Richdg 267 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 (edited) Just wondering which everyone thinks is the better option. Edited April 27, 2014 by Richdg Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Buppy 1,720 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 Neither is likely to get you very far, depending on how you want to define great and average. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marcaractac 3,962 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 I'd go with neither. You need a complete team to go the distance. 1 Z Winged Dangler reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DeGraa55 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 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
Sabaton617 28 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 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
Richdg 267 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 (edited) 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 April 27, 2014 by Richdg Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DeGraa55 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 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
Hockeymom1960 5,107 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 I still believe in the theory that offense wins games but defense wins championships. 1 Nev reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DeGraa55 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 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
Richdg 267 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 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". 1 Hockeymom1960 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DeGraa55 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 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
dirtydangles 1,328 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 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. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DeGraa55 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 (edited) 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 April 27, 2014 by DeGraa55 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nawein 324 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 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
wings87 1,290 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 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
GoalieManPat 1,007 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 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
Buppy 1,720 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 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
Guest DeGraa55 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 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
Dabura 12,207 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 Great defense. This shouldn't really be up for debate. 2 kipwinger and Hockeymom1960 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frankgrimes 1,836 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 Defens wins championships and you build from the net out, therefore average forwards/great defense 1 Hockeymom1960 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dabura 12,207 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 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. 1 frankgrimes reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dabura 12,207 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 They were spectacular quarterberbacks Typo. That should be "spectaculular." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Crazy 201 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 To win Championships to need above average D. We are not even close to this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rivalred 630 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 Need more solid D to cause turn overs and scoop up rebounds, plus the first outlet passes and shots from the point. Detroit needs to go shopping this off season and come in with a new fall apparel to walk down the runway and pull off a Zoolander Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shinzaki 72 Report post Posted April 27, 2014 I think we're close defensively. Brendan Smith took a huge step forward this past series playing with Kronwall. The Bruins baited him a lot and other than that incident with Chara, he kept his emotions in check and played hockey. Loved that play he made taking Marchand to the outside and then running him into the cage. Kronwall, Smith, Ericcson and DeKeyser is a workable top four. So..out of a pool of Almquist, Sproul, Marchenko, Oulett, Jensen and (someday )Nedomlel, you need a couple of guys to step up to form that third pairing. I like what Quincey has done over the second half of the season and the playoffs...he's not a huge hitter, but he understands positioning and leverage around the cage...but I think he's going to be too expensive to re-sign. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites