GDT: Unofficially Official 19-20 Training Camp Thread

[vladdy16]

Who called him a misfit bust? Not me.
What is there to collaborate on?
Rasmussen couldn't skate well enough to be a passable winger.
Everyone knows that being a center requires more skating. It's a 200-foot game every shift at center.

It's also common for centers to be skilled puck carriers and puck distributors.

You're asking for an awful lot of improvement for him to make it as a legit C.

I want him to succeed. And I think the best path is to make him a power-forward winger who plays netfront.

Just because Larkin - a speed demon - was able to shift from wing to C in his sophomore year doesn't mean that's the right course for Rasmussen.

Good thing none of my arguments hinged on anyone calling him a misfit bust then. That's an example of me freely offering my general thoughts on a message board for context and clarity. Seems pretty disingenuous to point to something that wasnt a part of an argument as a strawman...

What is there to collaborate on? Haha yikes. Our thoughts and opinions man. It's a fan community message board. Often I find myself stating a bold opinion that I later needed to amend, reel in, or abandon, thanks to help from insights and perspectives that are shared here, that I can later see in action.

You keep restating your premise about "skating" and how that relates to differences between wingers and centers. Yet you never elaborate on it, because the specificity necessary to elaborate on it requires less general terminology than "skating", "deking", "passing".

"Everyone knows that being a center requires more skating"

Here's an example. You use skating as a general term, to imply that if your skating doesnt work on wing, it really wont work at center. But even the vague terminology you are using betrays your point, because as we can see, you clearly say "more" skating, not "faster" skating, not even "better" skating. So that would necessitate a deeper dive into what "more" implies. Already your argument is breaking down, because "more" implies more links to traits like "stamina", "efficiency", "intent/awareness" etc. etc. etc. None of which you have come close to touching on.

The only additions you make to your premise, are more personal opinions sold as absolutes, that don't stand to scrutiny. "Not a skilled puck carrier" "Not a puck distributor"

I appreciate your bold take. It's not an absurd take, even if your reasoning is still completely unclear. Can you think of any past or current Power Forward wingers that you are hoping Rasmussen can be similar to? Most players that operate in that space are quite a bit more explosive than Rasmussen has ever shown.

Your last sentence is baffling to me. Rasmussen and Larkin, two guys that by all accounts have played center for most of their lives, you are claiming are converted wingers? What the heck?

But I do really appreciate your posts! I don't necessarily agree with posters that speak in absolutes, but the fact that you are willing to take the time to reply elevates you above most others that post that way. And like I said before, if youre sold on your thoughts on this topic, then we will just wait and see. I'll be the first to remind you if Ras ever gets to where he's putting up 20+20 from the C spot.

 

[Ezekial]

Just because Larkin - a speed demon - was able to shift from wing to C in his sophomore year doesn't mean that's the right course for Rasmussen.

WHAT!?

 

[Killerjas]

- Should have drafted Vilardi
- Should have drafted Tippet
- Should have drafted Liljegren
- Should have drafted Necas
- Should have drafted Välimäki

All were so much better than Rasmussen 2 years ago.

Vilardi might never make it to the NHL with his back issues.

 

[Pavels Dog]

It seems a lot less ridiculous than thinking this guy is going to be a center.
Doesn't skate well enough.
Does pass the puck well enough.
Doesn't carry the puck well enough.
And, if he's center, you make it really, really hard for him to get to the place where needs to be (net front) because since he's backchecking a lot, he's likely going to be the last forward up the ice a lot.

What exactly are you seeing here?

- Good skater for his size. I don't see this is a being a problem long-term.
- At this point probably he isn't a high-end playmaker, but the same things were said about Larkin. Not a playmaking center, not cerebral enough. Hey guess what, 18-19 year olds develop. And if we're looking at Rasmussen as a #2C, you don't need to be an elite playmaker in that role.
- That's way too early to say imo. His puck protection game could easily become elite if you look at how good he already is and the tools he has. Speed and dangles aren't the only way to carry the puck well.
- The center doesn't always need to be first guy back, that's such an old-school way of looking at today's game of hockey. So any guy who is good at driving to the net and good at tipping pucks should never be a center? Only perimeter players should be centers? Imo, this is a 100% made up reason for why Ras couldn't or shouldn't be a C. "Hey kid, if you were more of a perimeter player we'd put you in the middle.. sorry".

 

[nbwingsfan]

Lol no its not. 25 pounds of lean muscle mass is not even close to being possible in 6 months. For someone who is a dedicated lifter with a perfect diet it takes years to attain naturally.

25 pounds is pushing it, but it’s actually MUCH easier to gain lean muscle as a rookie lifter than it is for someone who’s done it for years. The fitter you are, the harder it is to gain muscle.

 

[MBH]

Good thing none of my arguments hinged on anyone calling him a misfit bust then. That's an example of me freely offering my general thoughts on a message board for context and clarity. Seems pretty disingenuous to point to something that wasnt a part of an argument as a strawman...

What is there to collaborate on? Haha yikes. Our thoughts and opinions man. It's a fan community message board. Often I find myself stating a bold opinion that I later needed to amend, reel in, or abandon, thanks to help from insights and perspectives that are shared here, that I can later see in action.

You keep restating your premise about "skating" and how that relates to differences between wingers and centers. Yet you never elaborate on it, because the specificity necessary to elaborate on it requires less general terminology than "skating", "deking", "passing".

"Everyone knows that being a center requires more skating"

Here's an example. You use skating as a general term, to imply that if your skating doesnt work on wing, it really wont work at center. But even the vague terminology you are using betrays your point, because as we can see, you clearly say "more" skating, not "faster" skating, not even "better" skating. So that would necessitate a deeper dive into what "more" implies. Already your argument is breaking down, because "more" implies more links to traits like "stamina", "efficiency", "intent/awareness" etc. etc. etc. None of which you have come close to touching on.

The only additions you make to your premise, are more personal opinions sold as absolutes, that don't stand to scrutiny. "Not a skilled puck carrier" "Not a puck distributor"

I appreciate your bold take. It's not an absurd take, even if your reasoning is still completely unclear. Can you think of any past or current Power Forward wingers that you are hoping Rasmussen can be similar to? Most players that operate in that space are quite a bit more explosive than Rasmussen has ever shown.

Your last sentence is baffling to me. Rasmussen and Larkin, two guys that by all accounts have played center for most of their lives, you are claiming are converted wingers? What the heck?

But I do really appreciate your posts! I don't necessarily agree with posters that speak in absolutes, but the fact that you are willing to take the time to reply elevates you above most others that post that way. And like I said before, if youre sold on your thoughts on this topic, then we will just wait and see. I'll be the first to remind you if Ras ever gets to where he's putting up 20+20 from the C spot.

Yes, I'm sold on my thoughts on Ras, or I wouldn't post them.
Have I been wrong on guys? Yes. Have I been right on guys? Yes.
Are there players who I don't take "sold" positions on? Yes. Veleno and Zadina, for example, are two prospects I believe will be NHLers. But I'm not sure how good they'll be.
I think Ras's true upside is as a top six winger and net-front ability.
Making him a C just seems like a good way to waste years of development.

There are no "absolutes," ie, data, when it comes to opinions on puck carrier or puck distributor.
But these are clear to see to anyone who has watched Rasmussen in NHL exhibition games and NHL games.

I'm not sure what's "baffling" about the Larkin/Ras W to C shift comment.
Larkin had success as a winger as an NHL winger.
His conversion to C was tough in his sophomore year. But he'd made it just fine by year 3.
It was always a solid bet because Larkin had the speed you want in a center. That speed allows him to close gaps on the backcheck. Pick up for other people's mistakes.

Rasmussen, like Larkin, was a center who played wing in his freshman year.
Unlike Larkin, he didn't enjoy success in his freshman year. Unlike Larkin, he doesn't have the speed to close gaps on the backcheck.

Asking this guy to play that every-shift 200-foot game every shift is asking an awful lot for a guy who plays strongest on the walls and in front of the net.

 

[MBH]

- Good skater for his size. I don't see this is a being a problem long-term.
- At this point probably he isn't a high-end playmaker, but the same things were said about Larkin. Not a playmaking center, not cerebral enough. Hey guess what, 18-19 year olds develop. And if we're looking at Rasmussen as a #2C, you don't need to be an elite playmaker in that role.
- That's way too early to say imo. His puck protection game could easily become elite if you look at how good he already is and the tools he has. Speed and dangles aren't the only way to carry the puck well.
- The center doesn't always need to be first guy back, that's such an old-school way of looking at today's game of hockey. So any guy who is good at driving to the net and good at tipping pucks should never be a center? Only perimeter players should be centers? Imo, this is a 100% made up reason for why Ras couldn't or shouldn't be a C. "Hey kid, if you were more of a perimeter player we'd put you in the middle.. sorry".

* Good skater for his size doesn't mean anything. Good skater or not is the question.
* Larkin came into the NHL as a guy with a 1-to-2 goals to assists ratio. Ras's last two years of junior, he was more than 1-to-1. Different kinds of players.
* It's not too early to say. The big slowish centers who are effective at puck carrying had these kinds of skills from day one. They didn't develop them in the NHL.
* Center's being the first guy back isn't old-school. It's how the game is generally played today. Generally, centers match up with centers. It has nothing to do with "perimeter." Nobody would say Crosby is a perimeter guy. Or McDavid.

The "red flags" around Rasmussen were always that he can't produce at 5 on 5. A big reason Rasmussen's 5 on 5 production was weak, even in junior, is because of the flaws in his game that were so evident last year.

He had 14 ES goals in his last year of junior. 16 the previous year.

Look at his NHL stats. Same pattern. 1.06 points/60 at 5 on 5.
Usually, rookies come up, get sheltered, and produce pretty good numbers.
Rasmussen 1.06.
Athanasiou 2.38
Larkin 2.07
Mantha 2.18
Jurco 1.63
Tatar 2.22
Sheahan 2.23
Nyquist 3.04
Bertuzzi 2.08
Frk 1.69
Pulkkinen 1.31.

Rasmussen is so far down this list it's not funny. He's got a ton of work to do.
I'd prefer to not ask him now, after a tough rookie year, to take on the most demanding position in hockey.

 

[lhsgolf19]

Not sure where to put this but



Very good news

 

[vladdy16]

Yes, I'm sold on my thoughts on Ras, or I wouldn't post them.
Have I been wrong on guys? Yes. Have I been right on guys? Yes.
Are there players who I don't take "sold" positions on? Yes. Veleno and Zadina, for example, are two prospects I believe will be NHLers. But I'm not sure how good they'll be.
I think Ras's true upside is as a top six winger and net-front ability.
Making him a C just seems like a good way to waste years of development.

There are no "absolutes," ie, data, when it comes to opinions on puck carrier or puck distributor.
But these are clear to see to anyone who has watched Rasmussen in NHL exhibition games and NHL games.

I'm not sure what's "baffling" about the Larkin/Ras W to C shift comment.
Larkin had success as a winger as an NHL winger.
His conversion to C was tough in his sophomore year. But he'd made it just fine by year 3.
It was always a solid bet because Larkin had the speed you want in a center. That speed allows him to close gaps on the backcheck. Pick up for other people's mistakes.

Rasmussen, like Larkin, was a center who played wing in his freshman year.
Unlike Larkin, he didn't enjoy success in his freshman year. Unlike Larkin, he doesn't have the speed to close gaps on the backcheck.

Asking this guy to play that every-shift 200-foot game every shift is asking an awful lot for a guy who plays strongest on the walls and in front of the net.

You refuse to stick to a variable. On one hand, switching from C to W and back to C is somehow impossible to you. But you have no problem mentioning that he didn't show playmaking skills in the NHL, even though he's only played 4th line wing in the NHL.

It's ridiculous to say "it's clear to say to anyone who has watched" when you are arguing with someone who obviously has, plus lots of Junior footage. All that makes it pretty clear that Ras likes to distribute the puck. Not just along the boards. He cuts high and to the middle on any fixed zone entry and looks for a dish to spring a winger, or set him up on the half wall for the 5 man cycle.

Larkin did not convert to a C his sophmore year! He played center his whole life, and it took some experience for him to adjust to the pro game. Because center is a more tactically taxing position.

If you need world class speed to backcheck to "pick up for other people's mistakes" you are out of position. You'll say 'well speed certainly helps'. Yep.

Rasmussen just played 3 games in a row at center. 3 strong games. Last game he centered Dylan Larkins line. He's either been incredibly fortunate for 180 minutes in a row, or he's a pretty competent center. I know your premise has to do with production ceiling down then line, but it's off to as shaky a start as it could be.

He had a shift where he was on the forecheck, then the back check, stirred up a break out, let his linemates change, and won possession in the offense zone before changing. Coverage, stamina, positioning, superb skating all on full display. If you go back and watch, it puts all most all the variables you are bringing to this discussion to rest.

 

[vladdy16]

* Good skater for his size doesn't mean anything. Good skater or not is the question.
* Larkin came into the NHL as a guy with a 1-to-2 goals to assists ratio. Ras's last two years of junior, he was more than 1-to-1. Different kinds of players.
* It's not too early to say. The big slowish centers who are effective at puck carrying had these kinds of skills from day one. They didn't develop them in the NHL.
* Center's being the first guy back isn't old-school. It's how the game is generally played today. Generally, centers match up with centers. It has nothing to do with "perimeter." Nobody would say Crosby is a perimeter guy. Or McDavid.

The "red flags" around Rasmussen were always that he can't produce at 5 on 5. A big reason Rasmussen's 5 on 5 production was weak, even in junior, is because of the flaws in his game that were so evident last year.

He had 14 ES goals in his last year of junior. 16 the previous year.

Look at his NHL stats. Same pattern. 1.06 points/60 at 5 on 5.
Usually, rookies come up, get sheltered, and produce pretty good numbers.
Rasmussen 1.06.
Athanasiou 2.38
Larkin 2.07
Mantha 2.18
Jurco 1.63
Tatar 2.22
Sheahan 2.23
Nyquist 3.04
Bertuzzi 2.08
Frk 1.69
Pulkkinen 1.31.

Rasmussen is so far down this list it's not funny. He's got a ton of work to do.
I'd prefer to not ask him now, after a tough rookie year, to take on the most demanding position in hockey.

You really need to work on the way you use variables in an argument. "Rookie" is not a reliable variable, when it could mean "18 yo" or "24 yo".

Stats from 'sheltered' players don't mean that much because of the inherently small sample size. Reducing the sample size even further to pts/5 on 5 makes the sample size incredibly small.

That's the reason for inflated numbers. One goal here or there swings the results wildly when you are playing that little. One would risk thinking Chris Shelton had the potential to be one of the greatest HR hitters of all time with your logic.

Also, please name a big slow center that you could tell would be good from day 1?

The problem is you out yourself when you offer too much detail. "Centers generally play against centers" is flat out wrong. "Centers being the first guy back" is wrong. That's not how coverage works with 3 F's and 2 D.

F3 is your back checker. The C often tries to maintain a position at F3, but it's not at all paramount that your C be the F3 when the puck goes the other way.

Then in the D-zone, as things shake out, the C will join the D and support them net front coverage, on the boards and on break out. It's vital that you understand these things, before claiming that a person does or doesn't have what it takes to play the position. Rasmussen gave a crash course in these elements when he played top line C last game, you should check it out.

 

[saska sault]

* Good skater for his size doesn't mean anything. Good skater or not is the question.
* Larkin came into the NHL as a guy with a 1-to-2 goals to assists ratio. Ras's last two years of junior, he was more than 1-to-1. Different kinds of players.
* It's not too early to say. The big slowish centers who are effective at puck carrying had these kinds of skills from day one. They didn't develop them in the NHL.
* Center's being the first guy back isn't old-school. It's how the game is generally played today. Generally, centers match up with centers. It has nothing to do with "perimeter." Nobody would say Crosby is a perimeter guy. Or McDavid.

The "red flags" around Rasmussen were always that he can't produce at 5 on 5. A big reason Rasmussen's 5 on 5 production was weak, even in junior, is because of the flaws in his game that were so evident last year.

He had 14 ES goals in his last year of junior. 16 the previous year.

Look at his NHL stats. Same pattern. 1.06 points/60 at 5 on 5.
Usually, rookies come up, get sheltered, and produce pretty good numbers.
Rasmussen 1.06.
Athanasiou 2.38
Larkin 2.07
Mantha 2.18
Jurco 1.63
Tatar 2.22
Sheahan 2.23
Nyquist 3.04
Bertuzzi 2.08
Frk 1.69
Pulkkinen 1.31.

Rasmussen is so far down this list it's not funny. He's got a ton of work to do.
I'd prefer to not ask him now, after a tough rookie year, to take on the most demanding position in hockey.

Are you a Wings fan? Asking for a friend.

 

[Invictus12]

You're betting on a 6'6 guy with skating issues to find the elite speed needed to break up a rush the other way when he's starting from behind the net or screening the goalie? You must be a man of great faith.

You know, I was just reading the Bertuzzi thread and the first couple of pages has people writing him off. I hope you're making that same mistake.

 

[MBH]

You refuse to stick to a variable. On one hand, switching from C to W and back to C is somehow impossible to you. But you have no problem mentioning that he didn't show playmaking skills in the NHL, even though he's only played 4th line wing in the NHL.

Playing C in the WHL or NCAA isn't the same as playing C in the NHL. Which is likely one reason why the Wings ease these guys into it.

It's ridiculous to say "it's clear to say to anyone who has watched" when you are arguing with someone who obviously has, plus lots of Junior footage. All that makes it pretty clear that Ras likes to distribute the puck. Not just along the boards. He cuts high and to the middle on any fixed zone entry and looks for a dish to spring a winger, or set him up on the half wall for the 5 man cycle.

You mean highlight packages? Or did you watch a ton of Tri-City games?
I don't care much about highlight packages. A highlight package might lead you to believe Stacey Roest was a dynamic player.
I care about games I've seen. I've watched him play in two prospect tournaments and this is his third exhibition season. I've also watched him play a ton of NHL games.

He's does not look a playmaker to me. Frankly, I think anyone who refers to him as a playmaking is probably just looking for an internet fight.

Larkin did not convert to a C his sophmore year! He played center his whole life, and it took some experience for him to adjust to the pro game. Because center is a more tactically taxing position.

That's not true.
He went from 100 faceoffs, to 300+ faceoffs, to 1300 faceoffs to nearly 1600 faceoffs.

If you need world class speed to backcheck to "pick up for other people's mistakes" you are out of position. You'll say 'well speed certainly helps'. Yep.

That's not true.
And you don't need world class speed. You need better speed than Rasmussen.
And out of position? It's hockey. And sometimes plays breakdown. Hustling back is part of the job. Having the speed to get back and help is a major plsu.

Rasmussen just played 3 games in a row at center. 3 strong games. Last game he centered Dylan Larkins line. He's either been incredibly fortunate for 180 minutes in a row, or he's a pretty competent center. I know your premise has to do with production ceiling down then line, but it's off to as shaky a start as it could be.

I wouldn't say he looked good.
I think he's destined for GR at C unless one of our top 4s is hurt.
Through 3 games:
39% CF.
0 goals for. 2 goals against.
0-0-0 3 shots points in 40 minutes of 5 on 5 play.
37% faceoffs.

How's that compare to Veleno. A year younger.
27 minutes at 5 on 5.
0-1-1 4 shots in 27 minutes.
60 percent on faceoffs.
36% CF
1 GF 1GA.

He had a shift where he was on the forecheck, then the back check, stirred up a break out, let his linemates change, and won possession in the offense zone before changing. Coverage, stamina, positioning, superb skating all on full display. If you go back and watch, it puts all most all the variables you are bringing to this discussion to rest.

Great.
Yep. One shift lays everything to rest.

One thing I want to see from Rasmussen... skate with the puck for 3 seconds without dumping it or forcing a pass.

 

[MBH]

You really need to work on the way you use variables in an argument. "Rookie" is not a reliable variable, when it could mean "18 yo" or "24 yo".

Stats from 'sheltered' players don't mean that much because of the inherently small sample size. Reducing the sample size even further to pts/5 on 5 makes the sample size incredibly small.

That's the reason for inflated numbers. One goal here or there swings the results wildly when you are playing that little. One would risk thinking Chris Shelton had the potential to be one of the greatest HR hitters of all time with your logic.

Also, please name a big slow center that you could tell would be good from day 1?

The problem is you out yourself when you offer too much detail. "Centers generally play against centers" is flat out wrong. "Centers being the first guy back" is wrong. That's not how coverage works with 3 F's and 2 D.

F3 is your back checker. The C often tries to maintain a position at F3, but it's not at all paramount that your C be the F3 when the puck goes the other way.

Then in the D-zone, as things shake out, the C will join the D and support them net front coverage, on the boards and on break out. It's vital that you understand these things, before claiming that a person does or doesn't have what it takes to play the position. Rasmussen gave a crash course in these elements when he played top line C last game, you should check it out.

I watched last game. Rasmussen is a liability at Center.
If the Red Wings decide to keep him there, he'll almost certainly be sent to GR for quite awhile to learn the game.
Maybe you remember Rasmussen's last game last year.
At Center.
March 21 vs Blues.

Example 1. Starts with the play at 1:27.
Example 2. Starts at 2:04. Skating with his head down. Gets crushed. Turns it over. Goal against. (and injured for the rest of the season.

 

[Ezekial]

Your avatar says felono and your username says feleno.

 

[ricky0034]

Rasmussen at Center is a great idea if the Wings want a 4th liner

 

[deca guard]

say we look at it as mantha and rasmussen are our top two lines power forwards . larks n jv our centers . tuzzi playing with larks n manth . aa or zad playing with veleno and razz . that stacks up pretty good . imo these big bodied guys with good hands and thinking like manth n razz are very valuable , and i dont care about skating . give them every o zone start to exist as wrecking balls causing havac in opponant zone . draft centers and power forwards then fill in the small talent wingers how ever you can , there last on my draft list . but d and c are first .

 

[deca guard]

“One of the things we got to get Zadina to understand is it’s super hard in this league to self-create,” Blashill said. “In order to self-create, you’ve got to be super-fast or super big and strong and he’s not either one of those, so what he’s got to do is make sure he does a really good job in his give-go game.
“I think sometimes Filip wants to score so bad that he’s trying to do it all himself. We’ll just keep working on trying to get better opportunities to have a give-and-go, give it, dart to areas and get it back.”

Red Wings to Filip Zadina: more give-and-go, less pressing

 

[vladdy16]

Playing C in the WHL or NCAA isn't the same as playing C in the NHL. Which is likely one reason why the Wings ease these guys into it.



You mean highlight packages? Or did you watch a ton of Tri-City games?
I don't care much about highlight packages. A highlight package might lead you to believe Stacey Roest was a dynamic player.
I care about games I've seen. I've watched him play in two prospect tournaments and this is his third exhibition season. I've also watched him play a ton of NHL games.

He's does not look a playmaker to me. Frankly, I think anyone who refers to him as a playmaking is probably just looking for an internet fight.




That's not true.
He went from 100 faceoffs, to 300+ faceoffs, to 1300 faceoffs to nearly 1600 faceoffs.



That's not true.
And you don't need world class speed. You need better speed than Rasmussen.
And out of position? It's hockey. And sometimes plays breakdown. Hustling back is part of the job. Having the speed to get back and help is a major plsu.



I wouldn't say he looked good.
I think he's destined for GR at C unless one of our top 4s is hurt.
Through 3 games:
39% CF.
0 goals for. 2 goals against.
0-0-0 3 shots points in 40 minutes of 5 on 5 play.
37% faceoffs.

How's that compare to Veleno. A year younger.
27 minutes at 5 on 5.
0-1-1 4 shots in 27 minutes.
60 percent on faceoffs.
36% CF
1 GF 1GA.




Great.
Yep. One shift lays everything to rest.

One thing I want to see from Rasmussen... skate with the puck for 3 seconds without dumping it or forcing a pass.

I see, you're just going to keep being evasive when you're mistaken, and reframing the discussion and appealing to your own authority. Not constructive.

If you wouldn't mind explaining to me your take aways from the numbers you just posted for Veleno and Rasmussen.

Are you under the impression that we are debating where Rasmussen ends up this year?

 

[vladdy16]

I watched last game. Rasmussen is a liability at Center.
If the Red Wings decide to keep him there, he'll almost certainly be sent to GR for quite awhile to learn the game.
Maybe you remember Rasmussen's last game last year.
At Center.
March 21 vs Blues.

Example 1. Starts with the play at 1:27.
Example 2. Starts at 2:04. Skating with his head down. Gets crushed. Turns it over. Goal against. (and injured for the rest of the season.

Again, variables and specificity. What exactly do those two examples prove about Rasmussens skating?

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

“One of the things we got to get Zadina to understand is it’s super hard in this league to self-create,” Blashill said. “In order to self-create, you’ve got to be super-fast or super big and strong and he’s not either one of those, so what he’s got to do is make sure he does a really good job in his give-go game.
“I think sometimes Filip wants to score so bad that he’s trying to do it all himself. We’ll just keep working on trying to get better opportunities to have a give-and-go, give it, dart to areas and get it back.”

Red Wings to Filip Zadina: more give-and-go, less pressing

This is the first time I've seen Blashill give a 100% accurate criticism of a player in the media. Not vague, no disappointed dad tone, no platitudes, no irrelevant comments about seniority. It's strangely refreshing.

 

[MBH]

I see, you're just going to keep being evasive when you're mistaken, and reframing the discussion and appealing to your own authority. Not constructive.

If you wouldn't mind explaining to me your take aways from the numbers you just posted for Veleno and Rasmussen.

Are you under the impression that we are debating where Rasmussen ends up this year?

You said Rasmussen has played through three exhibition games.
Those are not the numbers of someone who has played well.

 

[MBH]

Again, variables and specificity. What exactly do those two examples prove about Rasmussens skating?

Just an idea, but it might be OK to stick to Rasmussen, instead of constantly criticizing someone's posting technique. It's pretty clear that this isn't even about Rasmussen.

What is your take on Rasmussen, anyway? That you think he's going to be a good NHL center?
You think his skill set and qualities are best suited for center?

If you're going to continually criticize one's debating technique, you'd be wise to hold yourself to the same standards to which you hold others.

In this particular video, Rasmussen gets to the front of the net, and despite all that reach, can't get to the loose puck in front of the net because his zero-to-whatever speed is really bad.
In the second video, it's more of his puck carrying ability. It's one of the few times Ras doesn't immediate get rid of the puck. And we see why. The game is too fast for him. Lanes and options are opening and closing too fast. He makes a decision, puts his head down thinking one thing, and gets creamed.

Usually, Ras gets the puck on his stick and it's gone before he takes two strides.
In this case, on stride three, he gets lit up.

 

[MBH]

This is the first time I've seen Blashill give a 100% accurate criticism of a player in the media. Not vague, no disappointed dad tone, no platitudes, no irrelevant comments about seniority. It's strangely refreshing.

Yeah. Seems about right.
I would say that Datsyuk/Zetterberg aren't super big/fast.
But neither guy was trying to make the NHL at 19 either.

 

[deca guard]

This is the first time I've seen Blashill give a 100% accurate criticism of a player in the media. Not vague, no disappointed dad tone, no platitudes, no irrelevant comments about seniority. It's strangely refreshing.

blash no doubt has been very positively affected by his new gm