Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If you want access to members only forums on HSO, you will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member. ?

Burns- Future top defenseman in NHL?


WildCountry

Recommended Posts

Actually I think it was Schultz that got the 21 million for 6 years if I remember right.

I love watching Burns play. It's refreshing to see a Wild player that can actually pinch down and step into the play to create something for our offense. I think he's going to be a great player for a long time. He looks great in the shootouts as well which doesn't look good for Nummellin getting off the bench any time soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think burns will become one of the top defensemen in the league, barring injury. As he gains experience and confidence his game is only going to get better. The best thing about the way he can get into the offense like he does is that he almost always gets back into position if play turns the other way. Not many can do that. Plus he sweeps half the zone with that stick of his!!

IMO guys like Burns, Sheppard etc bode well for our future. If only we could get rid of guys like Skoula, Hill, Nummelin, even Johnnson and get some solid defense we could make a serious run.

When you only have 3 out of 8 with + points it makes it a lot tougher to win.

Burns +8

Carney +8

Schultz +2

Foster -2

Nummelin -2

Johnnson -9

Hill -12

Skoula -15

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I concur on Burns-huge upside and will get better as he fills out and matures more. Skoula needs to go w/out a doubt. Hill ended up being a bad pick up. I like Nummy as a guy we can throw out there on the PP or in a shootout situation but he definitely is lacking in the physical dep't. I disagree on Johnsson. Yes he is a minus whatever, but from what I have seen lately he is one of the few guys other than Burns and Schultz who can skate it out of our end and create scoring chances . Decent hands. He has even stepped up and starting making some hits so I think we need him. He has improved quite a bit IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: 8-Ball
I disagree on Johnsson. Yes he is a minus whatever, but from what I have seen lately he is one of the few guys other than Burns and Schultz who can skate it out of our end and create scoring chances . Decent hands. He has even stepped up and starting making some hits so I think we need him. He has improved quite a bit IMO.

Johnnson will be making more than $5 million per season the next 2 years. He is way overpaid for the things he does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am really impressed with him. So far he has made some pretty good decisions about getting involved with the O. Yet he still keeps his eye on the blue line and hustles back when he needs to. How many odd man rushes have you seen him come flying back into the play when it looked like he was beat. It is fun to watch him develop his offensive style of defense. Now all we need are five more years to develop another center that can hit and win a draw. Who will it be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: yakfisher
Now all we need are five more years to develop another center that can hit and win a draw. Who will it be?

Sheppard is the name that comes to mind but the window for the Wild will be the next couple of years. They need to get this kind of center next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought they needed it this year just like everyone else. Hopefully they get one for next season, or it could be another year that frustrates fans. I'm not saying the season is over, I just think it will be one heck of a battle to get to the finals with the players they have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: yakfisher
I just think it will be one heck of a battle to get to the finals with the players they have.

Alot of people thought that about the 03' team as well, you never know what can happen during the playoffs!!

Big game tonight, must win to get 2 more points

Go Wild!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: walleyes12
 Originally Posted By: yakfisher
I just think it will be one heck of a battle to get to the finals with the players they have.

Alot of people thought that about the 03' team as well, you never know what can happen during the playoffs!!

Big game tonight, must win to get 2 more points

Go Wild!!

And as I recall in '03 it was one heck of a battle. Fun to watch, but a heck of a battle none the less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love when people rip Kim and Skoula, do they not realize that these players would be grabbed instantly by any other team?

Plus minus is overated in my book. I would like to see the plus minus of these players when its 5 on 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kim Johnson ok I do not mind him at all good player hard worker. Skoula on the other hand is just bad. I don't care if he won the game last night he shouldn't be stepping up when it's 4-4 anyway but hey we got the win. Ill cheer for Skoula but man your big your afraid to give a hit and worse of all your afraid to take a hit you can't be looking over you shoulder every time you go into the corner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: PierBridge
 Originally Posted By: NAPAFISH

Plus minus is overated in my book. I would like to see the plus minus of these players when its 5 on 5.

Why it wouldn't change much if at all.

Some high plus players are inflated cause they get tons of power play time, where as some are less with a lot of kills.

Must you always argue??

I just think that even strength play would be a better determination of a defensemen 's value

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: NAPAFISH
 Originally Posted By: PierBridge
 Originally Posted By: NAPAFISH

Plus minus is overated in my book. I would like to see the plus minus of these players when its 5 on 5.

Why it wouldn't change much if at all.

Some high plus players are inflated cause they get tons of power play time, where as some are less with a lot of kills.

Must you always argue??

I just think that even strength play would be a better determination of a defensemen 's value

I wasn't arguing at al.

You used "these players" I was pointing out the difference in plus minus stats by Kim and Skoula who you mentioned in your post wouldn't be much different with or without Power Play points factored in.

Now that you clarified for me that you meant the whole plus minus proccess system, the people that run NHL teams understand the difference between even strength and PP its a very good stat to judge how defensive defensemen/forwards are playing within the team scheme. sleep.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Originally Posted By: NAPAFISH
 Originally Posted By: PierBridge

Plus minus is overated in my book. I would like to see the plus minus of these players when its 5 on 5.

Some high plus players are inflated cause they get tons of power play time, where as some are less with a lot of kills.

Players do not recieve a + when they score on the power play, nor do players recieve a - when they give up a power play goal. If a team gives up a shorthanded goal the 5 on the ice recieve a - and the 4 on the ice that scored gets a +

All +/- is 5 on 5, 4 on 4, 3 on 3, and shorthanded goals for and against.

+/- is bigger than you think. Our checking line with have bigger - cause they go against the other teams top line every night.

+/- is a good way to judge a defenseman. There job is not let the other team score. Most offensive defenseman will have a - rating because they take more chances. A good example is Sheldon Souray last year with Montreal(-28), Rob Blake with the Kings(-26) and Zdeno Chara with the Bruins(-21).

Of the Top 20(D) in +/- last year I would consider 6 were offensive defenseman.

Lindstrom +40

Preissing +40

Campbell +28

Pronger +27

Boumeester +20

Timmonen +20

The others were "stay at home" defenseman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.