Detroit Red Wings

well sure the big boned individuals should be there when the post season rolls around but that hasn't been the case for Franzen over the past few seasons. These big guys seem to have a drastic drop off in play and Im not sure Franzen's hasn't already happened. Im pretty ignorant as to the Wings though so thats why Im asking you guys. I remember him being a monster before and hardly noticed anything from him over the past few seasons. Big body guys I like, big body old guys i don't. decent reg. season stats for Franzen though, maybe he's got more tread on the tires.

 

i'd like to see an average age of who actually played. total TOI should be a weighted factor. i assume quant uses the latter of the formulas u refer to (they were the ones i got my numbers from). that's way closer to accurate than "under contract". soreboob played what, 30 minutes all season for the wings?

 

this sounds suspiciously like it's wandered into "intent to blow the whistle" territory

i'm fine with actual utilization.

 

Detroit is more of a statistical outlier in many respects so the implications of some words or phrases shouldn't be applied the same way in Detroit as they would be (and are often) applied to other cities.

For example, we'll hear NBC talk about a "youth movement" in Detroit where it was primarily injury plugs and more of the normal/typical roster turnove, but we hear nothing about how Anaheim completely changed construction and utilization. While cap implications, speed, and other characteristics could be used to describe it, getting younger across the board was the overwhelming characteristic of the roster construction and utilization. From how Bruce used the players last year, to trading Ryan, to scratching Selanne, to leaning on Lindholm, to arranging the top 9 the last 2 years.

 

This is actual utilization and why I think it screws with the picture:

http://redwings.nhl.com/gamecenter/en/boxscore?id=2008021230

http://voices.suntimes.com/sports/i...reserve-recall-morin-teravainen/#.U2kmxFfQxuM

 

I agree about Soreboob being weighted lighter, same with Bert. On the other side Kronwall, Dats, Alfie, Mule, Weiss etc. would be weighted much heavier. That's why I think a better number is in the middle.

 

I missed this before.

Yes, they are getting younger that is true.

How it's described and how it compares to what 29 other teams over the years in the cap era is what gets my attention and paints a picture I haven't agreed with and feeds into a storyline that I think shouldn't be there.

 

Meanwhile, from our friends at mlive. (Ansar Khan)

 

I hope he doesn't kneed surgery.

Did they mention any specifics about the type of knee pain?

 

I hope not either. I still cant find out what type of injury it actually is. The one thing i have read said, if he was to have surgery, its a 'minor' procedure. Ive checked about a half dozen outlets and everything is rather vague.

 

Hopefully his knee and Z's back are ready to go at 100% in October.

 

From the Detroit News...

So far, no reports of pain or discomfort with Datsyuks knee. No pain...no surgery.

 

ahem. i thought we were talking about actual TOI.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats....osition=S&country=&status=&viewName=timeOnIce

 

I was talking about utilization and desired utilization as opposed to a linear projection.

Using straight TOI is kind of like using straight Fenwick instead of Fenwick-close since so many situations are irrelevant. One stat just tracks what happened regardless of circumstances, the other tracks what happened when things are far more meaningful.

Chara missed 120 minutes of games he could have played for example, Seidenberg was out, Kelly and Thornton should have been assumed to play many more minutes than they did, so were McQuaid and Eriksson. Since teams can't carry vets for too much depth because of CBA rules, young players almost have to fill in so it drives the average age per minute down painting what can be a very inaccurate picture of what the team was doing and how they were built. For veteran teams that look really young on paper, it's almost always a function of injuries.

Boston and Detroit were built to be much more veteran than is reflected in TOI, so I disagree with calling them a young team. They are among the older teams in the league going by how the gms built them. Dallas was built to be incredibly young, so calling them a veteran team (because guys held up that probably weren't assumed to) is very misleading to me (they're incredible old on both charts and I find that extremely misleading, like calling Detroit "old" in 2009 for example).

 

bob, you're way more concerned with assigning motive and intent here. my interest is in the actual team demographic.

i don't think it's inaccurate at all here, in terms of what the team is, and what it is becoming. several of those young fill in players will be full time starters next season. again, it seems u choose to focus on "this isn't what they were trying to do." i say so what - for whatever reason, it's what they're doing now.

 

I'm only interested in finding intent or motive (I call it construction, philosophy, or the plan but intent works well enough) for the sake of evaluating age in relation to the league. No reason to look at age otherwise imo. It is very easy to quantify "intent" accurately for the overwhelming majority of players in the league 4 or more years. Gms and coaches know what they have and what they'll get and when they want to get it and that's what I believe should matter when discussing what is actually going on with a team.

The rest is just accidents and very seldom permanent shifts.

Well, it's not what they were doing depending on the sample slot because it doesn't look like any vet was thrown out of a roster slot unless they were at the end of their career like Bert or Alfie. I would also say it's much more accurate to start with saying they were forced to use younger players instead of saying they actually got younger as a team. We saw what happened to ice time when bodies came back, the ice time went right back to vets like Miller, Helm over Nyquist, Sheahan, etc.

Ericsson and Miller fill in for 30+ crowd losses next year and Helm, Kindl, and Abelkader fall on the opposite side of young when they turn 28 next year. As it appears right now, the average age is still going to be in the oldest 3rd of the league barring a massive shift in roster players or a ridiculous string of long term sequential injuries like 14'.

As far as a deliberate move to get younger, that was what happened in 2011 more than in 2014 because the moves were planned. They weren't extremely young but they opted for new players that were younger, it was a choice in more cases than this year where Kenny's and Babs, hands were often forced, largely because of CBA rules relating to the roster and movements.

 

the team is younger than it was, and will continue to be. cleary, bert, soreboob - gone. the players they were forced to play have become players they choose to play.

i get your issue here, i just don't see why u go to such lengths to deny anything other than your central premise.

 

seriously, i feel like i mentioned to someone what a horrible winter we had, and then was told at length why it shouldn't have been.

 

It's not younger yet, right now the 23 man is looking to be older in October than it was in March or April. Players turned over, everybody gets a year older, and the roster needs may be addressed by older players.

It's similar to discussions about Stanbo when he and Chi's front office is called excellent at drafting and the among the first things pointed to are Saad and/or Teravainen. Of the top reasons to praise the FO in Chicago, drafting should be well down the list, but it isn't.

 

the difference is the qualitative assessment u and many other like (or feel compelled) to make. at no point have i done any such thing. show me where i've praised anyone for anything in this discussion.

the team is getting younger. i've got nothing to add to this debate, because you're debating points i don't care about. my only intent here was to point out the team IS younger than it has been. all u seem to care about is denying that.

i have listened for years about how old the wings are. now, they're not as old, and what i'm hearing is "oh yes they are".

i have simply tried to talk about the age of the players that are playing. i don't give a fuck who anyone thinks should have been playing, or was intended to be playing.

perhaps u should save most of that for people who crossed your line - u know, like said "youth movement" inappropriately in your opinion. that wasn't me.