kipwinger

Dear Jeff Blashill, Don't change anything. Sincerely, Everyone

C'mon guys. Keep playing like you were. Plenty of time to tie this up.

Speed and tenacity needs to be this team's identity going forward. Aggressive, aggressive, aggressive.

Even though it didn't yield a goal, that last powerplay looked a LOT better. As does our all around effort tonight. Regardless of the outcome I wouldn't chance a thing for next game if I were Blashill.

Can anybody on our team hit the net with the puck? So many missed shots.

It's that whole, "win one for the Gipper" mentality. Apparently winning is easy if you "want it" and if you are losing its because you "don't care". Not, you know, the product of careful preparation and execution of a well developed strategy that plays to your strengths and minimizes your weaknesses.

I love our speed, and our transitions, this game. Now if we could get some guys to play in the middle of the offensive zone. All our offense comes from the rush, which is fine, but we'd be a lot better off if we got shots from the middle when we have sustained offensive zone pressure. Too much perimeter shooting.

I thought we looked really good the last two periods last game. I was hoping we'd build on that.

Didn't catch the first, how did we look?

The fallacy here is that we've got bad players, and that we need to change them. Our players are good, and didn't magically forget how to play from one year to the next. The fact that they're universally all less good than they were a year ago suggests there's a systemic problem. The key is to make the necessary adjustments to get our good players back to the level they've demonstrated they're capable of. What's troubling is that our coaching staff currently seems to have no idea how to do that. In hindsight it would probably have been a good idea to go out and get an established assistant coach with a track record of power play success. But hindsight is what it is.

Its not fundamentally different then saying "if you want Jurco to score more give him 20 minutes a night and power play time". Sure he will score a little more, but that ignores the fact that you then WONT be giving that time to better, more capable, players. The Wings did EXACTLY what you're advocating with Ian White. And while he did score more them team was worse off for it because we had a depth defenseman playing big minutes. Which is a relative loss for the overall product regardless of what it did for White's stat line.

I'm not arguing that he's had the same amount. He hasn't. I'm arguing that he's been given plenty of chances to earn power play time and hasn't. Likely because he's not any good on the power play. And if that's the case, he probably isn't going to fix the problem. He is marginally outscoring Quincey and Marchenko, neither of whom have any power play time. He's just not a great offensive player. There's plenty of other things he's fine at, but your intent to paint him as "offensive" based on his possession numbers and natural athleticism don't ring true. The guy doesn't score much, thems the facts.

I'm all for fixing problems. I am not, however, in favor of replacing player with worse players. For all his good possession stats, Smiths game has not translated into more points for our team. Green, Knonwall, and Dekeyser are all more "offensive". To suggest replacing Green with Smith on the power play is laughable. Sure its bad, but its not going to improve by putting a less offensive guy out there. Green has 9 more assists than Smith has total points. Clearly he's more capable of generating goals than Smith. Look, I'm frustrated with the lack of scoring too. And I'm a huge believer in possession analytics. But they only matter if they lead to more points. And in Smiths case they don't. I mean, if you follow the logic that "if its broke, replace current players simply with different players" then you should also favor having Helm on the power play. Or Glendening. I mean, it can't be worse right? Except it can, and will be, if you take capable guys out of those spots. The goal should be to get our scorers to score more, like they have previously, not replace them with guys who have never done it in the first place.

Look, I don't have a problem with Smith. He's playing well this year. But his offensive potential has not translated to the NHL, and his weaknesses (defensive zone coverage mostly) would get exposed playing 25 minutes a night. I think he's be best as an Oduya, Anton Stralman, type. He will probably not score much, but could still be a decent puck mover and pk guy. And we have to stop with this fallacy that he just needs power play time to start scoring. For the last three years he's been given opportunities to earn power play time out of camp, and he wasn't delivered. For all his offensive attributes at lower levels, he's just not a point producer in the NHL. As evidenced by the fact that he scores less than other guys who don't get power play time either.

I'm still happy. But I do miss Franzen.

He's actually having a good season. He was injured last year and is rounding into form again. Unfortunately he can't be sent down again, so he has to make the team out of camp next season to avoid waivers or a trade.

Smart move. The Grifs likely lose Ouellet, Sproul, and Jensen after this year. Need to restock the cupboard.

I was suggesting that Smith is good at puck movement, and transition, like Green and Kronwall. And I think out team does need better defense to offense transition. In terms of pairing him with one of them, I'm not against it. I was simply deferring to the tendency our coaches have had to put a good puck mover with a stay at home guy. I agree that Smith is better than Marchenko though. Ideally we would have all of kronwall, green, dekeyser, and smith in the lineup filled out with two of the remaining three. I also don't think either Qiuncey or Ericsson are "bad", theyre both good in the defensive zone. But I do think Ericsson throws the puck away too much on the breakout, which is killing our ability to enter the ozone with speed.

Let me put it this way, the fact that these particular guys are seen as alternatives to one another is troubling. Smith is our best possession defenseman (not best offensive defenseman, and there's a difference). Marchenko is a good stay at home guy and pk option. Smith should be competing with Kronwall, Green, and (formerly) Kindl. Marchenko should be competing with Dekeyser, Quincey, and Ericsson. The fact that they're competing with each other is sort of willy nilly. But then again, if taking Ericsson out if the lineup is a non starter you're left with silly options.

Please stop putting us on the power play. Please?

Dude, glorify Babcock all you want. I think we miss Jim Hiller a hell of a lot more than than we do Babs. Give our current team a powerplay that's 2nd in the league and we aren't even talking about missing the playoffs right now.

We were heavily injured for one of those years. Actually, we were second in the league. The team that was first won their division and a playoff round. So I think injuries in general aren't a very good excuse. Plus, we haven't missed the playoffs...yet. So you're putting the cart before the horse a bit.

Babcock's teams were in the EXACT same position the last two years, maybe three. Each year we went down to the final few games before locking up a playoff spot. I don't disagree that the coaching is problematic. It is. But lets not romanticize the past. Babcock was just as bad in recent years.

Its not unprecedented. If I recall correctly Zetterberg was scratched as recently as 2006 or 2007.

Firstly, I was making a large point about how people perceive "defensive ability". Not comparing Tatar vs. Glendening with some point about our roster. Also, Quite a lot of our players are as good or better than Chicago's. Tatar wouldn't crack their roster but Tomas Fleishmann does? Lol. Chicago is better than us because their top players are WAY better than our top players. Not because their secondary players are better. Toews, Kane, Keith, and Seabrook are much better than Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Kronwall, and Dekeyser (?). Much. With that said I think there are a number of ways in which we can improve our lot given our current lineup. And i think there are lots of ways I think we can improve our secondary guys. But we're not likely going to compete for a Cup until we have high end players (in their prime) again. And I'm not talking about good complimentary players, I'm talking about guys who can carry a team night in and night out (kinda like Kane and Toews do). Switch all our none core guys with Chicago's and we're still not any good. So it's not like their roster moves are what's putting them over the top. If anything, the fact that they've torn their team apart three times and won three Cups is proof that it doesn't matter who they put around their good guys, not that they've got some winning recipe for player acquisition.