Interesting stat: He's the only defensemen in the league that has played in all of his team's games and yet has not been on the ice for a goal against. I know it's still early, but that's still impressive (even more so since the Kings have given up a league high 33 goals this season).
As the official driver of the Drewiske Bandwagon dating back to last season, let me say there is plenty of room for you guys to jump on.
Only flaw in his game right now is how he has to take a minor penalty every game.
I really liked his game since he was brought up last year. He's really solid in our zone and I think he has a little more offensive upside that he will have the chance to show being on the bottom pairing and getting little PP time. He's been getting lit up, but he always seems to make the play anyway. Doesn't seem to be getting skittish going into the boards either, but hopefully he can avoid a few of those hits without giving up the puck.
Last edited by FootKnight: 10-23-2009 at 07:32 PM.
Interesting stat: He's the only defensemen in the league that has played in all of his team's games and yet has not been on the ice for a goal against. I know it's still early, but that's still impressive (even more so since the Kings have given up a league high 33 goals this season).
Are you sure on this, I am almost positive DD was on the ice for a few pk goals earlier in the season when we couldn't stop anyone..... maybe the stat is just even strength goals so he doesn't have any minus'.
That being said both contracts are great numbers for the Kings, I feel like if both guys waited till the end of the season, the each could have got half a mil more. Though maybe both were worried about having a little slide to there game, and wanted guaranteed money, instead of risking the off chance they might get replaced(Bernier, Hickey/Martinez).
Not bad signings but......They shoulda traded Quick last year to address current team needs.(I can't wait to get flamed) He was a 4th round draft pick (i think) that came out of nowhere (on the depth chart) and would have garnered a lot of value in a package deal and it all would have been possibe to address current holes plus as Bernier WAS the guy in managements eyes. Now Quick is the guy in managements eyes (even though he will be upended by Bernier) and his value by the time he is traded will be next to nothing.
He is like Fleury as a rookie. Very quick but overcommits on everything and not nearly as talented as Bernier. Bernier is a textbook goaltender. If our defence wasn't as good as it was it would be more than obvious how lacking he is...
Drewiske not a bad potential top 5 d. Maybe a 1st or 2nd PK D.
Quick is a very good goalie. Bernier will have to earn the job. Even if JB nabs the #1, Quick is still signed at a decent price to be a solid backup. Nice one two punch imho.
Not bad signings but......They shoulda traded Quick last year to address current team needs.(I can't wait to get flamed) He was a 4th round draft pick (i think) that came out of nowhere (on the depth chart) and would have garnered a lot of value in a package deal and it all would have been possibe to address current holes plus as Bernier WAS the guy in managements eyes. Now Quick is the guy in managements eyes (even though he will be upended by Bernier) and his value by the time he is traded will be next to nothing.
He is like Fleury as a rookie. Very quick but overcommits on everything and not nearly as talented as Bernier. Bernier is a textbook goaltender. If our defence wasn't as good as it was it would be more than obvious how lacking he is...
Drewiske not a bad potential top 5 d. Maybe a 1st or 2nd PK D.
So you suggest the Kings trade a young goalie who had 21 wins in 41 starts in his first season as a goalie, and suggest replacing him with an unproven goalie who is finally starting to show consistency for once... yeah, that makes a ton of sense. Ever heard of the term "maximum asset value?" Your suggestions indicate to me that you haven't.
So you suggest the Kings trade a young goalie who had 21 wins in 41 starts in his first season as a goalie, and suggest replacing him with an unproven goalie who is finally starting to show consistency for once... yeah, that makes a ton of sense. Ever heard of the term "maximum asset value?" Your suggestions indicate to me that you haven't.
Not to mention I'd like to know what else he suggests we would have traded as part of that package because young goalies don't carry much trade value.
__________________
"It has not been a good day. I lost my glasses early this morning and I had to go buy a pair of 79 dollar reading glasses today. 79 bucks. You can literally get them at Costco, three-for-20." - Darryl Sutter's response to going up 2-0 in the series.
I went back through the games and did a little research. For even strength goals against, or when the Kings are on the PP and the other teams scores shorthanded, here are the Kings defensemen that have been on the ice for goals against (total goals against for each defensemen, including Harrold playing D only)
Here is their even strength time on ice per game:
Johnson 17:20
Doughty 16:04
Martinez 16:01
Scuderi 15:42
Drewiske 14:19
O'Donnell 14:10
Greene 14:00
Harrold 8:44
Now, I suppose you can argue that maybe Johnson and Scuderi are playing against the other teams top lines, and are getting more minutes, but quite frankly, they are getting completely schooled at even strength. And Drewiske and Greene, how impressive is that! I mean Drewiske at 0 goals. Wow. Maybe they should switch roles for a while until Johnson learns how to play defense, because quite frankly, he is picking up where he left off last year. Major defensive suckage. The numbers don't lie.
So you suggest the Kings trade a young goalie who had 21 wins in 41 starts in his first season as a goalie, and suggest replacing him with an unproven goalie who is finally starting to show consistency for once... yeah, that makes a ton of sense. Ever heard of the term "maximum asset value?" Your suggestions indicate to me that you haven't.
My point was, he was nothing and developed last year into something(maximum asset value) we knew he wasn't.... Media and teams around the league picked up on this sensation(Quick) ( i knew he wasn't I think he is brutal)
Last year with our players advancing we knew we needed a second line centre and look what has happened with Frolov(Terry Murray has single handedly lowered his trade value). Last year we could have packaged Frolov and Quick and maybe Teubert +pick for two great players...
Instead, quick is showing his true colours and will never have the value he had last year and frolov is in a contract year and the coach is benching him... We could have had that second line centre and 3rd defenceman.
We missed out... so we waste a million on a goaltender that should be earning 75000k in the AHL. SMART
How many of those 13 were in the 3 game losing streak? How many were the dog **** goals that Ersberg and Quick gave up?
Why is it relevant if it was during a losing streak? You're either doing the job or you aren't. We all know that Quick and Ersberg have been less than stellar, but how are you going to defend the parings.
Why is it relevant if it was during a losing streak? You're either doing the job or you aren't. We all know that Quick and Ersberg have been less than stellar, but how are you going to defend the parings.
My point was, he was nothing and developed last year into something(maximum asset value) we knew he wasn't.... Media and teams around the league picked up on this sensation(Quick) ( i knew he wasn't I think he is brutal)
Last year with our players advancing we knew we needed a second line centre and look what has happened with Frolov(Terry Murray has single handedly lowered his trade value). Last year we could have packaged Frolov and Quick and maybe Teubert +pick for two great players...
Instead, quick is showing his true colours and will never have the value he had last year and frolov is in a contract year and the coach is benching him... We could have had that second line centre and 3rd defenceman.
We missed out... so we waste a million on a goaltender that should be earning 75000k in the AHL. SMART
Let me try to follow your illogical scenario. Jon Quick is one of three NHL starting goalies that are 23 or younger (the other two being Price and Mason). His 6 wins in 9 starts is tied for 3rd most wins in the NHL so far. So you say Quick is showing his true colors, and he is winning games, even as he struggles.
I see why fans of Canadian teams are so fickle with ass backwards thinking like that. Yeah, that sure is smart.
How many of those 13 were in the 3 game losing streak? How many were the dog **** goals that Ersberg and Quick gave up?
I was thinking about making a thread about this earlier today, actually. It seems that everyone agrees Johnson is playing some of his best hockey yet this year, but his plus/minus is pretty poor. I can't think of many goals that he was directly responsible for, so is that number a statistical aberration due to being on the ice for some soft goals, or is he actually not playing as well as we seem to think? Are there less obvious reasons why goals get scored while Johnson is on the ice? For instance, and this idea is 100% hypothetical, could it be that something in the way he defends encourages those long, high shots that expose Quick? Or does this have more to do with Scuderi, either individually or in terms of the chemistry between the two? It just seems strange to me that Johnson's numbers are as poor as in previous years despite better individual play, a better defensive partner, and comparable if not better goaltending. What's going on?
Let me try to follow your illogical scenario. Jon Quick is one of three NHL starting goalies that are 23 or younger (the other two being Price and Mason). His 6 wins in 9 starts is tied for 3rd most wins in the NHL so far. So you say Quick is showing his true colors, and he is winning games, even as he struggles.
I see why fans of Canadian teams are so fickle with ass backwards thinking like that. Yeah, that sure is smart.
Hey Ziggy
U just watch and see what happens... Quick is going nowhere...if we didn't have the first line we have now we would be 2-8.
U just watch!!!! Quick is brutal. END OF STORY.
Wow, numbers be damned. Johnson is hugely improved on D over last year. He is better positionally, more aggressive and better with his stick. He looked lost on D last year, this year he knows where to go for the most part. He could be better though.
I think it is Scuderi not fully knowing the system yet. He is good and makes so many great plays, but he is still having trouble reading where the forwards are going to be.
I think those numbers will even out over the year.
