HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

San Jose & Detroit

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-14-2012, 08:19 PM
  #301
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedWings19405 View Post
Burns is like JayBo in that everyone continues to talk about what his potential will be and how good he can be. Well when do we accept the fact he is what he is? Burns is never going to be dynamite in his zone, he is going to continue to cough up pucks. I said he scorers more.
Except Burns was good in his d-zone last year. And you know what's even better than being in the d-zone? Pushing the play and maintaining possession in the offensive zone. If you look at Burns' advanced stats (a lot more useful than looking at something so subjective like giveaways), you'll see that he played against tough competition yet still spent most of the time in the offensive zone.
It went a bit downhill when he was paired with Murray (who was just plain awful last season), but he still carried his and Murray's weight.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-14-2012, 08:40 PM
  #302
The Zetterberg Era
Moderator
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 21,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
The part that I disagree with is Burns not progressing. From the beginning of the year, when I was slightly disappointed by Burns, to the end of the year, when I was elated at his player, he improved so, so much. The reason why I think he still has more is that he showed last season that he could adjust to the system and that he could make changes to his game and show marked, game-to-game improvement. He went from below average to above average defensively in the span of a year. I feel comfortable going into next season with Burns as the #1, should the right Boyle trade come along.

I guess I understand in that you look at the physical tools and think that they could be anything and everything, but neither has the 'it' factor that would make them a consistent shoe-in All-Star. But I think Burns has shown that he can continue to improve, even at 27, and that's something that Jay-Bo, who has been basically the same player for years, has not.

I think Burns and Kronwall are similar types of players right now to be honest. I just think that Burns has more to show and has demonstrated to me that he's willing and capable of improvement right now.
This is exactly what I am getting at. I am not here to run down your players. I won't pretend to be the biggest Brent Burns fan, was kind of relieved with the hissy fit Babcock had when we didn't get him that the Wings came up short. He did improve a little in his zone, but I still see a lot of those mind-numbing inexcusable turnovers.

Went to a couple of Sharks games this year. My brother is a season ticket holder and lives in San Francisco. So I get to hear updates on who is doing what and see them in person a couple times during the year when I go out to visit.

I just think when you see him play you are left believing he could be so much more. After a while that became, well he clearly isn't going to be quite what I thought. They both suffer from setting the bar high. Burns can continue to improve in his own end but it might rob him of his offense. At this point you role with him, you put him with Vlasic and that is your number one pair in my opinion. Together as several have pointed out they really help the other one. I think that pair could be dynamite but, will continue to give the credit to Vlasic more than likely.

The Wings have two prospects who I know people get upset when you do this could turn into a very similar pairing. Ouellet (smart and coaches best friend) and Sproul (big all the physical tools offensive guy) both remind me of each player above. I am not going to say they stink and I would be happy if either turned into that player that I use as a comparison.

It is just for me Burns is a very good number 2. He has his talents and strengths and his weaknesses. I don't think he has the hockey IQ or it factor as you put it to change what he is. He works hard and he is a very good hockey player. But my days of Brent Burns is going to be a monster have passed. I understand why Sharks fans hope this isn't the case and honestly for you guys I hope your right. I know I will get to hear my brother rave about him whenever he is playing a team not named the Detroit Red Wings if he does. If it means anything him becoming that player went from 1% (in Minnesota during his last couple seasons there) to about 10% when he wound up in San Jose. I don't think it is impossible, but I am not jumping on the bandwagon if you understand what I am getting at.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-14-2012, 10:36 PM
  #303
Petes2424
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,107
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by probertrules24 View Post
Detroit doesn't need a puck moving Dman. They have Kronwall, Quincey, White, Smith, Kindl. The only defensive guy they have is Ericsson. I think Murray does fill a need for a 6th/7th Dman. He's big, he will clear the crease, the only problem is I doubt SJ is interested in what the Wings will have to offer.
Every defenseman the Wings use/draft/sign, etc, is generally an above average puck moving defenseman. That said, if a guy doesn't have a good to great outlet pass, the Wings won't invest in him by trade or significant free agent signing. Theyll invest on the cheap in that department if needed. Guys like Commodore. An extra guy. So, since they need a top 4 guy, it'll be someone like they always get.

Petes2424 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-14-2012, 10:57 PM
  #304
SnarkAttack
Registered Loser
 
SnarkAttack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZetterBurger View Post
Boyle, Kronwall, Burns, Vlasic, Quincey, Stuart, Ericsson, White, Demers, Braun, Smith, Murray, Kindl.
I think those rankings are fairish. Boyle is far and away the best player on the list, I'd go Burns before Kronwall as well. Kronwall and Vlasic are of similar value to me, with Kronwall getting theslight edge. I'd also switch Demers and Braun based on current level of play.

SnarkAttack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-14-2012, 11:32 PM
  #305
The Zetterberg Era
Moderator
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 21,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnarkAttack View Post
I think those rankings are fairish. Boyle is far and away the best player on the list, I'd go Burns before Kronwall as well. Kronwall and Vlasic are of similar value to me, with Kronwall getting theslight edge. I'd also switch Demers and Braun based on current level of play.
Well if Burns has more value than Vlasic because he is better offensively than I rebutt with this.

NHL level:

GP G A P PPG PIM +/-

Player A: 534 66 154 230 0.43 359 -13

Player B: 467 49 168 217 0.46 298 51


That is right Burns has played more NHL games and is player A as I am sure the +/- gives away. Now true Burns has played on worse teams so throw out the +/-, I hate that stat anyway. Turnovers and giveaways versus takeaways are a big advantage for Kronwall. Who while Burns is improving, Kronwall has always been a little bit safer with the puck and better his zone. But here comes the big difference which is while Burns has a limited sample size I think is why you will have trouble getting a Detroit fan to elevate Burns over Kronwall.

NHL Postseason:

GP G A P PPG PIM +/-

Kronwall: 79 4 36 40 0.51 73 25

Burns: 16 1 4 5 0.31 24 3

Kronwall elevates his game come the post-season. Also delivering more of his crunching hits on a nightly basis.

So I have trouble with the logic you are using to boost Burns past Kronwall in this thread. He is not a better offensive d-man than him although he has the potential to be and he isn't better than him in his own zone. In fact Burns defensive improvements could be seen as what dropped his point total a little. That and not being the first option on his team for everything anymore and logging bigger ice time. I think that is a good adjustment long term for him because it makes him a better D-man. On the other Kronwall who may have been sheltered defensively (like Burns was last season) is about to take up all of the primetime ice-time in Detroit. He is likely to see a spike in his numbers as he has always done his damage on the second units and not with Datsyuk on the ice to help his numbers farther at even strength.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2012, 01:09 AM
  #306
Mattb124
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,425
vCash: 500
I was with you until the last post, which is a blatant misuse of statistics. For Burns (who was a converted forward and still learning D early in his career), you are comparing 11 games from'06-'07 and '07-'08 seasons on the wild and 5 games from last season versus x number of games from consistent playoff runs for Detroit/Kronwall to suggest Kronwall is the better play-off performer. That's bogus analysis.

Burns had generally better simple stats last year than Kronwall - and they both played second pairing (similar competition), did they not? This year it will likely be hard to compare the two with likely st vs. 2nd pairing stats, but (call me a homer) I think Burns is the slightly better player. Kronwall lays better (Murray-like) hits and may play the safer game, but Burns' numbers were slightly better while learning a new system and playing primarily with Murray who had a decidedly down year.

Mattb124 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2012, 03:20 AM
  #307
The Zetterberg Era
Moderator
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 21,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattb124 View Post
I was with you until the last post, which is a blatant misuse of statistics. For Burns (who was a converted forward and still learning D early in his career), you are comparing 11 games from'06-'07 and '07-'08 seasons on the wild and 5 games from last season versus x number of games from consistent playoff runs for Detroit/Kronwall to suggest Kronwall is the better play-off performer. That's bogus analysis.

Burns had generally better simple stats last year than Kronwall - and they both played second pairing (similar competition), did they not? This year it will likely be hard to compare the two with likely st vs. 2nd pairing stats, but (call me a homer) I think Burns is the slightly better player. Kronwall lays better (Murray-like) hits and may play the safer game, but Burns' numbers were slightly better while learning a new system and playing primarily with Murray who had a decidedly down year.
I said his playoff stats were a small sample size. Kronwall's are not. He clearly elevates his game say what you want about Burns. Doubt you would like me using the converted D theory or just the fact Ericsson played better than Stuart last year down the stretch and in the playoffs to throw out he is better than Stuart. You see because Stuart's track record and reputation would win that argument.

Much as in terms of actual tangible accomplishments Burns doesn't meet Kronwall. Member of the triple Gold club and stud when things are on the line. What statistics were misused. Kronwall scored more goals than him last year and had one less point and beat him in virtually every important statistical defensive category save plus minus, all while not turning the puck over nearly as much as Brent Burns. His career numbers with both over 400 career games state one is better slightly offensively than the other. I was pointing out to those saying Burns is better offensively a rather significant set of data suggests otherwise.

Burns is a good player but he isn't as good as Kronwall. It is very close but Kronwall has better accomplishments and numbers and that is a fact. You want to blame that on system adjustment, fine. Burns also played with much better personnel, when people were writing in Brent Burns for a 50+ point season and got what they got but try and tell me he did some great job, sorry I don't buy it and I remember different views being thrown around entering last year. Murray had a down year, well unfortunately Sharks fans so did Stuart who looked like a shell of the back to back finals runs Stuart for most of this season.

He has to prove he is better than Kronwall and to date he has not done that. Once again I didn't say Brent Burns was awful, I said I think Kronwall is better. Not just from watching both play but low and behold from actual statistical evidence. You can not like that and scream that I am twisting stats. But as of today I am doing so with not only the belief he is better but an argument that backs it up. You are coming from a position of Burns can be so much better though, which like I said before goes back to this belief that one day super Brent Burns projection is going to meet the actual guy. To date it has not happened, in fact in both their career years Kronwall was better across the board there also.

I didn't say that Kronwall was better than Dan Boyle, I said he was better than Brent Burns. Stop acting like that was blasphemy. I am sure other people think Burns is better, I am not one of them and stated why. A big part of what sparked this whole thing is I called both #2 d-man, I just think one is better than the other. Burns was being called a #1 and I disagreed. I didn't call him a choker at playoff time or some bottom pairing plug. But Kronwall's step up in production come post-season is worth a mention as it is with most players that do it, sorry Burns hasn't had the opportunity to prove his worth on that stage.

I might come off as a homer too. But it is a little tiring hearing what are you guys going to do with only Kronwall?. He is a very good hockey player with an outstanding resume so to speak. I will take what I know and his track record along with the expected bump in production with his rise in minutes over maybe this is the year Burns puts it all together. For your sake I really honestly do hope he does, when Burns is on he is one of the more entertaining d-man in the league. My problem with him is how often that happens.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2012, 07:25 AM
  #308
RomersWorld*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,162
vCash: 500
Kronwall is the most overrated player in the NHL IMO. He was brutal defensively this year on the Wings. He also has the same brain farts and turnovers that Burns has. Basically everything you said about Burns is true for Kronwall except that Burns is bigger and better.

Kronwall all last year was pinching at terrible times and leaving his d-partners out to dry. It is insane how overrated his defensive game is because he lays big hits and people go on youtube and think that is defense. He really isn't much better than Burns, if at all defensively.

His odd-timed and awful pinches are a big reason why Kronwall finished a -2 on a +45 team. The Wings had the 4th highest goal differential in the NHL and he finishes a minus player. Worst +/- on the entire team besides the slow as molasses Tomas Holmstrom. That tells a lot of the story. Hell, even the "declined" Brad Stuart finished with a +16 on the season and that is with being left hung out to dry a lot of the time because of Kronwall. I admit that Stuart had a bad playoffs, brutal in fact. However, he still was a good player in the regular season and a lot of Wings' players sucked against Nashville.

Despite that, Kronwall is a good player who will give you 37-43 points usually if healthy. Certainly isn't going to run the PP like Lidstrom did and White is definitely no Rafalski. So I do see the PP continuing to get worse.

RomersWorld* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2012, 11:55 AM
  #309
Mattb124
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,425
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedWings19405 View Post
I said his playoff stats were a small sample size. Kronwall's are not.
My complaint with your analysis isn't one of sample size, it's one of context. You are comparing contemporary stats for a player on a perrenial contender versus one who was out of the play-offs for multiple years and whose playoff experience was primarily as a young player on a fringe play-off team team (Wild).

[/QUOTE]
Kronwall scored more goals than him last year and had one less point and beat him in virtually every important statistical defensive category save plus minus, all while not turning the puck over nearly as much as Brent Burns.[/QUOTE]

Let's look at the statistical categories that you claim are "virtually every": goals, TOI (by 20 seconds), and the vaunted giveaways. Burns beats Kronwall in points and +- (mitigating the giveaway argument, as the give-aways don't seem to be translating into goals against). But where Burns shines is in the advanced stats. Let's look at on-ice Corsi as an example, wherein '11-'12 Burns was substantially better than Kronwall (9.93 versus 5.58). Burns was #1 in on-ice Corsi on the Shark's, while Kronwall was second to last on Detroit. That is telling.

You cite Burns playing with better personnel to suggest his numbers are somewhat inflated. His primary D-partner was Murray, who had an abysmal year as evidenced by his corsi of -7.93. I believe Kronwall played mostly with Stuart who likewise had an off year but was still a plus 4.69. That implies that Burns excelled despite having a poor performing partner.

All that said, I am not sure you can cite Kronwall as being statistically better as "fact". In fact, I don't think you can definitively cite Kronwall as being statistically better.

Kronwall certainly has the better hockey resume (and a great one at that), but I don't think that comparing team accomplishments is particularly relevant when evaluating individuals given the availability of individual stats.

I am not implying Burns is worlds better than Kronwall, in fact I think they are fairly comparable but with different skill sets. I just like Burns' game a bit better and I do think he has some upside he has yet to realize. On that we can agree to disagree.

Mattb124 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2012, 12:10 PM
  #310
hateseed
TentacleGrapeSoda
 
hateseed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Coastal California
Posts: 508
vCash: 500
Some of you Det fans rankings of Kronwall make me think you've been Kronwalled

Throwing 10 gigantic hits a season doesn't make you good at defense. It means you are willing to throw dangerous hits, and risk leaving your partner with his ass hanging out.

hateseed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2012, 12:51 PM
  #311
The Red Line
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,758
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hateseed View Post
Some of you Det fans rankings of Kronwall make me think you've been Kronwalled

Throwing 10 gigantic hits a season doesn't make you good at defense. It means you are willing to throw dangerous hits, and risk leaving your partner with his ass hanging out.
Yes because hitting is the only aspect of his game...

The Red Line is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:05 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.