Can you guys settle a stupid argument for me?

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Quincey.

I don't think Smith has as much potential as some would like to believe. We're not talking about a 21 year old. He's 27 and has been in the league more than 4 seasons. Sure there's the off chance he'll transform under Blashill but he'll more likely remain a "lotta tools no toolbox" player.

Quincey on the other hand isn't anything special but is a pretty solid middle/bottom pairing NHL defenseman. The same can't really be said for Smith.

 

[Winger98]

But Q is a big part of that reason. The only real above average passers of the puck we have are Marchenko and Kronner. DD does a good job moving it with his feet but as a pure passer of the puck is probably average by NHL standards. Q is very, very slow to make reads with the puck on his stick and stops moving his feet as soon as he receives the puck (which is the kiss of death for puck movement if you really pay attention). I don't think moving him to a new system will radically change this.

It won't change Q, but he might be surrounded by a group that compliments him a bit more. Quincey's game isn't a kiss of death if the rest of the D can move the puck at least competantly. The problem, as you point out here, is that we don't really have that here. On our blueline he takes its shortcomings and compounds them.

 

[steafo]

I chose Smith just due to some possibility of untapped potential. Quincey may be better defensively right now but over the last couple years I've seen him get exposed when taken wide. His skating isn't any good anymore. I don't think he was ever a burner but a lot of his penalties are due to his skating not putting him in the right position.

I think Smith basically is what he is right now. An offensive defenseman that gets put in a defensive dman role due to a lack of them on his team. If he were expected to produce points while making defensive gaffes as an offensive defenseman often does I think he would be doing exactly what he is expected to do. Give him significant powerplay time and loosen the leash a bit and I think we have a different Smith on our hands.

 

[njx9]

Q if he's paired with a better offensive player isn't too bad. Few mistakes on the defensive end of the ice. But he's a bad offensive player. His passing is bad, his skating is bad, and he's relatively worthless in the offensive zone.

I'd take Smith, I think. Like someone said above, I'd rather his mistakes, than Quincey's offensive ineptitude. But I wouldn't say anyone is wrong for going the other way.

That said, neither one is better than a 4, and realistically, I wouldn't want either of them playing beyond bottom pairing with appropriate ice time.

 

[InjuredChoker]

i'd take smith and even moreso for the sens who tend to play with bit higher tempo than average team. past 3 seasons it's closer but next 3 seasons, smith is in his prime years and quincey would be on age 31-33 years.

and i still think smith has some untapped potential in him.

Nice way of putting your own little conditions on this.

after reading just the first post, i thought the OP would take smith.

 

[BinCookin]

and i still think smith has some untapped potential in him.

Mentioned by a few posters. The only way he "hits" this untapped potential is a drastically different role on a new team.

And even then, If i was the Sens I would def take Q over Smith.

As a Marc Methot Replacement... Def. Q.

 

[obey86]

Smith.

 

[Squirrel in the Hole]

Quincey is a solid defensive defenseman. Smith might finally be putting it together. For the next 2-3 years I'm taking Quincey due to beard.

Yeah, Quincey. That beard is awesome.

 

[WingedWheel1987]

People make it sound like Smith put up more than 15 points last season.

The guy isn't good...like at all.

He is 27 and the most points he has ever put up in a single season was 19.

Offensive defenseman that makes giant mistakes in his own zone and can't generate offense. He is basically Jonathan Ericsson.

Quincey is much better than Smith. He put up 11 points in 47 games and his offense blows too.

Q had a combined total of 42 points these last three seasons.

Smith had 47.

At least Q is more responsible in the Wings own zone. He isn't great, but certainly better than Smith.

 

[njx9]

Regurgitating box scores isn't a particularly good way to gauge offense, in terms of what people are saying Smith does well. Quincey passing it into a forward's skates becomes a turnover, or a forced deep dump. Smith passing it more cleanly to a forward or help lead a rush doesn't necessarily turn into more points when the forward's he's leading on the breakout include Glendening or Helm. I'm not saying those are the only players he played with (frankly, I have no idea who he was on the ice with most of the time), but I *am* saying that a simplistic "BUT POINTS!" argument misses the mark rather badly in this conversation.

 

[odin1981]

KFQ no question. Smith is always touted as some "off-d" but he has never exceded 20-25 points. And he sucks in his own zone. Has the ****ing mental toolbox of a box of rocks.

KFQ at least can play d and is capable of 2nd pairing duty if injuries hit you bad. But ideally he would be a vet #5 that you glue a rookie to.

 

[obey86]

People make it sound like Smith put up more than 15 points last season.

The guy isn't good...like at all.

He is 27 and the most points he has ever put up in a single season was 19.

Offensive defenseman that makes giant mistakes in his own zone and can't generate offense. He is basically Jonathan Ericsson.

Quincey is much better than Smith. He put up 11 points in 47 games and his offense blows too.

Q had a combined total of 42 points these last three seasons.

Smith had 47.

At least Q is more responsible in the Wings own zone. He isn't great, but certainly better than Smith.

You do realize he didn't play on the PP right? You can't expect many more points from a non-star defenseman who doesn't get power play time and plays limited minutes as is. Even someone like Gostisbehere, an offensive demon, only was able to put up 19 5v5 points in the same ice time as Smith (951 TOI for both) with similar ozone% starts (40% vs. 39.7%).

And spare me "if he deserved it he would have played on the PP" crap. This is the team that had Helm and Richards in the top 6 all season, Abdelkader playing 18 minutes a night, and 2 of the teams best scorers (Tatar, AA) getting team low minutes (14/game and 9/game) on a team that couldn't score. Plenty of Blashill's lineup/usage decisions didn't/don't make any sense.

 

[WingedWheel1987]

You do realize he didn't play on the PP right? You can't expect many more points from a non-star defenseman who doesn't get power play time and plays limited minutes as is. Even someone like Gostisbehere, an offensive demon, only was able to put up 19 5v5 points in the same ice time as Smith (951 TOI for both) with similar ozone% starts (40% vs. 39.7%).

And spare me "if he deserved it he would have played on the PP" crap. This is the team that had Helm and Richards in the top 6 all season, Abdelkader playing 18 minutes a night, and 2 of the teams best scorers (Tatar, AA) getting team low minutes (14/game and 9/game) on a team that couldn't score. Plenty of Blashill's lineup/usage decisions didn't/don't make any sense.

Why not give Ericsson more time on the PP too? He also had just as many points as Smith did last season.

If you can't outproduce a guy who isn't capable of generating any offense, you probably aren't going to be some offensive wizard on the PP.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Regurgitating box scores isn't a particularly good way to gauge offense, in terms of what people are saying Smith does well. Quincey passing it into a forward's skates becomes a turnover, or a forced deep dump. Smith passing it more cleanly to a forward or help lead a rush doesn't necessarily turn into more points when the forward's he's leading on the breakout include Glendening or Helm. I'm not saying those are the only players he played with (frankly, I have no idea who he was on the ice with most of the time), but I *am* saying that a simplistic "BUT POINTS!" argument misses the mark rather badly in this conversation.

Brendan Smith is one of the worst passers on the team. Anyone who says he is good at "passing it cleanly" has not been paying attention. He passes it into skates, ices the puck more than anyone else due to bad passes, frequently passes it right to opposing players, and doesn't really have good vision.

Smith's potential is more as a puck-rushing d-man than a PMD.

 

[obey86]

Why not give Ericsson more time on the PP too? He also had just as many points as Smith did last season.

If you can't outproduce a guy who isn't capable of generating any offense, you probably aren't going to be some offensive wizard on the PP.

If you can't see that Smith is much more offensively capable than Jonathan Ericsson by watching them actually play, I don't know what to tell you.

Jonathan Ericsson had 15 points at 5v5. Here's some players who scored near the same range of Ericsson at even strength:

OEL, 20 5v5 points
Weber, 20
Gostisbehere, 19
Brian Campbell, 19
Keith, 18
Leddy, 18
Ristolainen, 18
Seth Jones, 17
Stralman, 16
Justin Faulk, 15.
Seabrook, 15
Phaneuf, 15
Vatanen, 14
Dumba, 12
Green, 12

I guess players like Ristolainen (41 total points), Keith (43), Seth Jones (31), Faulk (37), Seabrook (48), Phaneuf (32), Vatanen (38), and Green (34) don't deserve their PP time as they can barely (or in some cases don't) outproduce a guy who isn't capable of generating offense in Ericsson.

The overall point is, you're really underrating how hard it is to put up big point numbers as a defender without power play opportunity. Even some of the best offensive defenders in the entire NHL can barely outproduce an offensive bum like Ericsson at even strength (as evidenced above). You're holding Smith to an unfair standard by saying he "only put up 15 points" and completely ignoring the lack of PP opportunity. And forgive me if I don't exactly defer to Blashill as some genius with his personnel decisions, seeing how he handled the usage of Z, Dats, Tatar, Helm, Richards, AA, Glendening, and Ericsson last season.

 

[Pavels Dog]

If you can't see that Smith is much more offensively capable than Jonathan Ericsson by watching them actually play, I don't know what to tell you.

Jonathan Ericsson had 15 points at 5v5. Here's some players who scored near the same range of Ericsson at even strength:

OEL, 20 5v5 points
Weber, 20
Gostisbehere, 19
Brian Campbell, 19
Keith, 18
Leddy, 18
Ristolainen, 18
Seth Jones, 17
Stralman, 16
Justin Faulk, 15.
Seabrook, 15
Phaneuf, 15
Vatanen, 14
Dumba, 12
Green, 12

I guess players like Ristolainen (41 total points), Keith (43), Seth Jones (31), Faulk (37), Seabrook (48), Phaneuf (32), Vatanen (38), and Green (34) don't deserve their PP time as they can barely (or in some cases don't) outproduce a guy who isn't capable of generating offense in Ericsson.

The overall point is, you're really underrating how hard it is to put up big point numbers as a defender without power play opportunity. Even some of the best offensive defenders in the entire NHL can barely outproduce an offensive bum like Ericsson at even strength. You're holding Smith to an unfair standard by saying he "only put up 15 points" and completely ignoring the lack of PP opportunity.

Imo Smith serves no purpose on a PP though. He's not a good passer so not a good QB, doesn't have an accurate shot either. Zone entries could be one thing, but he's hardly Erik Karlsson or Pavel Datsyuk in that regard.

Smith is simply not good offensively. The fact it even has to be argued WHY he's better offensively than Ericsson/Quincey shows how bad he is.

 

[obey86]

Smith is simply not good offensively. The fact it even has to be argued WHY he's better offensively than Ericsson/Quincey shows how bad he is.

It was only brought up because someone who thinks point totals are all that matter brought up the comparison.


And he's above average offensively....which is more than you can say for the other Wings defenders (outside of Green).

 

[Pavels Dog]

It was only brought up because someone who thinks point totals are all that matter brought up the comparison.


And he's above average offensively....which is more than you can say for the other Wings defenders (outside of Green).

Above average by which metric? He's worse than Green, Kronwall and Dekeyser offensively so even on a team with a defense that's bad offensively, he struggles to be above average.

 

[njx9]

Above average by which metric? He's worse than Green, Kronwall and Dekeyser offensively so even on a team with a defense that's bad offensively, he struggles to be above average.

Worse by which metric?

Brendan Smith is one of the worst passers on the team. Anyone who says he is good at "passing it cleanly" has not been paying attention. He passes it into skates, ices the puck more than anyone else due to bad passes, frequently passes it right to opposing players, and doesn't really have good vision.

Smith's potential is more as a puck-rushing d-man than a PMD.

I don't buy that he 'frequently' passes it to opposing players, and that absolutely doesn't match what I saw last year. It stinks of confirmation bias. Further, the comparison was to Quincey, where I do think Smith was a substantially better passer. But it's Brendan Smith, so I don't really expect rational response or anything approaching coherence in any discussion about him.

 

[Ezekial]

It was only brought up because someone who thinks point totals are all that matter brought up the comparison.


And he's above average offensively....which is more than you can say for the other Wings defenders (outside of Green).

Not to mention the amount more ES minutes players like Seabrook (~500), Faulk (~300), Ericsson (225), and Ristolainen (600) to name a few.

Risto had freakin 4 more points in 600 more mintues. That's 10 full games of even strength playing time. Or, 3/5 Smith's total playing time.
I'm not here saying Smith is and all star or even good, people need to gtfo with spewing numbers without context all day.

 

[BonkTastic]

Thanks for the feedback, guys. Appreciated!

 

[Pavels Dog]

Worse by which metric?

Goals, assists, points, contract, eye test.

When Brendan Smith is 35 years old and a 3rd pairing guy in the AHL there will still be people around here talking about how he's on the verge of a breakout season and how the latest obscure and devoid of context advanced stats show he's as good as Erik Karlsson.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

You do realize he didn't play on the PP right? You can't expect many more points from a non-star defenseman who doesn't get power play time and plays limited minutes as is. Even someone like Gostisbehere, an offensive demon, only was able to put up 19 5v5 points in the same ice time as Smith (951 TOI for both) with similar ozone% starts (40% vs. 39.7%).

And spare me "if he deserved it he would have played on the PP" crap. This is the team that had Helm and Richards in the top 6 all season, Abdelkader playing 18 minutes a night, and 2 of the teams best scorers (Tatar, AA) getting team low minutes (14/game and 9/game) on a team that couldn't score. Plenty of Blashill's lineup/usage decisions didn't/don't make any sense.

The thing is, the same argument could be made for Quincey, who got even less PP time than Smith last season. Q hasn't seen much PP time since his first seasons back with the Wings. On Colorado and LA he was averaging over 3 minutes a game and put up his best point totals.

So you have a guy who's actually produced on the PP in the NHL before versus a guy who never really has but has "potential" to.

 

[lomekian]

If you can't see that Smith is much more offensively capable than Jonathan Ericsson by watching them actually play, I don't know what to tell you.

Jonathan Ericsson had 15 points at 5v5. Here's some players who scored near the same range of Ericsson at even strength:

OEL, 20 5v5 points
Weber, 20
Gostisbehere, 19
Brian Campbell, 19
Keith, 18
Leddy, 18
Ristolainen, 18
Seth Jones, 17
Stralman, 16
Justin Faulk, 15.
Seabrook, 15
Phaneuf, 15
Vatanen, 14
Dumba, 12
Green, 12

I guess players like Ristolainen (41 total points), Keith (43), Seth Jones (31), Faulk (37), Seabrook (48), Phaneuf (32), Vatanen (38), and Green (34) don't deserve their PP time as they can barely (or in some cases don't) outproduce a guy who isn't capable of generating offense in Ericsson.

The overall point is, you're really underrating how hard it is to put up big point numbers as a defender without power play opportunity. Even some of the best offensive defenders in the entire NHL can barely outproduce an offensive bum like Ericsson at even strength (as evidenced above). You're holding Smith to an unfair standard by saying he "only put up 15 points" and completely ignoring the lack of PP opportunity. And forgive me if I don't exactly defer to Blashill as some genius with his personnel decisions, seeing how he handled the usage of Z, Dats, Tatar, Helm, Richards, AA, Glendening, and Ericsson last season.

Very much agree with this. Indeed, for all his knackered hip, broken fingers, intermittent physicality and loss of Mobility, Ericsson would be fine as a #6. For a while he was a genuine top 4 guy, but the above injuries have removed his ability to slap it hard, play outlet passes or recovery skate with any great effectiveness.

As for the OP, it would be Smith in a vacuum for 3 reasons.
1) KQ is older and is starting to show slight signs of wear in his play, particularly recovery skating.
2) Smith is not nearly as defensively solid on the whole, but skates better, passes better, can lug the puck and
3) Smith tends to improve at both ends in the playoffs for some unfathomable reason that contradicts his astonishing displays of brainlessness that crop up. This, and the improvement in his play at times last year suggest to me that he could flourish in a different system.

 

[RedWingsfan55]

Smith. No debate.