What's the deal with Sopel?

Chris wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 12:45:09 -0400, "HockeyinHD" <hidden DeleteThis @home.com>
> wrote:
>
>> "Freedom Elz" <kred DeleteThis @tifle.net> wrote in message
>> news:CLaJi.3947$tx1.149@read1.cgocable.net...
>>
>>> Bullshit, list them.
>> Pronger, Neidermeyer, Lidstrom, Beauchamin, Phaneuf, Ohlund, Bieksa,
>> Mitchell, Regehr, Jackman, (Jason) Smith, Norstrom, McKee, Hamrlik, Modry.
>> At least.
>
> Well, it only took me asking about 9 times, but at last we get a list.
> And a pretty decent one also.
>
> Guys I'd put ahead of Hannan include the two Anaheim guys, Lidstrom,
> Regehr, Norstrom and Phaneuf.

I'm guessing you haven't seen Norstrom play the last couple years. As
much as I love the guy, as much as he was one of the most underrated
defensemen in the NHL for nearly a decade, he's a shell of his former self.

> On par would be Ohlund, Mitchell,
> perhaps McKee,

Ohlund? Are you serious?

I'd even have to take exception to the idea of Mitchell being considered
on par with Hannan.

> and I also like Volchenkov from Ottawa. Jason Smith is
> a nice tough player, but slow as all hell and doesn't belong on the
> list. Nor Hamrlik.
>
> So, we agree on 5 of them being better than Hannan, I think you've got
> a few that don't belong there, so let's split the difference - Hannan
> is somewhere between 6 and 10 defensively then?

See here, Chris? Do you understand why I criticize you so much about
doing everything you can to fold when confronted by a Wings fan?

For the last year and a half, all you have done is crow about Hannan.
When the Avs could have had Regehr, Norstrom, Mitchell, McKee and even
Ohlund over the past year, you were still all about Hannan.

Now that a Wings fan is questioning you, you are caving like crazy.

As if that weren't enough, you actually came right and said that you'd
"split the difference". You basically just flat out altered your opinion
to fall in line with what a delusional, radically biased Wings fan thinks.

Why?

Take a stand. Have an opinion. If you're wrong, be wrong and admit you
were wrong. This spineless flip-flop nonsense has got to go.

-Thomas
 >> Stay informed about: What's the deal with Sopel? 

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 17:43:58 -0400, Thomas <noneman.RemoveThis@none.man> wrote:

>Chris wrote:
>> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 12:45:09 -0400, "HockeyinHD" <hidden.RemoveThis@home.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Freedom Elz" <kred.RemoveThis@tifle.net> wrote in message
>>> news:CLaJi.3947$tx1.149@read1.cgocable.net...
>>>
>>>> Bullshit, list them.
>>> Pronger, Neidermeyer, Lidstrom, Beauchamin, Phaneuf, Ohlund, Bieksa,
>>> Mitchell, Regehr, Jackman, (Jason) Smith, Norstrom, McKee, Hamrlik, Modry.
>>> At least.
>>
>> Well, it only took me asking about 9 times, but at last we get a list.
>> And a pretty decent one also.
>>
>> Guys I'd put ahead of Hannan include the two Anaheim guys, Lidstrom,
>> Regehr, Norstrom and Phaneuf.
>
>I'm guessing you haven't seen Norstrom play the last couple years. As
>much as I love the guy, as much as he was one of the most underrated
>defensemen in the NHL for nearly a decade, he's a shell of his former self.

You may be right. He was such a stud for so long though, it's hard to
let it go. One of my all time favorite players.
>
>> On par would be Ohlund, Mitchell,
>> perhaps McKee,
>
>Ohlund? Are you serious?

Ohlund is very underrated, IMO.

>I'd even have to take exception to the idea of Mitchell being considered
>on par with Hannan.

Mitchell is a really solid defenseman, Thomas.

>> and I also like Volchenkov from Ottawa. Jason Smith is
>> a nice tough player, but slow as all hell and doesn't belong on the
>> list. Nor Hamrlik.
>>
>> So, we agree on 5 of them being better than Hannan, I think you've got
>> a few that don't belong there, so let's split the difference - Hannan
>> is somewhere between 6 and 10 defensively then?
>
>See here, Chris? Do you understand why I criticize you so much about
>doing everything you can to fold when confronted by a Wings fan?
>
>For the last year and a half, all you have done is crow about Hannan.

Yep. He's a Top 10 defensive defenseman. We can argue about the
details, but my point in this exercise is that while Eric and Bushay
crow about how lousy Hannan is (or, to be fair, how average he
apparently is), they can't even put together a list of players they
*think* are better than he is, even with 614 lbs of homerism behind
them.

So, my point here isn't to argue about individual guys - there aren't
10 better defensive defensemen in the NHL than Hannan, IMO - my point
was to get them to prove it for me by not being able to come up with a
reasonable list. They couldn't even come up with a list at all. I
suspected as much, but there you are.

Chris
 >> Stay informed about: What's the deal with Sopel? 

>> Yep. He's a Top 10 defensive defenseman. We can argue about the
>> details, but my point in this exercise is that while Eric and Bushay
>> crow about how lousy Hannan is (or, to be fair, how average he
>> apparently is), they can't even put together a list of players they
>> *think* are better than he is, even with 614 lbs of homerism behind
>> them.
>
>Chris..I put together no list because like Eric says....this list doesnt
>exist.

Which defensemen in the NHL play defense the best?

Pretty easy.

Chris
 >> Stay informed about: What's the deal with Sopel? 

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 14:54:14 -0400, Thomas <noneman RemoveThis @none.man> wrote:

>HockeyinHD wrote:
>> "Freedom Elz" <kred RemoveThis @tifle.net> wrote in message
>> news:6baJi.1389$372.523@read2.cgocable.net...
>>
>>> Great, he calls Hannan one dimensional, but some how the one dimesnional
>>> Rafalski
>>> gets omitted.
>>
>> Is Scott Neidermayer one-dimensional? Nick Lidstrom?
>>
>> See, here's the problem with the whole one-dimensional debate Offensive vs.
>> Defensive dmen:
>>
>> When you're talking about 'defensive' dmen you're talking about guys who, by
>> and large, do exactly nothing offensively. They don't score, tally assists,
>> or even handle the puck with all that much ability. They are, however, good
>> to great at playing the man, clearing the net-front, stuff like that.
>>
>> On the other hand, when you're talking about 'offensive' dmen, you're
>> usually talking about guys who are putting up goals, tons of assists, fluid
>> with the puck, all that stuff... but you rarely see the dearth of
>> performance on the defensive side with them that you see on the offensive
>> side with the 'defensive' dmen, see what I mean? If a guy isn't at least
>> mediocre defensively he doesn't stay in the league,
>
>Sandis Ozolinsh.
>Patrice Brisebois.
>Paul Fucking Coffey.
>Brian Rafalski.
>Oleg Tverdovsky.
>Brian McCabe.
>
>Need me to go on?
>
>> while there are
>> gajillions of guys who are somewhere between below mediocre to outrageously
>> incompetent offensively and yet can hang around.
>>
>> To explain it numerically, it's like saying your typical offensive
>> defenseman is a 7-9 on offense but only a 4-5 on defense while the defensive
>> dmen are 1-3 on offense but 7-9's on defense.
>
>Yeah, but that's not even remotely true. And you know that.
>
>The only reason you make that argument in the first place is because you
>know there there's no way to quantify defense, so there's no way to
>disprove your argument. Thing is, there's no way to prove it either.

The concept of a defensive defenseman has been very, very well
understood for several decades in NHL hockey. In fact, it's been
discussed any number of times with both Bushay and Eric in this very
ng any number of times. Furthermore, when I originally asked where
Hannan sits in that specific list, one said "not in the top 15" the
other "not in the top 20 (or 30, I forget).

Yet, when I ask - over and over again - for the list of said players,
lo and behold! - there is no such thing as a list of defensive
defenseman. We get comments from one about offensive guys, and
7/10ths this and that, 7-9s this and other that, and from the other we
get nothing, except once he reads the first guys' posts and says
"Yeah, we can't really list defensive defensemen". We all know what
'defensive defensemen' are. I believe the Avs got one of the very
best of them - top 5 or so - and if we look at pure defensive play
amongst all defensemen ('defensive defensemen' and 'both offensive and
defensive' defensemen) we got a guy in the top dozen.

So, I tell them to list *any* defenseman - which should ease the pain
of the sudden amnesia these guys got over the term 'defensive
defenseman' - and rank *any* defenseman in the NHL them by his
defense (though it will mess up the salary comparison I had hoped to
do later), and I *STILL* can't get a list. I even responded to Eric's
'mini list' and jacked up a few of his suggestions with the hope that
they'd feel better about their smack about Hannan and I'd get a
better list from him, and a corresponding one from Bushay. I wish you
hadn't jumped on me so quickly, as now it's very unlikely I'll get a
list from either of them. No matter, I suppose. It'll prove itself
over the coming season.

Chris
 >> Stay informed about: What's the deal with Sopel? 

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 12:54:00 -0400, "HockeyinHD" <hidden.TakeThisOut@home.com>
wrote:

>So in other words, you can't recall a single instance of it happening.
>Whew, for a second there I thought I was going to have to be stern with
>someone being pretty silly about Kronwall. False alarm, apparently.
>
Well you did start a thread last year entitled Niklas "Norris"
Kronwall.
 >> Stay informed about: What's the deal with Sopel? 

"Chris" <noone DeleteThis @goaway.com> wrote in message
news:p78bf313ete3lf07qkutenukirk40u95pp@4ax.com...
>
>>> Yep. He's a Top 10 defensive defenseman. We can argue about the
>>> details, but my point in this exercise is that while Eric and Bushay
>>> crow about how lousy Hannan is (or, to be fair, how average he
>>> apparently is), they can't even put together a list of players they
>>> *think* are better than he is, even with 614 lbs of homerism behind
>>> them.
>>
>>Chris..I put together no list because like Eric says....this list doesnt
>>exist.
>
> Which defensemen in the NHL play defense the best?



That question is essentially the same as your original question. Nothing's
changed.



>
> Pretty easy.

I agree.
 >> Stay informed about: What's the deal with Sopel? 

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 19:40:03 -0400, "Bushay" <bushay44.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>
>"Chris" <noone.TakeThisOut@goaway.com> wrote in message
>news:p78bf313ete3lf07qkutenukirk40u95pp@4ax.com...
>>
>>>> Yep. He's a Top 10 defensive defenseman. We can argue about the
>>>> details, but my point in this exercise is that while Eric and Bushay
>>>> crow about how lousy Hannan is (or, to be fair, how average he
>>>> apparently is), they can't even put together a list of players they
>>>> *think* are better than he is, even with 614 lbs of homerism behind
>>>> them.
>>>
>>>Chris..I put together no list because like Eric says....this list doesnt
>>>exist.
>>
>> Which defensemen in the NHL play defense the best?
>
>That question is essentially the same as your original question. Nothing's
>changed.

And you answered my original question by saying "Hannan's not in the
tope 15". Now, you are joining the dodge campaign. I hope you're
regularly stretching your hamstrings.

We all know what a defensive defenseman is, and we all certainly can
understand the question "Which defensemen play defense the best?".

The Avs got a very good one.

Chris
 >> Stay informed about: What's the deal with Sopel? 

"Thomas" <noneman.TakeThisOut@none.man> wrote in message
news:KsqdnWi19tBl-GjbnZ2dnUVZ_uzinZ2d@wideopenwest.com...
> Freedom Elz wrote:
>> "HockeyinHD" <hidden.TakeThisOut@home.com> wrote in message
>> news:H5mdnST6YJUH1WjbnZ2dnUVZ_vmlnZ2d@insightbb.com...
>>> "Freedom Elz" <kred.TakeThisOut@tifle.net> wrote in message
>>> news:CLaJi.3947$tx1.149@read1.cgocable.net...
>>>
>>>> Bullshit, list them.
>>> Pronger, Neidermeyer, Lidstrom, Beauchamin, Phaneuf, Ohlund, Bieksa,
>>> Mitchell, Regehr, Jackman, (Jason) Smith, Norstrom, McKee, Hamrlik,
>>> Modry. At least.
>>
>> Out of that list, Mitchell, Smith, Norstrom, Hamrlik, Ohlund, Bieksa,
>> Beauchamin, Modry
>> anf Regehr are not superior defesively to Hannan.
>
> Neither is Lidstrom, and McKee is on par.
>
> Lidstrom is probably the most overrated player, defensively, in NHL
> history.

Personally, I hate the way the guy plays defensively, would it kill him to
hit someone? Even with the amount of Norris trophies he's won nobody will
ever consider him one of the best ever at his position.
 >> Stay informed about: What's the deal with Sopel? 

Freedom Elz wrote:
> "HockeyinHD" <hidden.TakeThisOut@home.com> wrote in message
> news:H5mdnSf6YJUH1WjbnZ2dnUVZ_vninZ2d@insightbb.com...
>> "Freedom Elz" <kred.TakeThisOut@tifle.net> wrote in message
>> news:rTaJi.3948$tx1.1815@read1.cgocable.net...
>>> "HockeyinHD" <hidden.TakeThisOut@home.com> wrote in message
>>> news:8qmdnfb_wre8gmjbnZ2dnUVZ_qqgnZ2d@insightbb.com...
>>>> "Freedom Elz" <mediadawg1.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:1190384178.232508.325360@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>> Well, it could be the fact that Calgary was the second to last team in
>>>>> the league
>>>>> for 5 on 5 scoring don't you think?
>>>> Was that because of him or in spite of him? How can you tell the
>>>> difference?
>>> Well the fact that Calagary went out and traded for more offensive
>>> players up
>>> front tells me that it wasn't because of him. Its not like the guy played
>>> 60
>>> minutes a game.
>> So in order to fix their offense they had to trade an (allegedly) decent
>> to good offensive player?
>
> I've never said that he was either. I said he was a solid d man that moves
> the puck
> well out of his own zone. Calgary needed a first line centre, they though
> Tanguay
> could fill that role, that's why they made the deal.
>
>
>>> Yeah, you know what it is, I typed in Kronwall and Norris and 18 pages
>>> came
>>> up, I'm not wasting my time digging through it. If you choose to believe
>>> that not
>>> one of the homers in here ever made such a claim, that's fine, giddyup.
>> So in other words, you can't recall a single instance of it happening.
>> Whew, for a second there I thought I was going to have to be stern with
>> someone being pretty silly about Kronwall. False alarm, apparently.
>
> Oh I can recall all kinds of instnaces of it happening. I just don't see the
> point in
> diggin through 18 pages worth of posts to find out whether it was Hockguy/
> Tran/
> Slider/Pussay/Yournamefirst, is it really that important to you to find out
> which
> one of those dolts was responsible?

The funny, and somewhat ironic thing is that it was Eric himself who
made the ridiculous homeristic remarks about Kronwall.


>
>
>>> Was Alex Tanguay there when Leopold was? Did they have Huselius there
>>> when Leopold was there? The Flames added two 75+ point guys up front it
>>> makes sense they would score more often.
>> But how did those forwards ever get the puck without Leopold there setting
>> them up? You don't mean to suggest that Leopold's offensive ability was
>> so easily replaced on the blue line, do you?
>
> The blueline clearly wasn't the problem.

Their blueline was amongst the best in recent history. Sutter kept
Leopold's offensive game in check and taught him how to play defense.
The Flames had tons of guys who could play defense really well, and
since Leopold wasn't being asked to score any points, yeah, they easily
replaced the offense they got from Leopold, and they didn't take a hit
defensively.

That doesn't say anything at all negative about Leopold.


>
>> you've taken the position that Leopold's good at it... until you see
>> definitive proof to the contrary. That's fine, I guess... it's just based
>> on hope and not fact.
>
> Not really, if priduction from the blueline was the problem they would have
> brought
> in some offensive d-men instead of forwards.

Basically, the reality of the situation is that Leopold is offensively
gifted, but was put into a system that stifled his defensive production.

The question, now, is whether or not he will open his game up to the
level that he did in college (better than a point a game his junior and
senior years), or if the three seasons in the defensive lockdown have
permanently hindered his offensive development.

It should be noted that Eric has implied in the past (we're talking
2006, not 2001) that Kronwall is an offensive-defenseman. Given that and
what he's now saying about Leopold's lack of defensive "ability" (which
goes further than production...he's saying that not only is Leopold
lacking in offensive production, but that Leopold lacks the ability to
produce as well), you would expect that a guy he considers to be a
future Norris candidate, and at the very least a top pairing guy, would
be far superior to Leopold offensively, right?

Leopold:
02-03 58gp 4g 10a 14p
03-04 82gp 9g 24a 33p
05-06 74gp 2g 18a 20p
06-07 15gp 2g 3a 5p

Kronwall:
02-03 DNP
03-04 20gp 1g 4a 5p
05-06 27gp 1g 8a 9p
06-07 68gp 1g 21a 22p

Pro-rate that out to a full 82 game season:

Leopold:
02-03 82gp 6g 14a 20p
03-04 82gp 9g 24a 33p
05-06 82gp 2g 20a 22p
06-07 82gp 11g 16a 27p

Kronwall:
02-03 DNP
03-04 82gp 4g 16a 20p
05-06 82gp 3g 24a 27p
06-07 82gp 1g 25a 26p

The two players are five months apart as far as age is concerned, so
that's not an issue. Prior to the NHL, Kronwall had four years playing
in the Swedish Elite league and one in the AHL, compared to Leopold's
four years in college, which would give the advantage to Kronwall (you'd
expect a player to be more NHL-ready coming from four years in the SEL
and one as a top-pairing guy in the AHL than four years of NCAA hockey).

Finally, Detroit was vastly superior offensively to Calgary. Over the
last three seasons, Detroit has scored 814 goals, to the 690 that have
been scored by Leopold's teams the last three seasons.

Kronwall has had the benefit of playing in wide-open offensive systems,
without having the wear-and-tear of being expected to play tight
defense, penalty kill minutes, or having to overcome the Sutter system.

Yet, still, despite all of this in Kronwall's corner, this future
Norris-caliber offensive defenseman's career PPG is still no better than
that of the guy Eric claims has no offensive ability to speak of.

And that's ignoring the fact that last year, Leopold - in 15 games, all
of which were played while he was still injured - scored one fewer goal
than Kronwall has scored in his ENTIRE FUCKING NHL CAREER.

Nah, no homerism from Eric or anything.

-Thomas
 >> Stay informed about: What's the deal with Sopel? 

Freedom Elz wrote:
> "Thomas" <noneman.DeleteThis@none.man> wrote in message
> news:KsqdnWi19tBl-GjbnZ2dnUVZ_uzinZ2d@wideopenwest.com...
>> Freedom Elz wrote:
>>> "HockeyinHD" <hidden.DeleteThis@home.com> wrote in message
>>> news:H5mdnST6YJUH1WjbnZ2dnUVZ_vmlnZ2d@insightbb.com...
>>>> "Freedom Elz" <kred.DeleteThis@tifle.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:CLaJi.3947$tx1.149@read1.cgocable.net...
>>>>
>>>>> Bullshit, list them.
>>>> Pronger, Neidermeyer, Lidstrom, Beauchamin, Phaneuf, Ohlund, Bieksa,
>>>> Mitchell, Regehr, Jackman, (Jason) Smith, Norstrom, McKee, Hamrlik,
>>>> Modry. At least.
>>> Out of that list, Mitchell, Smith, Norstrom, Hamrlik, Ohlund, Bieksa,
>>> Beauchamin, Modry
>>> anf Regehr are not superior defesively to Hannan.
>> Neither is Lidstrom, and McKee is on par.
>>
>> Lidstrom is probably the most overrated player, defensively, in NHL
>> history.
>
> Personally, I hate the way the guy plays defensively, would it kill him to
> hit someone? Even with the amount of Norris trophies he's won nobody will
> ever consider him one of the best ever at his position.

Right. You *can* still be effective while using a stick-check as opposed
to a body-check. And Lidstrom used to be very very good that way. It
made up for his complete lack of physicality.

But he doesn't do that anymore. His stick-check is average at best these
days, and he doesn't skate well enough to impede the opposition, quick
enough to adjust or fast enough to recover.

Basically, at this point in his career, he's getting a pass because of
what he used to be. People remember him being what he was, and don't see
him for what he is now.

And because there are no stats that quantify defense, coupled with the
fact that they don't understand that +/- is not a defensive statistic
(or even the slightest bit indicative of individual performance in ANY
way at all), you get Wings slapdicks going on and on about Lidstrom's
defense, when the guy is below-average at best defensively. And has been
for a couple years now.

-Thomas
 >> Stay informed about: What's the deal with Sopel? 

Chris wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 17:43:58 -0400, Thomas <noneman RemoveThis @none.man> wrote:
>
>> Chris wrote:
>>> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 12:45:09 -0400, "HockeyinHD" <hidden RemoveThis @home.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Freedom Elz" <kred RemoveThis @tifle.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:CLaJi.3947$tx1.149@read1.cgocable.net...
>>>>
>>>>> Bullshit, list them.
>>>> Pronger, Neidermeyer, Lidstrom, Beauchamin, Phaneuf, Ohlund, Bieksa,
>>>> Mitchell, Regehr, Jackman, (Jason) Smith, Norstrom, McKee, Hamrlik, Modry.
>>>> At least.
>>> Well, it only took me asking about 9 times, but at last we get a list.
>>> And a pretty decent one also.
>>>
>>> Guys I'd put ahead of Hannan include the two Anaheim guys, Lidstrom,
>>> Regehr, Norstrom and Phaneuf.
>> I'm guessing you haven't seen Norstrom play the last couple years. As
>> much as I love the guy, as much as he was one of the most underrated
>> defensemen in the NHL for nearly a decade, he's a shell of his former self.
>
> You may be right. He was such a stud for so long though, it's hard to
> let it go. One of my all time favorite players.

1. Fair enough.
2. Don't cave like that.

>>> On par would be Ohlund, Mitchell,
>>> perhaps McKee,
>> Ohlund? Are you serious?
>
> Ohlund is very underrated, IMO.

Yeah, but better defensively than Hannan?

>
>> I'd even have to take exception to the idea of Mitchell being considered
>> on par with Hannan.
>
> Mitchell is a really solid defenseman, Thomas.

He's decent. He's not Hannan.

>
>>> and I also like Volchenkov from Ottawa. Jason Smith is
>>> a nice tough player, but slow as all hell and doesn't belong on the
>>> list. Nor Hamrlik.
>>>
>>> So, we agree on 5 of them being better than Hannan, I think you've got
>>> a few that don't belong there, so let's split the difference - Hannan
>>> is somewhere between 6 and 10 defensively then?
>> See here, Chris? Do you understand why I criticize you so much about
>> doing everything you can to fold when confronted by a Wings fan?
>>
>> For the last year and a half, all you have done is crow about Hannan.
>
> Yep. He's a Top 10 defensive defenseman. We can argue about the
> details, but my point in this exercise is that while Eric and Bushay
> crow about how lousy Hannan is (or, to be fair, how average he
> apparently is), they can't even put together a list of players they
> *think* are better than he is, even with 614 lbs of homerism behind
> them.
>
> So, my point here isn't to argue about individual guys - there aren't
> 10 better defensive defensemen in the NHL than Hannan, IMO -

There aren't five.

> my point
> was to get them to prove it for me by not being able to come up with a
> reasonable list. They couldn't even come up with a list at all. I
> suspected as much, but there you are.

Alrighty.

-Thomas
 >> Stay informed about: What's the deal with Sopel? 

Chris wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 14:54:14 -0400, Thomas <noneman RemoveThis @none.man> wrote:
>
>> HockeyinHD wrote:
>>> "Freedom Elz" <kred RemoveThis @tifle.net> wrote in message
>>> news:6baJi.1389$372.523@read2.cgocable.net...
>>>
>>>> Great, he calls Hannan one dimensional, but some how the one dimesnional
>>>> Rafalski
>>>> gets omitted.
>>> Is Scott Neidermayer one-dimensional? Nick Lidstrom?
>>>
>>> See, here's the problem with the whole one-dimensional debate Offensive vs.
>>> Defensive dmen:
>>>
>>> When you're talking about 'defensive' dmen you're talking about guys who, by
>>> and large, do exactly nothing offensively. They don't score, tally assists,
>>> or even handle the puck with all that much ability. They are, however, good
>>> to great at playing the man, clearing the net-front, stuff like that.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, when you're talking about 'offensive' dmen, you're
>>> usually talking about guys who are putting up goals, tons of assists, fluid
>>> with the puck, all that stuff... but you rarely see the dearth of
>>> performance on the defensive side with them that you see on the offensive
>>> side with the 'defensive' dmen, see what I mean? If a guy isn't at least
>>> mediocre defensively he doesn't stay in the league,
>> Sandis Ozolinsh.
>> Patrice Brisebois.
>> Paul Fucking Coffey.
>> Brian Rafalski.
>> Oleg Tverdovsky.
>> Brian McCabe.
>>
>> Need me to go on?
>>
>>> while there are
>>> gajillions of guys who are somewhere between below mediocre to outrageously
>>> incompetent offensively and yet can hang around.
>>>
>>> To explain it numerically, it's like saying your typical offensive
>>> defenseman is a 7-9 on offense but only a 4-5 on defense while the defensive
>>> dmen are 1-3 on offense but 7-9's on defense.
>> Yeah, but that's not even remotely true. And you know that.
>>
>> The only reason you make that argument in the first place is because you
>> know there there's no way to quantify defense, so there's no way to
>> disprove your argument. Thing is, there's no way to prove it either.
>
> The concept of a defensive defenseman has been very, very well
> understood for several decades in NHL hockey. In fact, it's been
> discussed any number of times with both Bushay and Eric in this very
> ng any number of times. Furthermore, when I originally asked where
> Hannan sits in that specific list, one said "not in the top 15" the
> other "not in the top 20 (or 30, I forget).
>
> Yet, when I ask - over and over again - for the list of said players,
> lo and behold! - there is no such thing as a list of defensive
> defenseman. We get comments from one about offensive guys, and
> 7/10ths this and that, 7-9s this and other that, and from the other we
> get nothing, except once he reads the first guys' posts and says
> "Yeah, we can't really list defensive defensemen". We all know what
> 'defensive defensemen' are. I believe the Avs got one of the very
> best of them - top 5 or so - and if we look at pure defensive play
> amongst all defensemen ('defensive defensemen' and 'both offensive and
> defensive' defensemen) we got a guy in the top dozen.
>
> So, I tell them to list *any* defenseman - which should ease the pain
> of the sudden amnesia these guys got over the term 'defensive
> defenseman' - and rank *any* defenseman in the NHL them by his
> defense (though it will mess up the salary comparison I had hoped to
> do later), and I *STILL* can't get a list. I even responded to Eric's
> 'mini list' and jacked up a few of his suggestions with the hope that
> they'd feel better about their smack about Hannan and I'd get a
> better list from him, and a corresponding one from Bushay. I wish you
> hadn't jumped on me so quickly, as now it's very unlikely I'll get a
> list from either of them. No matter, I suppose. It'll prove itself
> over the coming season.

....and they will still deny it because Hannan's not going to score 70
points, and the two of them wouldn't know defense if they saw it...

So this time a year from now, you'll be getting frustrated by the same
argument from the same two guys.

-thomas
 >> Stay informed about: What's the deal with Sopel? 

"Thomas" <noneman.TakeThisOut@none.man> wrote in message
news:5vOdnRRLMuClX2jbnZ2dnUVZ_trinZ2d@wideopenwest.com...
> Chris wrote:
>> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 14:54:14 -0400, Thomas <noneman.TakeThisOut@none.man> wrote:
>>
>>> HockeyinHD wrote:
>>>> "Freedom Elz" <kred.TakeThisOut@tifle.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:6baJi.1389$372.523@read2.cgocable.net...
>>>>
>>>>> Great, he calls Hannan one dimensional, but some how the one
>>>>> dimesnional Rafalski
>>>>> gets omitted.
>>>> Is Scott Neidermayer one-dimensional? Nick Lidstrom?
>>>>
>>>> See, here's the problem with the whole one-dimensional debate Offensive
>>>> vs. Defensive dmen:
>>>>
>>>> When you're talking about 'defensive' dmen you're talking about guys
>>>> who, by and large, do exactly nothing offensively. They don't score,
>>>> tally assists, or even handle the puck with all that much ability.
>>>> They are, however, good to great at playing the man, clearing the
>>>> net-front, stuff like that.
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand, when you're talking about 'offensive' dmen, you're
>>>> usually talking about guys who are putting up goals, tons of assists,
>>>> fluid with the puck, all that stuff... but you rarely see the dearth of
>>>> performance on the defensive side with them that you see on the
>>>> offensive side with the 'defensive' dmen, see what I mean? If a guy
>>>> isn't at least mediocre defensively he doesn't stay in the league,
>>> Sandis Ozolinsh.
>>> Patrice Brisebois.
>>> Paul Fucking Coffey.
>>> Brian Rafalski.
>>> Oleg Tverdovsky.
>>> Brian McCabe.
>>>
>>> Need me to go on?
>>>
>>>> while there are gajillions of guys who are somewhere between below
>>>> mediocre to outrageously incompetent offensively and yet can hang
>>>> around.
>>>>
>>>> To explain it numerically, it's like saying your typical offensive
>>>> defenseman is a 7-9 on offense but only a 4-5 on defense while the
>>>> defensive dmen are 1-3 on offense but 7-9's on defense.
>>> Yeah, but that's not even remotely true. And you know that.
>>>
>>> The only reason you make that argument in the first place is because you
>>> know there there's no way to quantify defense, so there's no way to
>>> disprove your argument. Thing is, there's no way to prove it either.
>>
>> The concept of a defensive defenseman has been very, very well
>> understood for several decades in NHL hockey. In fact, it's been
>> discussed any number of times with both Bushay and Eric in this very
>> ng any number of times. Furthermore, when I originally asked where
>> Hannan sits in that specific list, one said "not in the top 15" the
>> other "not in the top 20 (or 30, I forget). Yet, when I ask - over and
>> over again - for the list of said players,
>> lo and behold! - there is no such thing as a list of defensive
>> defenseman. We get comments from one about offensive guys, and
>> 7/10ths this and that, 7-9s this and other that, and from the other we
>> get nothing, except once he reads the first guys' posts and says
>> "Yeah, we can't really list defensive defensemen". We all know what
>> 'defensive defensemen' are. I believe the Avs got one of the very
>> best of them - top 5 or so - and if we look at pure defensive play
>> amongst all defensemen ('defensive defensemen' and 'both offensive and
>> defensive' defensemen) we got a guy in the top dozen.
>>
>> So, I tell them to list *any* defenseman - which should ease the pain
>> of the sudden amnesia these guys got over the term 'defensive
>> defenseman' - and rank *any* defenseman in the NHL them by his
>> defense (though it will mess up the salary comparison I had hoped to
>> do later), and I *STILL* can't get a list. I even responded to Eric's
>> 'mini list' and jacked up a few of his suggestions with the hope that
>> they'd feel better about their smack about Hannan and I'd get a
>> better list from him, and a corresponding one from Bushay. I wish you
>> hadn't jumped on me so quickly, as now it's very unlikely I'll get a
>> list from either of them. No matter, I suppose. It'll prove itself
>> over the coming season.
>
> ...and they will still deny it because Hannan's not going to score 70
> points, and the two of them wouldn't know defense if they saw it...
>
> So this time a year from now, you'll be getting frustrated by the same
> argument from the same two guys.

No doubt Bushay doesn't, then again he doesn't know his ass from a hole
in the ground. But I'm still shaking my head in disbelief that Eric listed
Kubina as superior to Hannan. Kubina turned in Brisebois-ian performance
last year, absolutely putrid. If you showed tape of Kronwall next to Kubina
last year he may just have gotten that elusive Norris trophy.
 >> Stay informed about: What's the deal with Sopel?