• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Richdg

What is more important?

Rate this topic

   73 members have voted

  1. 1. More important?

    • Great forwards/average defense
      13
    • average forwards/great defense
      54

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

44 posts in this topic

I've always felt strong team defense with 'decent' talent up front can win the Cup...Won't be the most exciting team to watch, but then again if you win the Cup how bad could it be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always felt strong team defense with 'decent' talent up front can win the Cup...Won't be the most exciting team to watch, but then again if you win the Cup how bad could it be?

How's that working for the rangers?

Both Pitt, Chicago, Detroit, Boston, la have good balance when they all won.

So balance is key IMO. But I also feel you do need some stars up front more so than defense. Teams that win seem to have an awesome top 6 and a decent bottom 6. Then defense need a great shutdown pair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure I'll be in the minority but I'd rather have great forwards and average defense with the caveat of having an above average goalie and the forwards are responsible on defense. Based on this series against Boston, if you can't score no matter how good your defense plays, you're still gonna lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I ask is because right now we don't have either. Nor do we have enough pieces to have both for a couple more years. So for us to improve-and maybe this is the better question, which do we spend our assets on? Do we strengthen the BL group even if it means weakening our forwards, or build up the forwards and play with what we have on D. Not an easy choice.

For us to have a great D we need a true top pair guy. To get such a guy is going to cost several of our good young forwards. Just as an example....... The Kings call and offer up Doughty but want Nyquist, tatar, and Sproul in return. Would you do it?

OR

Snow calls and offers up tavaras for the same package.

Now neither is going to happen. But I think you all understand the question I am asking.

Edited by Richdg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure I'll be in the minority but I'd rather have great forwards and average defense with the caveat of having an above average goalie and the forwards are responsible on defense. Based on this series against Boston, if you can't score no matter how good your defense plays, you're still gonna lose.

And in the last several years team have won with that formula. That's what I voted for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still believe in the theory that offense wins games but defense wins championships.

Pissburg

Chicago

Boston

LA

say different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are great teams-in both ends. But which is more important? if you win a game say 4-1, what was the reason you won? the fact that you scored 4 goals or the fact that you gave up 1? yes tall grass stuff I understand. But there is a reason why in most sports people will tell you "defense wins championships".

Hockeymom1960 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How's that working for the rangers?

Both Pitt, Chicago, Detroit, Boston, la have good balance when they all won.

So balance is key IMO. But I also feel you do need some stars up front more so than defense. Teams that win seem to have an awesome top 6 and a decent bottom 6. Then defense need a great shutdown pair.

I don't follow the Rangers - however I have heard about that Lunqvist fella between the pipes...But seriously - I haven't heard about the Rangers having a 'stellar' defense.

Pissburg

Chicago

Boston

LA

say different.

I could say the same about the NJ Devils, but since that was so many moons ago.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't follow the Rangers - however I have heard about that Lunqvist fella between the pipes...But seriously - I haven't heard about the Rangers having a 'stellar' defense.

I could say the same about the NJ Devils, but since that was so many moons ago.....

Well I agree the devils and wings for example won with balance and good/great goal contending but that was before the cap. After the cap it's the team that prioritize offense and having a really good top 6 that are winning the cup most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I agree the devils and wings for example won with balance and good/great goal contending but that was before the cap. After the cap it's the team that prioritize offense and having a really good top 6 that are winning the cup most.

Well - I agree with what you wrote above.....However - the op's question was more or less 'one or the other'...

Defense with great goaltending but mediocre offense or great offense with mediocre defense and goaltending....There's nothing about balance...I'll stick with what I said earlier - strong D, and goaltending.

Hockeymom1960 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well - I agree with what you wrote above.....However - the op's question was more or less 'one or the other'...

Defense with great goaltending but mediocre offense or great offense with mediocre defense and goaltending....There's nothing about balance...I'll stick with what I said earlier - strong D, and goaltending.[/quote

That's fine...I'll stick with what is winning cups :). Also it says nothing about goaltending just offense/defense.

Which IMO is most important is you NEED. A good goalie. A Howard rinne lundquist quick etc etc

Edited by DeGraa55

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well - I agree with what you wrote above.....However - the op's question was more or less 'one or the other'...

Defense with great goaltending but mediocre offense or great offense with mediocre defense and goaltending....There's nothing about balance...I'll stick with what I said earlier - strong D, and goaltending.[/quote

That's fine...I'll stick with what is winning cups :). Also it says nothing about goaltending just offense/defense.

I'm assuming great defense with an exceptional netminder...But maybe that wasn't the op's intent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask the predators how this worked for them...

I think you need to put up goals and have a decent D - and a good goalie to make saves.

Predators have never had even an average offense. Their best offensive forward just played on our 4th line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those aren't great choices, you need a combination of great/good players on both sides of the puck as well as a big time goalie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still believe in the theory that offense wins games but defense wins championships.

Pissburg

Chicago

Boston

LA

say different.

I don't get what you are trying to say. All of those teams except for maybe Pittsburgh had Championship caliber defence and goaltending when they won.

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I agree the devils and wings for example won with balance and good/great goal contending but that was before the cap. After the cap it's the team that prioritize offense and having a really good top 6 that are winning the cup most.

I'd have to partially disagree. LA in particular won with defense and goaltending. That was a huge part for Boston as well. Chicago has a great top 6, but also a very good defense. Pittsburgh hasn't won anything since their Cup, their defense and goaltending being the reason. Even when they did win, they won by playing very good defense in the final two games.

You do need a strong offense, but you need strong defense and goaltending as well. Could get away with an average defense maybe if you have a great goalie, or vice versa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get what you are trying to say. All of those teams except for maybe Pittsburgh had Championship caliber defence and goaltending when they won.Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk

Boston has how many injuries on defense? Their defense has less games played in playoffs then most. Chicago has Keith and seabrooke then who?

I'm mostly getting at the star power. Chicago atop six consist of toews Kane hossa and sharpe plus two complimentary guys. Pittsburgh is same way. Boston id say doesn't have the star power as much up front but more balanced and good players top to bottom.

I'd have to partially disagree. LA in particular won with defense and goaltending. That was a huge part for Boston as well. Chicago has a great top 6, but also a very good defense. Pittsburgh hasn't won anything since their Cup, their defense and goaltending being the reason. Even when they did win, they won by playing very good defense in the final two games.

You do need a strong offense, but you need strong defense and goaltending as well. Could get away with an average defense maybe if you have a great goalie, or vice versa.

You mean doughty who is considered an offensive defenseman? And letang?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimately, it comes down to puck possession. Great defense is what gets you there. Great defense is more than just d-zone coverage. It's the transition game, the first passes. Great offense comes from great defense. Great defense doesn't come from great offense.

The Kings are so good defensively because they don't spend any time in their zone. Their defensemen know how to manage the puck once they regain possession. If they have the puck and they're not forechecking or cycling in the o-zone, they're pushing the play up the ice, away from Quick (who, yes, does benefit greatly from all this). That means they're not embarking on African safaris deep within their zone every 40 seconds like we are. They're spending a lot of time on the attack, because they're spending little time in their zone. They're spending little time in their zone because they "defend" well. They move the puck out of their zone and through neutral ice well.

Arguably the best top three we've ever had is Lidstrom, Rafalski, Kronwall. Three offense-minded, puck-moving, possession-savvy veteran defensemen. Lidstrom and Rafalski especially - they knew how to take care of business in their own end and put us on the attack with brilliant breakouts, a quick-strike transition. And that's saying nothing of their work in the o-zone. They were spectacular quarterberbacks, and they could bomb it from the points.

We miss the old Mule. We miss Z and D in their prime. But, more than anyone else, we miss Lidstrom and Rafalski, and the luxury of being able to play Kronwall on the second pairing. (I'd also take Stuart over Quincey.) I mean, think about it. Our forward corps isn't bad, even with the injuries we've had. It's actually quite good. It should've been scoring at a much better clip. What went wrong? Was it beause we just needed one more top-sixer? Was it because we didn't have Thomas Vanek? Would Vanek have been the difference? Doubtful.

What we need is a veteran top-four defensemen who, above all else, does good things with the puck.

frankgrimes likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0