News Article: Possibly Kronwall's Last Season in the NHL

[Bench]

What were these sheltered minutes? You talked about his oZS% being over 50%, but what was that compared to his teammates?

From 2012-2013 to 2015-2016 he was 18th, 22nd, 23rd, and 15th among all skaters. 6th, 5th, 4th, and 3rd among defensemen who actually played a good chunk of each season.

I think if you want to argue him being sheltered, you have to provide something substantive to demonstrate it.

After Lidstrom retired, Kronwall was anything but sheltered. Are we forgetting him and Ericsson being the #1 PK unit, #1 5v5 unit... the #1 everything? Those two held things down because nobody else could. Literally the only pairing Babcock could put out there to keep the puck out of the net against top lines.

 

[Scypher]

I would agree he was a bargain player, but that doesn't make him a number one D-man. His defense was never that good and it was worse when he stopped playing physically. This is backed up by the advanced stats that show he was never a great driver of possession, and played very sheltered minutes (54% O-zone starts career, and very stable seasons to season).

With all due respect, would you mind asking the main board if Kronwall was a #1D defenceman? I would be amazed if he wasn’t seen as a #1 NHL D by the entire league’s fans and players and probably all around the world (greetings from Austria !) as well.
It’s not about convincing you, that is not my goal, it is about showing respect and honor a true great #1 deserves and to simply not question his legacy.

 

[BinCookin]

^^ People had different definitions of #1 D man is the main problem with this argument.

Some people think there are only about 10 #1 D men in the whole league.... So your entire debate is based off of different definitions (no one can win)

 

[Pavels Dog]

Kronner was 10th in Norris voting at one point. Top 15-16 a couple of times. #1D on a playoff team, with a pretty bad #2 and iffy defensive depth beyond that. He was clearly, undeniably a #1D in his prime (~08-15).

 

[ManwithNoIdentity]

It's time and everyone knows it

Dude had played his heart out and will be a wing for life but personally for him and his health, and the teams need its best for all involved.

There's nothing like old school Kronwall'd hits where even the player on the receiving end were all "oh sh..."

You just have to wonder after these two retire if the playing for Detroit their entire career player will be a thing

 

[newfy]

^^ People had different definitions of #1 D man is the main problem with this argument.

Some people think there are only about 10 #1 D men in the whole league.... So your entire debate is based off of different definitions (no one can win)

I get that side of it, I dont think theres only 10 #1D in the league but some people do. I think theres number 1 D and then above that is the tier of Norris contender/star level dmen by my definition. BUT if prime Kronwall is considered anywhere close to a number 3 dman by your definition (like mentioned in this thread) then your definition is wrong, plain and simple.

 

[ShelbyZ]

If we are out of the playoffs around the deadline and Kronwall agrees to a move I wonder what he could fetch at the TDL? I’d be very pleased with a conditional 3rd.

IMO, it probably doesn't even get to the agreement part.

If Kronwall had never won a Stanley Cup and was having a productive season in a sheltered role, I could maybe see a contender picking him up and giving him a role like Timonen had with the '15 Blackhawks.

However, Kronwall's won it all and has been in the area his entire career. I would imagine he'd rather skate off the ice to a standing ovation for his last game as a Red Wing, than pack up and live in a new city for a 2/3 months for another shot at a Cup.

Knowing the Red Wings front office, they probably wouldn't even approach him to collect his 10 team trade list.

 

[BinCookin]

I get that side of it, I dont think theres only 10 #1D in the league but some people do. I think theres number 1 D and then above that is the tier of Norris contender/star level dmen by my definition. BUT if prime Kronwall is considered anywhere close to a number 3 dman by your definition (like mentioned in this thread) then your definition is wrong, plain and simple.

Oh my definition is there are 31 #1 D men, and 31 #2 D men.... And not all #1 D are the same... etc etc.
I generally hate the definition.

IMO a #1 D man is a player who would likely qualify as top 31 D men in the league.
If we want to talk about superstars... people should use the word superstars.

 

[njx9]

Oh my definition is there are 31 #1 D men, and 31 #2 D men.... And not all #1 D are the same... etc etc.
I generally hate the definition.

IMO a #1 D man is a player who would likely qualify as top 31 D men in the league.
If we want to talk about superstars... people should use the word superstars.

So you'd call Mike Green a 1D just because he got the most minutes on the Wings? Just want to understand how you're looking at it.

 

[newfy]

So you'd call Mike Green a 1D just because he got the most minutes on the Wings? Just want to understand how you're looking at it.

I would say no hes not, but some teams like Nashville have Josi and Subban. Both owuld qualify as a number 1 D in my books. There likely is around 30 guys in the league who I would say fit the definition, its just that some teams dont have any and some teams have more than one. It balances out in the long run

 

[Sparty]

If Zetterberg's not gonna play, I hope they'd make Kronwall the captain for his final year. Dude deserves it.

 

[BinCookin]

So you'd call Mike Green a 1D just because he got the most minutes on the Wings? Just want to understand how you're looking at it.

Two other poster's above were having this argument.. not me, just to be clear.

And my point was everyone has a different definition of the word #1 D man.

Its such a subjective term, that it makes a discussion stupid, everyone wants to know where to draw the line...
But there is no real line, there is no nuance with the definition.
What im saying is that calling Green a #1 OR #2 D man completely means nothing at all to me. I don't care what we call Green.

Here is my actual "method" or rating D men:


Numerical Method (Best to Worst)

1. Player 1
2. Player 2
3. Player 3
4. Player 4
etc.

I would divide this list into: (Average of last 5 years on talent lists)

Superstars (Subban, Burns, Karlsson, Doughty, Weber)
Stars (Carlson, Hedman, Byfuglien, Suter, Ekblad, Letang, Giordano, Pietrangelo, Keith, OEL, Josi, Chara)
Solid top pairing caliber D man (Phaneuf, Vlasic, Seabrook, Shattenkirk, Fowler, Yandle, E. Johnson, Boychuk, Dumba, Niskanen, Hamilton, Trouba, Myers, Jones, Ristolainen, Green, Slavin, Krug, H. Lindholm, M. Reilly, Gostisbehere, Klingberg, Muzzin)
Quality Tweener (#2-#3 debatable): (Staal, Sekera, Petry, Schultz, Parayko, Barrie, Leddy, Goligoski, Bouwmeester, Edler, Faulk, Brodin, Pesce, Martinez)
*Player order within each category by high salary to low salary - i used capfriendly to find the names*

With an Error rate of 1 position between

Superstar - Star - Solid top pairing guy - Top/2nd pairing guy.

Thats how i would rate D men. And by my list Green would be in "solid top pairing guy" with an error (debatable) range of +/- 1 position of those names listed (like any other name on that list)

Or another way would be somewhere from 25th to 40th best Defenseman in the league...

These definitions are both much better than "is he a #1 or #2 or #3 D man".

 

[kliq]

So you'd call Mike Green a 1D just because he got the most minutes on the Wings? Just want to understand how you're looking at it.

For me, being a #1 D-man means you are one of the 31 best D-men in the league. Being a #1 guy on a bad team does not make you a #1 d-man, just like be a #2 on a great team (ie. Subban/Josi) does not mean you are not a #1 D-man. I believe there is a difference between being a legit #1 D-man, and being a teams top D-man if that makes sense. Green is not a #1 D-man.

 

[turkeyslurpees]

Hoping to see at least 10 more players get Kronwalled.

 

[Datsyukian Deke]

Should have been about two seasons ago for him to hang them up, give or take.