Comments for June 17, 2012 at http://hockey.dobbersports.com , comment 1 to 29 out of 20 comments http://hockey.dobbersports.com Sat, 25 May 2013 18:15:27 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21318 Souray is not a "defensive type", he is an offensive type! - itzjules Mon, 18 Jun 2012 15:52:08 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21310 But there are a lot of Primadonnas in the league anyway. The thing is if they produce on the scoresheet and their team is winning nobody cares, or they'll turn the blind eye. As you said in your comment, if he goes to Detroit you'd easily change you mind of him... So I mean when you complain that you don't like him because he's a Primadonna then 2 sentences later say oh but if he went to Detroit... kinda really defeats your argument doesn't it? - Ryan Ma Sun, 17 Jun 2012 22:02:31 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21309 It is a small sample size, but if what happened during those 11 games foreshadowed what could possibly happen this year, then the Red Wings are in trouble... To me it just seems like you're brushing aside the offensive aspect as "it'll just take care of itself". Last time I checked offense is still a pretty vital part of the game. If you don't score you don't win. You can play solid defense and get away with scoring 1 goal to win the game, but I don't think Detroit is built to win 1-goal games and suddenly change philosophy like the Caps did to primarily focus on defense. So yes Suter would replace Lidstrom's defensive aspect, but I don't think he'll replace the offensive aspect, which is the part that you need in order to win games... That's what I'm arguing. For me defense can be masked by a team defensive game plan as shown by Tippet, Hitchcock and DeBoer. However offense needs to be generated by the player themselves, and some players just don't have it in them to be able to generate it. - Ryan Ma Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:56:00 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21308 But there's nothing wrong with arguing from a stats point of view as long as it makes sense. Stats aren't the be all and end all of everything, but it does show a pretty clear picture most of the time... So you can't just say bah screw stats and never use them at all or else we'd all just believe all of the player hype on the boards. At the end of the day you need to have some sort of concrete evidence to prove your point or else you might as well "MT319" your way through every argument... and justify it with "because I said so..." Who's to say that it won't be effective if you put 2 offensive guys together? Plus things aren't definitive in that manner. You can't just say this guy is purely an offensive player, and so and so is a purely defensive player. In reality many defenseman are a mixture of both, some maybe more offensive than others and some maybe more defensive than others, but you can't go around saying player X is purely offense and player Y is purely defense and they don't cross over... You don't just add X to Y that's the most effective defensive combination available. There are a lot of "viable" combinations. If I stuck a combo of Burns and Souray together do you think that both will play an offensive role 100% of the time? No they won't. Souray might shoot more from the point while Burns covers more defensively... Or Burns might pinch and Souray covers defensively... They may complement each other or they might not, but there's no certainty that placing two offensive guys together will never work. What's worked in Detroit with Stuart pairing up with Kronwall as the number 4 worked for Detroit. He goes to a new environment and it isn't cemented that he's a number 4 there. What if they land Suter? Does Stuart still cement himself as a number 4 then? So when you argue he was a number 4 in Detroit, therefore he's a number 4 in SJ it holds no water... SJ's coaching staff might not utilize him as a 4, so how can you say he's a 4 definitively end of story? - Ryan Ma Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:47:26 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21307 Greens defensive liability isnt my issue with him. I think he is a primadonna. I dont think he has the work ethic...a switch to a team like Detroit could really change my thoughts about him though. If he can stay healthy then I could see him return to his 70 pt ways...especially in the D. Detroit wouldnt cater to his attitude... - buck0198 Sun, 17 Jun 2012 17:02:10 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21306 What a trashy thing by Kane...I am not a Jets fan but would like to see them build a successful franchise. Where do you think he wants to go? I am sick of these pro athletes that would rather go to an immediate contender then stay with a franchise and help them become relevant... I respect guys like Doan and Weiss...those guys are what pro sports/hockey are all about. - buck0198 Sun, 17 Jun 2012 16:57:36 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21305 Don't know how much truth there is to that rumor... and trust me, i'd probably have heard it first, but if it is true, could be a reason for Edmonton to trade that 1st overall pick no? Kane, Enstrom, 1st for Yakupov, Paajarvi, 1st - Nate Sun, 17 Jun 2012 15:58:24 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21304 Re: Stuart/Souray. You are, yet again, only arguing from a stats standpoint. You don't make an effective defensive pairing by putting two offensive guys together. You pair one offensive guy with a defensive guy so they balance each other. Stuart has been Kronwall's defensive anchor on the second pairing for years now, which makes him a #4, regardless of how you try to squeeze a #X into numbers where defenseman Y HAS to play the PP and whatnot. Stuart is a #4, end of story. Re: Lidstrom. Yes, Lidstrom's injury is a waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too small sample size for you to go bananas with numbers as you usually do. I'm just assuming that I watch the Wings a truckload more than you do, as they're my favorite team, and I'm telling you that it's the defense that will be missed the most and that will be irreplaceable for the Wings. The offense can be replaced by committee and if the team can prepare for it (unlike what they're able to do when Lidstrom is suddenly injured) then they will be just fine. Also, Suter is pretty much the closest you get to a Lidstrom type player today. He's a two-way guy who can run the power play and he makes lots of smart, low-risk plays to start the rush and neutralize opponents. - sentium Sun, 17 Jun 2012 13:45:34 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21303 Green honestly isn't as bad defensively as many people make him out to be. Yes he makes mistakes, but on a high powered offense first the Caps were, you expect him to make mistakes and take risks. Defensively he's good enough offensively to cover for a lack of great defensive skills. - Ryan Ma Sun, 17 Jun 2012 12:33:49 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21302 See I would argue differently... The Red Wings are going to miss Lidstrom dearly. He provided so many dimensions for the Wings. I know it's a small sample size, but when Lidstrom was out of the line up due to injury between Feb 25 and Mar 24, the Wings went 3-6-2 without Lidstrom in the line up. The reason is because their offense dried up as they averaged just [b]2.55[/b] goals per game. With Lidstrom in the line up they averaged 3.37 goals per game. I agree with you that the defensive aspect is probably where they're going to miss [b]the most[/b]. It's hard to replace a +21 rating for someone who chews up 24 mins every single game on the blue-line for a team. But the secondary effect which is the offense is going to hurt as well. That's the point that I'm arguing. Sure you can cover for the loss of Lidstrom defensively with a Suter, but how are you going to cover the offensive loss? So far Suter has not convinced me that he's a number one puck moving defenseman. He's a great number two two-way type of D that can play both ends of the ice, but until I see him actually run an offense on his own without Weber, I'm not convinced. In terms of offense Green is a better option over Suter, which is what I feel Detroit needs to replace for missing Lidstrom and not so much the defensive aspects. They have Kronwall, Quincey, Ericsson to cover that defensive stuff, so they don't need another defense first type. They need someone to get the puck to Dats and Zets. Without a puck mover it makes Dats and Zets game less effective... That's where I'm arguing that Green is a better fit in Detroit than Suter. No way in hell I would argue that Green is better defensively than Suter. - Ryan Ma Sun, 17 Jun 2012 12:31:46 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21301 It depends what you're looking for. You're comparing apples to oranges if you're comparing skill sets between the two. Souray is an offensive type who isn't shy of putting the puck at the net and can play on the PP with no hassles. Stuart isn't an offensive type, doesn't shoot the puck a lot, doesn't play PP, but is a solid PKer and very strong defensively... So it depends on what the Sharks are looking for in their D3 position. Stuart is a great D5/6 to fill a defensive role, but you wouldn't want him as a D4 if you're expecting the D4 to play PP and garner 20 mins a game... If I'm the GM of the Sharks I'm looking for Souray as an offensive D3 sliding Vlasic down to D4 to have him Murray and Braun as my D5/D6, but I would limit Braun to 16-17 mins a game... If you sign Stuart and shift Braun up to D3, I see the same thing happening as this year. But that's just me - Ryan Ma Sun, 17 Jun 2012 12:13:25 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21300 3rd/4th best in their given situation, but it's not good enough considering they played like crap last year... Murray was out for 20 some games too, which push Braun and the rest of the D into positions they're not meant for as well. My argument is that their top 2 guys are solid, Boyle and Burns are a good 1/2 punch. Vlasic is a good complement to Boyle. So you can say 1,2 and 3 are covered. The way I look at well structured teams (and depending on the team structure), for a D4 you kinda need Quincey, Stralman, Coburn, Salo type and I don't know if Braun fits the bill. He is still young and developing, but for a D4 you want a guy that can play defense for the PK, is physical, but can also tally 30-35 points as well but I don't know if Braun fits the bill as that type of player? - Ryan Ma Sun, 17 Jun 2012 12:03:22 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21299 Definitely agree with you that he is overpaid. But you wouldn't expect him to maintain his current 60 point production if he goes to a SJ, Philly, Rangers, Car, Col... If he gets into one of those teams surely you would think he gets back up to 80s with some sort of supporting cast even if he's part of the supporting cast. - Ryan Ma Sun, 17 Jun 2012 11:56:28 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21298 Burns was actually quite solid defensively in 2011-12 (although the Sharks did give him the fourth hardest minutes and the most offensive zone starts). http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_statistics.php?ds=30&s=29&f1=2011_s&f2=5v5&f4=D&f5=S.J&f7=40-&c=0+1+3+5+4+6+7+8+13+14+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63+67# Funny thing with Green - he was actually more of a defensive/two-way guy in junior. - angus Sun, 17 Jun 2012 07:29:40 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21297 "If the Wings miss out on Suter, Green could be a great if not better replacement for Lidstrom." And now I'm just shaking my head. Seriously? Ryan, it's not the offense that the Wings are going to miss from Lidstrom. At least not the main thing. No, it's his defensive prowess. If you are seriously arguing that Green is better at defense compared to Suter, then I just don't know what to say. Wow. - sentium Sun, 17 Jun 2012 06:04:59 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21296 There is no way that Souray is a better dman than Brad Stuart. Stuart is the perfect steady stay at home guy to cover for Burns, who is at best an adventure defensively. - sentium Sun, 17 Jun 2012 06:01:38 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21295 The Sharks will find a way to get Braun in the lineup - he was their 3rd or 4th best d-man last year. Demers and Murray could be on the outside (Murray trade bait as Stuart makes him a bit redundant). - angus Sun, 17 Jun 2012 06:01:12 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21294 I disagree about Nash's numbers skyrocketing going to a new team, unless that team is a run and gun offense team and they are far and few between it seems. Definitely wouldn't include the Rangers. He is overpaid. - hawkdog Sun, 17 Jun 2012 05:00:17 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21293 Yeah Stuart seems to make a great bottom pairing D, but I dunno if he'd be a good D4... But you're right. If you have a D corps of Boyle - Vlasic Burns - Souray Murray - Stuart It'd be one of the best in the league... - Ryan Ma Sat, 16 Jun 2012 22:01:25 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/other-features-mainmenu-89/archived-ramblings/4691-june-17-2012#comment-21292 I think Souray could make a fine defensemen, but remember that the Sharks did just trade for Brad Stuart's rights. They'll be signing him as he wants to be there and they clearly want him. So if anything, Demers or Braun gets shipped and they become the 7th d-man if the Sharks go after Souray, but my guess is that the don't and Murray still ends up on the 3rd pairing, which is perfect as that makes their d-core pretty legitimate. - tgraveline Sat, 16 Jun 2012 21:30:42 +0100