspect you will, then your argument applies even more to Babcock then it does to Quenneville.  Babcock's best teams were better than Quenneville's best teams, or Sutter's best teams.  Yet they won more Cups with theirs.  

 

Babcock's 2005 roster was WAY better than anything Quenneville has ever coached.  It's better than anything ANY of those guys have ever coached.  He had four 80+ point players.  And he lost in the 1st round.  So don't act like he's been given some hard road and the rest of these guys had a cake walk based on their rosters. 

 

2.  "But I'm not willing to say Quenneville is one of the best coaches in the league based on four solid postseasons and ignore the rest of his career". 

 

The rest of his career where he had more wins and more playoff appearances than he had in Chicago?

 

Quenneville's got over 700 wins.  He had as many wins in St. Louis as he does in Chicago in roughly the same amount of games.  Chicago is not an anomaly.  It's more of the same.  True Chicago's where he won his cups, but that's true of Babs and Detroit too.  He didn't win anything until he had Dats, Z, and Lids to work with.  In fact, he missed the playoffs 50% of the time he wasn't with the Wings. That's right, Babs missed the playoffs with a team that went to the finals the year before...just like Sutter. 

 

Cherry picking three players from a team of 20 players isn't an effective defense of saying one team is better than the other.  It also doesn't discredit anything I've said.  I think the Wings were the best team in the league in 2008 and 2009 skill-wise. I think since then, its been the Blackhawks.  Both teams have experienced success in those periods, as expected they would given their makeup on paper.

Babcock's 2005 squad was a solid team and they underperformed when the got to the playoffs.  The same way Quenneville's Chicago teams underperformed when they were eliminated in the first round two years in a row after winning a Cup, and the same way Quenneville's Blues underperformed earlier in his career.  I would say its the same way Sutter's team is currently under-performing, but if the reigning Cup champs end up missing the playoffs altogether, I think that's taking it to a new level, and I certainly don't think that is something that would be on the resume of one of the best NHL coaches in the league.  We'll have to see what happens on that one.

Also, forgive me if I don't jump up in disbelief of Quenneville's 700 wins.  The guy has been coaching playoff caliber teams his whole career dating back to 1996-1997.  That's almost 20 years of opportunity to work with.  Also your comparison to his time with the Blues and Blackhawks ("He had as many wins in St. Louis as he does in Chicago in roughly the same amount of games") is flat out wrong.  307 wins with St. Louis in 593 games coached =/= 266 wins with Chicago in 454 games coached.  That comes out to 51.7% wins vs 59% wins, which isn't a small margin.  That amounts to an extra six games won per 82 games, or a 12 point gap in an 82 game season.  So while they were both playoff-caliber teams, his time in St. Louis definitely isn't "more of the same".  Its quantifiably worse.  And the contrast between the two teams in the playoffs is even more apparent.  34 wins, 34 losses in seven playoff appearances with the Blues.  57 wins, 37 losses (and two aforementioned Cups) in six playoff appearances with the Hawks.  Definitely not more of the same.  But considering those Blues teams only made it past the second round once in seven seasons (eight if you include the year he was fired) it does further support the notion that Quenneville is unable to achieve any level of success with teams that aren't totally stacked and favored to win the Cup.  In short, Quenneville's teams don't exceed expectations.  They either meet their expectations, or they fall short.

And yes, Babcock has missed the playoffs 50% of his time not with the Wings (n=2, ie one time in his career).  Its also worth mentioning the skill level of that squad was marginal at best.  The year the Ducks went to the finals they went as a 7th seed, and unlike Sutter's Kings, the Ducks weren't a Cup favorite that for whatever reason barely squeaked into the playoffs.  The Ducks went as team that higher seeds thought of as a stepping stone to get to the next round.  Then they swept the defending Cup champion Red Wings team in the first round.  Then they beat the top seed in the West, the Dallas Stars 4-2.  Then they swept Minnesota in the Conference finals, before finally losing in seven games to New Jersey in the SCF.  The next season (and after losing their top-scorer Kariya when he bolted for Colorado in the offseason) they played closer to their skill set and missed the playoffs.  And just a side note: the Mighty Ducks team Babcock inherited ended the season in 13th place the year before he took them to the finals.  But that's neither here nor there.  The real beef I have isn't with how you perceive Babcock.  Its how you perceive Quenneville and Sutter.  Two guys who I think are somewhere between average and above average, but not cream of the crop.

 

edit: sorry for the wall of text, I'm on a study break and wanted it to last as long as possible lol




#2584311 Red Wings have 5 players with at least 20 goals

Posted by Echolalia on 24 March 2015 - 01:07 PM

Looking forward to the postseason, I think the biggest name on there is Abdelkader.  He has become the epitome of a playoff style player (well.. I suppose we'll see if that's true when we get there).  His goals are greasy, dirty, and he has been wreaking havoc in the crease, in the corners, and is still defensively sound.  As Cole continues to mesh with the Wings I think having him and Abby as a one-two punch in our top six could be the difference between success and failure in the playoffs. 




#2578111 What's with the "giving players hamster names" obsession?

Posted by Echolalia on 03 March 2015 - 10:38 PM

Zoidberg is not who I want the captain referred to as though, otherwise, I'd agree.


I don't pretend to understand Echolalia's law, I merely enforce it. Echolalia's law is like Echolalia's love: hard and fast.


#2578105 What's with the "giving players hamster names" obsession?

Posted by Echolalia on 03 March 2015 - 10:31 PM

Weiss means white in German.
And calling zetterberg zoidberg is almost sacrilege

Any and all Futurama references accepted regardless of situation under Echolalia Ordinance


#2577807 Red Wings acquire Marek Zidlicky from NJ for Cond. 2016 3rd Round Pick

Posted by Echolalia on 02 March 2015 - 08:53 PM

Marchenko has looked solid the same way that most of our defensive prospects look solid when they're brought up: they do they're best to stay out of trouble, don't bring much attention to themselves, and occasionally do something offensively. And of course Marchenko looks a bit better than Oulette because he's right-handed, which gives us a new dimension. But for as much flak LGW gives Smith, he's solidly on a level above all of Oulette, Marchenko, Lashoff, Kindl, and any other defensive prospect we currently have. And Marchenko's right-handedness isn't enough of an advantage for me to trust him over Smith in the playoffs.
We're essentially upgrading our right-handed defender from someone with no experience, to someone with quite a lot of experience.

But oh my gosh our defensive depth: Kindl, Lashoff, Oulette, Marchenko, maybe even Sproul all NHL-ready. That's almost a whole defensive team of players we aren't dressing.


#2577094 Red Wings acquire Erik Cole, conditional 3rd from Stars

Posted by Echolalia on 01 March 2015 - 11:41 PM

 

You guys are fascinating today...i didn't call you or anyone other than that kid into question. I respect a lot of the people that post here because they post rational, fact based, respectful responses...I just thought his response ("....just because the vibes Holland gives off tell you that he's a crappy gm") was not accurate and was not what i said. But please go back two needlessly making me into "that guy"

 

Friendly advice:

If you didn't include your first paragraph and the last line of your response, nobody would be giving your a hard time right now.  But bringing up your fan history and thumping your chest for being a die hard Wings' fan (on a Wings' forum where 90% of us can easily claim the same credentials or more), then following it up with the snarky comment about "thanks for playing" to close your post came off badly.  Very badly.  Most of us try to be friendly to one another here, even if we disagree with something, but when comments like that are made, people are going to gang up on you.

Likewise, if you stated an opinion in some other thread and jimmyemeryhunter (or whoever) posted something belittling and arrogant in response, myself and probably several others would come to your aid and attack the perpetrator.

Its just how we roll.

 

edit: sorry I was typing this up as your warning was being posted Mabus.  I do think its worthwhile for anyone interested in having an engaging and respectful conversation to be informed of this, though.

As for the trade itself (to get back on topic), I stated my views a couple pages back in a long-winded post I don't feel like retyping up here, but tl;dr: Cole will contribute here, the prospects we gave up won't.  Cole fills a need that the Wings have.  Looks like a good trade.




#2577076 Red Wings acquire Erik Cole, conditional 3rd from Stars

Posted by Echolalia on 01 March 2015 - 11:30 PM

 

So you're deciding to base your entire line of  argument on "what if Holland went to a bad/different team?" And then assuming he would do bad? Despite that there exists zero evidence to back that conclusion? Or any conclusion involving that premise?

 

Goodluck with the straw grasping brother. I'm out.

dood hes 29. He knows hockey.




#2577067 Red Wings acquire Erik Cole, conditional 3rd from Stars

Posted by Echolalia on 01 March 2015 - 11:20 PM

 

How old are you? May I ask? I turn 29 this month and I've followed the Wings religiously my entire life from age 8. For some reason i actually retain most of the generally useless history, info, players, trades, and dialogue I've heard along the way. I've followed the Wings for the entirety of Holland's tenure as GM and I have a particular addiction to information I've come across about NHL front offices. I like to think, as a fan, I'm about as informed as I can be enough to make the claims I do.

 

Holland has done a lot of things right in his time with the Wings, but he also had an All-Star cast of Front Office support along the way...not limited to Dellevano, Scotty Bowman (who I believe brought way more than people even thought...and they thought he brought a lot), Nill, Mark Howe, and several others. But since those people have started moving on, his ability to make good trades has nose dived. If Babcock creates good coaches, I believe Holland was created by other good front office people. HE does not seem to be a great stand alone GM. The two things that he is most credited for are also other peoples jobs (cap management and scouting). 

 

This is far more than vibes bro, but thanks for playing.

 

Actually it sounds like its ONLY vibes.  "who I believe brought way more..." "I believe Holland was created by other good front office people." "He does not seem to be a great stand alone GM".  These aren't facts.  This is what you believe.  And you didn't even bother to try to support these opinions with anything empirical or quantifiable.  As far as any of us are aware you're going off of vibes.

Also, you say Holland's ability to make good trades has nose-dived after people like Nill left.  Nill left in 2013.  Holland only made two trades since then (Legwand and Cole).  That's not exactly a good sample size to base criticism on, especially because the Cole trade isn't even 4 hours old yet, and we haven't had a chance to see what these players can do for their new teams (but considering Holland moved two players who will never see ice as a Red Wing, if Cole plays just one game then the Wings are coming out ahead).  If Holland made any s***ty trades prior to Nill leaving in 2013, are you willing to point the blame on Nill for those screwups?  Or does he only get credit for the good trades, and it was all Holland's idea for the bad ones?  And also, will you be basing your answer off more than vibes again?




#2577051 Do we need a trade to get our offence going ?

Posted by Echolalia on 01 March 2015 - 10:54 PM

I'll expand on this more when I'm not on my phone, but I think getting Nyquist out of the top six is a good idea. I'd love for Holland to get a big winger tomorrow.

 

I agree with this.  Nyquist has been money on the powerplay this year, where he has time and space to work.  5 on 5 hasn't been as friendly to him, and I think a lot of that has to do with how tightly the opposition checks him.  He spent a good deal of time last year on the third line, and even when he was bumped up to the top six during all the injuries, nobody in the league knew anything about this Nyquist kid, so other teams gave him time and space to make things happen.  I think playing him against third line opponents will buy him some of that time and space back, and we might see him produce more as a result.  The only question would be who will take his spot in the top 6, and will the production from Nyquist on the third line + player X on the second line be greater than Nyquist on the second, and player X on the third?  The only way to know for sure is to give it a try.

And ho hum the Wings picked up a top 6 forward, so Nyquist getting bumped becomes a little more convenient.  On the other hand, because this forward is Cole, if they were both on the same line, Nyquist might get that extra time and space anyway with Cole feeding him pucks and pulling the piano.  Frankly I'd like to see both options tried out.  Worst case scenario is it doesn't work out, and we can always go back to the old lines.  Its not like he's been completely ineffective anyway, and he'll always have the powerplay.




#2577031 Red Wings acquire Erik Cole, conditional 3rd from Stars

Posted by Echolalia on 01 March 2015 - 10:29 PM

I guess I'm joining the party a bit late.

My thoughts (which seem to echo many of the folks in here based on my read-through):

Cole, conditional 3rd <-> Backman, Janmark, 2nd.

Backman is a nonasset in the Wings' organization.  He couldn't break the lineup in GR (or refused to), and high-tailed it back to Sweden.  Combine that with the fact that half of our NHL lineup is relatively young (Smith, DeKeyser, Quincey, Kindl, Lashoff) and we have several guys banging on the door (Oulette, Marchenko, Sproul), and its pretty clear that Backman didn't have a future in Detroit.  So kudos to Kenny for turning a nonasset into a roster player, and if Jim Nill can get Backman over to the NHL, then good for the Stars and good for Backman.  But that opportunity doesn't exist for him in Detroit.

Janmark I don't know much about, admittedly.  I know a couple posters are pretty high on the kid, but I personally haven't heard much, but he's also buried pretty deep on the depth chart.  We have a lot of young forwards on the team that are playing well, and again, a lot that are in the pipeline.  I don't know if Janmark will ever have the opportunity to break the Wings' lineup, so again, this looks like Holland is getting value out of a player who, by himself, likely doesn't have any value in the Wings organization. 

So from how I'm looking at, the 2nd round pick was the Wings' most devastating loss in this trade, and if we don't get to the ECF (or we do but Cole doesn't play in at least 50% of the games to get us there), then the Wings have a 3rd round pick from Dallas coming back to soften that blow.  So as far as trade value, I think Holland did a good job.  I'm not sure what the Stars prospect pool looks like, but if its pretty shallow and these kids can come in and contribute, then Nill probably did well also and its a fair trade.

As for what Cole brings to the table: I have him pegged as someone similar to Abdelkader, except Cole has been scoring a bit more this year, but both are big bodies that can wear down on the other team, and are most comfortable in the greasy areas of the ice.  With Franzen out until further notice, it will be good to have another big body to round out our top six, and I can see that coming in quite valuable in the playoffs, especially considering the manner in which the Wings lost to the Bruins last year.  So I think Cole can contribute and be a difference maker.  The biggest knock on the guy is that he's up there in age, but looking at his ppg over the last few seasons, he's actually been trending upward. 2011-2012 was his most productive year at .74ppg and 35 goals.  The following year he was destroyed by injuries and posted .276 in only a handful of games.  The year after he played 75 of 82 games and had a .39ppg.  This year he's at .578ppg and has played 57 of the Stars 62 games.  So as far as how much age is allegedly slowing him down, its pretty hard to assess, actually.  His numbers took a sharp hit when he had that injury-plagued year in 2012-2013, but since then he's steadily been getting better, and hasn't missed too many games either, although he has yet to reach his .74ppg from 2011-2012.  At the very least he has shown he can still contribute, and its even more encouraging to see that hes trending up and not down.

 

Overall I'm pleased with the trade.  I think Holland did a good job of getting something out of "nothing", and I think he targeted a piece that will make the Wings a more well-rounded, and more difficult team to play against.  Also, for those of you upset about the trade, think of it this way:  Cole on the team likely bumps Andersson from the top 12.




#2575963 2/28 GDT : Red Wings 4 at Predators 3

Posted by Echolalia on 28 February 2015 - 03:48 PM

Brendan Smith reminds me of Podrick Payne




#2575359 2/26 GDT : Red Wings 3 at San Jose Sharks 2

Posted by Echolalia on 27 February 2015 - 12:42 AM

Odds of Wings getting a PP this period?

100%




#2575273 2/26 GDT : Red Wings 3 at San Jose Sharks 2

Posted by Echolalia on 26 February 2015 - 11:52 PM

Howard should really get into that scrum and help Andersson out




#2575194 2/26 GDT : Red Wings 3 at San Jose Sharks 2

Posted by Echolalia on 26 February 2015 - 11:08 PM

I only have one question?  How the HELL do we have only one shot on goal? 

 

C'mon Puckloo only scrub teams can only muster one shot on net at this point, don't be silly.

We have two.




#2575096 2/26 GDT : Red Wings 3 at San Jose Sharks 2

Posted by Echolalia on 26 February 2015 - 10:38 PM

why is everything green