Prospect Info: Grand Rapids Griffins 2015-16, Part II

[PullHard]

Because we will retain and move him? Theres no point paying $8M between two tenders when you can pay $4M-5M?

Mrazek has earned and will keep the No1 spot. As he should.

If we don't move him before next season, what will you say

 

[Mijatovic]

I will say its probably the biggest mistake Holland has made leaving $5m+ tied up in a backup goaltender especially when we have enough tied up in 3rd tier talent as it is.

 

[SoupNazi]

This is the Grand Rapids thread, guys, not the Jimmy Howard thread. Let's move along.

 

[Henkka]

This is the Grand Rapids thread, guys, not the Jimmy Howard thread. Let's move along.

Moderators, please do a favor. Transfer rhis discussion on the "Moving Jimmy" -thread.

Btw, if Dallas Stars is paying +10 million for their goaltenders (Lehtonen 5.9M), and cheaper Antti Niemi (4.5M) is their current 1a starter, which one is bigger mistake-machine, almighty Nill or senile Holland?

 

[GoAwayDanCleary]

Lil Bert is on fire

 

[Claypool]

Btw, if Dallas Stars is paying +10 million for their goaltenders (Lehtonen 5.9M), and cheaper Antti Niemi (4.5M) is their current 1a starter, which one is bigger mistake-machine, almighty Nill or senile Holland?

Niemi has two more years left at $4.5M per and Lehtonen has two more years at $5.9M per.

I don't think Dallas is winning the Cup anytime soon.

 

[Reddwit]

How is Russo doing this? He's +38 now.

Next highest is XO at +14

 

[FireBird71]

How is Russo doing this? He's +38 now.

Next highest is XO at +14

He's part of the reasonI could see Detroit letting Quincey move on

 

[RyanCarpenter28]

Griffins sign Joel Chouniard to a Spc.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

Mantha with a pretty sick goal. Deked the goalie out of his pads and popped it in. 3-0

It's 4-0 now. Russo has 3 assists. Wow.

 

[Tatar Shots]

Russo just pouring in the points. 3 assists so far tonight.

 

[FireBird71]

Would be totally fine with Russo taking Quincey's spot next year

 

[Mount Suribachi]

Would be totally fine with Russo taking Quincey's spot next year

Completely different players though.

 

[Henkka]

Completely different players though.

First 7 games for Russo
0+1=1p, -1


Last 45 games for Russo
4+25=29p, +42


Looks like he is great playmaking D with a decent defence? Lots of first assists, not many goals, does his shot suck?

 

[SpookyTsuki]

First 7 games for Russo
0+1=1p, -1


Last 45 games for Russo
4+25=29p, +42


Looks like he is great playmaking D with a decent defence? Lots of first assists, not many goals, does his shot suck?

Shot suck? No. He struggled his first 7 games or so

He prett much is close to 10 goals in an 82 game season

Probably 4-5 in the nhl. And if he can get 30 points and play decent dfence that's perfect

 

[FireBird71]

Completely different players though.

Yeah...one has a future here..one does not

 

[Reddwit]

Haha, how do we come to the conclusion Russo can replace Quincey? Maybe Marchenko can. We know nothing about what Russo can do in the NHL yet, let alone take over a vet who plays big minutes like Q.

I'm thinking Nick Leddy could be a decent comparison?

 

[Henkka]

Haha, how do we come to the conclusion Russo can replace Quincey? Maybe Marchenko can. We know nothing about what Russo can do in the NHL yet, let alone take over a vet who plays big minutes like Q.

I'm thinking Nick Leddy could be a decent comparison?

Yeah, something like that is a better comparison.

If Russo replaces Quincey, somebody has to take Quincey's defensive role. Maybe Marchenko can grow for that, who knows.

But more of, I see Russo as Smith's replacement, when Smith is gone as UFA after next season or traded at deadline (at next season) like Kindl was now.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

I don't know what kind of defensemen people think Russo is, but he's a right-handed puckmover who isn't likely to be a defensive stalwart at the next level. He's also a bit undersized. I agree with the idea that he can replace Smith. I could totally see him on a bottom pairing with Ericsson.

I'm not sure why he'd be a replacement for Quincey, who is a left-handed shutdown type.

 

[Filppula]

Aubry is having a great season. Career highs in goals and assists. 2 SH points today.

 

[Inspiration]

I don't know what kind of defensemen people think Russo is, but he's a right-handed puckmover who isn't likely to be a defensive stalwart at the next level. He's also a bit undersized. I agree with the idea that he can replace Smith. I could totally see him on a bottom pairing with Ericsson.

I'm not sure why he'd be a replacement for Quincey, who is a left-handed shutdown type.

Why does this matter? Is there a requirement that every team needs to have a certain number "shutdown" or "puck-moving" defensemen? Personally, I just want the best 6 defensemen possible in the Wings lineup every night. Certainly some small concessions can be made to fill special teams roles, but 'playing styles' (for lack of a better term) tend to be overrated in roster building. Good defensemen simply create more than they give up; how they accomplish that end (whether through steller offensive play, defensive play, or both) isn't necessarily important.

 

[PullHard]

Why does this matter? Is there a requirement that every team needs to have a certain number "shutdown" or "puck-moving" defensemen? Personally, I just want the best 6 defensemen possible in the Wings lineup every night. Certainly some small concessions can be made to fill special teams roles, but 'playing styles' (for lack of a better term) tend to be overrated in roster building. Good defensemen simply create more than they give up; how they accomplish that end (whether through steller offensive play, defensive play, or both) isn't necessarily important.

I think the idea is just that ideally a player like Quincey is kept or replaced by a similar player or upgraded by a player with a similar impact and a guy like say Smith is replaced by Russo or whoever.

I think there is a validity to the idea of maintaining certain roles. I agree that if a guy is a net positive impact on the ice he should be there, regardless of how big/ small, offensive/ defensive, etc he might be. Karlsson is one of the most valuable D in the league and he isn't running guys over or "shutting them down" in a defensive sense.

But at the same time, it seems like almost none of the defenders currently on this team enjoy battling for pucks, especially along the boards, and have a lot of trouble boxing guys out with their bodies. Russo would not help the team in this regard, though he might be able to put together a more polished passing/ transition game than someone like Smith if things go right for him. Where as guys like Ericsson and Quincey are two of the few D who look like they can body a guy out of the crease or off the puck along the boards if it came to it, despite how rarely it actually happens, so people will value them because of that.

 

[Mount Suribachi]

Why does this matter? Is there a requirement that every team needs to have a certain number "shutdown" or "puck-moving" defensemen? Personally, I just want the best 6 defensemen possible in the Wings lineup every night. Certainly some small concessions can be made to fill special teams roles, but 'playing styles' (for lack of a better term) tend to be overrated in roster building. Good defensemen simply create more than they give up; how they accomplish that end (whether through steller offensive play, defensive play, or both) isn't necessarily important.

Quincey plays nearly 20 minutes a night, against the opponents top 2 lines, with lots of D zone starts, with lots of PK time, and is one of the few players on our team who makes the opposition pay a physical price.

Russo will do none of those things - at least to start with, possibly ever. He may help with our biggest weakness (lack of PMD's) but swapping him with Quincey might fix one problem, but then it creates another.

As others have said, Marchenko/Oullet are the guys we should be grooming to replace Quincey, and Russo should be competing for Smith's job.

 

[Inspiration]

I think the idea is just that ideally a player like Quincey is kept or replaced by a similar player or upgraded by a player with a similar impact and a guy like say Smith is replaced by Russo or whoever.

I think there is a validity to the idea of maintaining certain roles. I agree that if a guy is a net positive impact on the ice he should be there, regardless of how big/ small, offensive/ defensive, etc he might be. Karlsson is one of the most valuable D in the league and he isn't running guys over or "shutting them down" in a defensive sense.

But at the same time, it seems like almost none of the defenders currently on this team enjoy battling for pucks, especially along the boards, and have a lot of trouble boxing guys out with their bodies. Russo would not help the team in this regard, though he might be able to put together a more polished passing/ transition game than someone like Smith if things go right for him. Where as guys like Ericsson and Quincey are two of the few D who look like they can body a guy out of the crease or off the puck along the boards if it came to it, despite how rarely it actually happens, so people will value them because of that.

This is not directed you specifically, but fans seems to have this idealized version of the game in their head, where they can re-deploy players any time, at will. Pair a "puck-moving" defenseman with a "shutdown" defenseman so they can cover for others' weaknesses? That seems to make perfect sense, right?

Except hockey doesn't work like this.

Sometimes the shutdown defenseman will be defending the puckcarrier and the puck-moving defense will need to make a key breakout pass. And yet equally often it will be the puck-moving defenseman forced into making a key defensive play and the shutdown defenseman in position to lead the breakout. That's my issue with picking players based on roles: hockey is free-flowing game with far less ability to control the deployment of personnel than we like to imagine. Every player has to perform nearly every role over the course of a game. Players should be selected for their overall contributions, not their ability to contribute in one facet of the game.

 

[Henkka]

Except hockey doesn't work like this.

Sometimes the shutdown defenseman will be defending the puckcarrier and the puck-moving defense will need to make a key breakout pass. And yet equally often it will be the puck-moving defenseman forced into making a key defensive play and the shutdown defenseman in position to lead the breakout. That's my issue with picking players based on roles: hockey is free-flowing game with far less ability to control the deployment of personnel than we like to imagine. Every player has to perform nearly every role over the course of a game. Players should be selected for their overall contributions, not their ability to contribute in one facet of the game.

This still reminds me with nightmares of that 2006 playoff series against Edmonton.

Oilers did find out that Lidström-Lilja is the shut-down pair and all their offensive plays against them came from Lilja's side (usually with super-speedy Sergei Samsonov) and they were rolling the game over against our best defenceman because of his weak partner.