View Single Post
Old
02-28-2010, 12:25 AM
  #65
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Whatever. We're talking of ditching Spacek here and going with a top-4 of Markov-Hamrlik-Gorges-Subban. Either Gorges has to pick up the slack for Subban to slide into a top-4 role (which gives the Habs two D-men asked to do more than they should) or you're trying to fit Subban in that #2 role currently filled out by Spacek.



I'm making assumptions, just as you are, except my assumptions about the capabilities of a rookie with 2 NHL games to his name are far more realistic than yours.

And even if you were to prove correct, my suggested course of action is way more prudent.



No, it's not. Actually, I think that's where your argument goes completely off the tracks, so let's stop here so I can explain why I think your argument that he's been proving he can handle top-four minutes is completely off the mark.

You're basing your assertion that he can play top-4 minutes based on the fact that he's played 20 minutes in those two games, and that that was top-4 minutes. Quite besides the fact that it was only two game, it's important to realize that 20 minutes against third and fourth lines is not "top 4 minutes". You don't figure out who were the top four defensemen by sorting the icetime chart by "TOI" and counting.

The important element here is not the quanitity of minutes Subban plays, it's the difficulty. There is a world of difference between playing 20 minutes against Alex Ovechkin and playing 20 minutes against third-line grinders.

Against the Flyers in game 1, Subban played most of his minutes paired with Gill as the third pairing; he was kept away from the Carter and Richards lines, Philly's top two lines, and used against the Giroux and Betts line. This was also the case for the beginning of game 2, where he was again paired with Gill and faced the Flyers' bottom 2 lines. Once the game became garbage time, it was time to experiment now that the hockey was meaningless, so Subban was separated from Gill and that was the only time he actually was mainly matched up against significant opposition (mostly the Richards line) in this case. It was the perfect time to get a first inkling of whether he could handle such tough opposition.

These are not first- and second-pairing minutes.

It doesn't matter how much time he spent on the ice, what matters is who he was matched up against. You really should know this, which makes your claims that I'm "basing my argument on something I don't seem to know" pretty ironic. Having played 20 minutes in all of two games games, of which maybe four periods were significant, against third-pairing opposition, does not make him a top-4 defenseman.



Spacek is playing the first pairing right now, which is Hamrlik-Spacek. Markov should nominally be the #1, but he's not completely back from his injury and he's handed #3 minutes at the moment, which means Spacek remains in the same role he's had since game 1 -- he's the #2 D-man.



Markov, one of these days, should really be handed a partner he doesn't have to babysit so that we can, for once, see what he's really capable of. So far he's had to compensate for Komisarek and O'Byrne, the best D-man he's been with has probably been Josh Gorges...



I hope not. Much too early. That'll mean the Habs are really thin on D.



Well, let's phase him in then. Slowly. There's no reason to throw him to the wolves. That's just setting him up for failure. Again, the difficulty curves in defensemen is really steep. Subban would hardly be the first prospect we think to have progressed more than he has.

I'm perfectly convinced Subban will develop into a first-pairing defenseman. But it will take another year or two.


I'm gonna pass over everything you've said and ignore it totally as I stopped reading where its bolded. You've repeated a fallacy yet again, even though I've told you this is untrue. You also presume I don't know how to check the play-by-play log on the game summaries on NHL.com, where you can actually see that Subban played against Philly's best players as the two games progressed. The last game, it was 20 minutes against mostly (at least 2/3 or 3/4 of the game) Philly's best guns.

Hammer and Spacek were the first pairing and Subban and Gorges were the second for most of the game. I don't need the ice time to figure this out, to think you can presume to know how I think when you're not even capable of checking facts for yourself, or even acknowledge what everyone saw in that game, is just plain ridiculous.

Check your facts here :

http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreport...0/PL020907.HTM

Subban played against all of Philly's top 6 forwards, mostly for the entire game the Habs lost 6-2, yet Subban wasn't there for any of the goals allowed. If you watched the game, you could see his poise on defense, the good decisions, the good first passes. He showed that all week-end long, and never dropped down even though he was quickly pitted against tougher opponents. He IS quite capable as of now to do it, the logical path to take is to see how far he can bring it.

For any other player coming up, I'd mostly agree to be prudent, but in my experience, this the one type of dude you don't need to be so prudent with.

So what have I had today on my plate because of you... twisted argument, being put HF mythos into my mouth, repeated fallacy. You've lost a lot of steam bro. Next time, if you want me to read your entire drivel and give a damn, try a different route than all those pityful tactics you used.

You also totally fail to realize that Subban is playing far better on the right side than Spacek, as it is the former's natural side. Markov wasn't there, but if he is, The better option would be to use Subban with either Markov or Hammer. The Subban/Hammer pairing we saw several times in the last gamem, was much less dysfunctional than when it was Spacek on that pairing.


Last edited by Ozymandias: 02-28-2010 at 12:33 AM.
Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote