Mike Babcock on Luke Glendening: Proper assessment or mancrush?

[SpikeDDS]

During the game last night, Ken Daniels quote Mike Babcock from that morning saying the following:

"Other than Nick Lidstrom, Steve Yzerman, Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Crosby, Thaves, and Bergeron, Luke Gendening is the most competitive player I've ever coached."

Am I wrong for thinking there's some mancrushing involved here? I'm not saying Glendening has played badly. Not at all. But to put him in this company seems absurd to me. I start seeing Glendening taking over a game and willing our team to wins, and I will gladly take this back, but right now, I'm seeing a solid player, but not a player whose competitiveness come close to transcending the game.

Am I out of line, or should Babs remember to buy chocolates?

Edited March 28, 2014 by SpikeDDS

[WingNut722]

@SpikeDDS

 

I doubt it's mancrush.  Babs is never one to heap praise on someone without a reason.  And it's not just his on-ice performance that goes into that calculation.  His work ethic in practices, locker room attitude, all that behind-the-scenes stuff we never see.

 

So, given the two choices at the bottom of your statement -- you're out of line.

[yave1964]

@SpikeDDS@WingNut722

 

  Glendening does a GREAT job of getting under opponents skin, something the Wings have been sorely lacking. After nine years of watching skilled players with very little nasty streak maybe Babs simply is reacting to actually having a player with a attitude on the team. We have too many skilled players without a dagger to dig into the other team. It is fun watching other teams draw stupid penalties every night for hitting Glendening after he gets under their skin. Smart young player, the points will come. Nice addition for his unique style.

[SpikeDDS]

@SpikeDDS 

So, given the two choices at the bottom of your statement -- you're out of line.

Yeah, nope, I'm not ready to swallow that just yet.

For the record I LIKE Glendening, and as @yave1964 said, I agree his kind of play is the kind the Wings need and have needed for a while. And I would also agree that because of this style of play that his role on the RWs is not and may not be primarily a scoring role and that should be taken into consideration, especially in comparison with guys like Stevie, Pav, Z, and Crosby.

Now I also grant that he doesn't have that many games under his belt, and for many of the first games, he had limited minutes, although Babs has seemed to like him almost from the very start, so his minutes haven't been as limited as other rookies' have been. And yet he is now playing his what? 47th game and has yet to score one goal?! If Franzen did that, we'd be calling for his head!

Then, you look at the names on that list. In all of these cases with the possible exception of Bergeron (but I like Bergeron, so it's hard to say) the driving force behind these guys' competitiveness is their wills; their wills to win, and their wills to score. They all have or had the potential to take control of a game and make it theirs. Kinda like Isaiah Thomas used to do at his prime. These guys are like that. Glendening can't even score his first goal, for Pete's sake! And again, I'm not saying I don't like him. I DO like him. I just don't think the will that he has displayed on the ice during games warrants being included on a list like that one. Being competitive in practice may be nice, but if you are really the 8th most competitive player that Babs has coached, how can you have only willed yourself to ZERO NHL goals in 47 games? If he's THAT competitive, he's gotta at least will himself one goal! Get in front of the net and not be denied until the puck is in there. That's what these guys do, or in the case of Nick, completely eliminate an opposing star player from being a threat for a game.

Call Glendening a great competitor. Say he's got gobs of potential. But to put him in this company at this stage is taking it too far, IMHO.,