What changes do you think we'll see with Blashill?

[jimmyemeryhunter 2,747]

Well, I've always felt that Babcock's system took both Kindl and Smith's best assets away from them. They're guys who excel at carrying the puck up the ice in transition. Yet Babs wanted quick passes from the defense to the forwards, which puts decision making at a premium and opens them up to the forecheck. And god knows they're both vulnerable in those areas.

Both are better when they're allowed to skate with the puck.

Agreed.

I'd also like to see you become a huge fan of rileys brother.

Not for any personal reason, or me thinking smith is awesome, but I think the conversation would be funny between you and krsmith.

Plus.

I will admit, the last two years he's been one of our better playoff d-men.

[kipwinger 8,524]

Agreed.

I'd also like to see you become a huge fan of rileys brother.

Not for any personal reason, or me thinking smith is awesome, but I think the conversation would be funny between you and krsmith.

Plus.

I will admit, the last two years he's been one of our better playoff d-men.

Well I've always agreed that with krsmith that Brendan's offensive skills weren't being maximized. But that still doesn't excuse his piss poor defense. Although, that might be easier to swallow if he scored more than say...Quincey.

[jimmyemeryhunter 2,747]

Well I've always agreed that with krsmith that Brendan's offensive skills weren't being maximized. But that still doesn't excuse his piss poor defense. Although, that might be easier to swallow if he scored more than say...Quincey.

Ha.

He's still young, hell be alright.

I'd rather he starts coming along and showing signs of progress under blash, then trade him and watch him become an amazing offensive d.

Which he very well could, he has the tools to do so.

[kipwinger 8,524]

Ha.

He's still young, hell be alright.

I'd rather he starts coming along and showing signs of progress under blash, then trade him and watch him become an amazing offensive d.

Which he very well could, he has the tools to do so.

I don't know about all that. He's physically tough, and a good skater. But his shot isn't great. He misses the net, a lot. To be a good offensive defenseman you need a shot. It's why Kindl will ALWAYS score more than Smith does at the NHL level.

[jimmyemeryhunter 2,747]

I don't know about all that. He's physically tough, and a good skater. But his shot isn't great. He misses the net, a lot. To be a good offensive defenseman you need a shot. It's why Kindl will ALWAYS score more than Smith does at the NHL level.

I don't think his shot is that bad, I do however see the huge problem with him getting it on the net.

Which kind of means he doesn't have a good shot, but I think he can learn to control it better.

Kindl should get another chance this coming year though...

Worse Case, we can sign him to a lower contract and make him our 7th guy.

This is the last year of his deal, right?

[kipwinger 8,524]

I don't think his shot is that bad, I do however see the huge problem with him getting it on the net.

Which kind of means he doesn't have a good shot, but I think he can learn to control it better.

Maybe. It would be good for us if he did. But I'm not sure he can. He never scored that way in college or the AHL either. He was just another forward out there. Which is good at lower levels, but I'd imagine if he had a point shot he'd have used it by now. I think he put up good numbers at lower levels because he was a really good skater, and because he had a green light to get into the play down low in the o-zone. I'm not sure he'll be able to replicate that in the NHL. Maybe, but I'm not holding my breath.

Like I said, I think Kindl has more upside under Blash than Smith does. I do, however, think that Smith could have a future in the NHL as a Oduya type guy, or a Stralman type guy. I dont' think he'll score much. But he could help a team in transition, and play good defense, based on his skating and toughness. But he'd have to give up trying to be an offensive d-man and commit himself to defensive responsibility...something he's not done thus far.

[jimmyemeryhunter 2,747]

Maybe. It would be good for us if he did. But I'm not sure he can. He never scored that way in college or the AHL either. He was just another forward out there. Which is good at lower levels, but I'd imagine if he had a point shot he'd have used it by now. I think he put up good numbers at lower levels because he was a really good skater, and because he had a green light to get into the play down low in the o-zone. I'm not sure he'll be able to replicate that in the NHL. Maybe, but I'm not holding my breath.

Like I said, I think Kindl has more upside under Blash than Smith does. I do, however, think that Smith could have a future in the NHL as a Oduya type guy, or a Stralman type guy. I dont' think he'll score much. But he could help a team in transition, and play good defense, based on his skating and toughness. But he'd have to give up trying to be an offensive d-man and commit himself to defensive responsibility...something he's not done thus far.

That's not a bad plan of action, maybe that's what babs saw in him and tried to push him into a more defensive role.

If he can become that, I'd be ecstatic.

As for the bolded, I said something about moving him to forward full time a while back, and if I recall correctly you were against that...

If it was, why would you be averse to that?

I'm also wondering about Quincey under blashill, he was becoming a decent point producer in Colorado and LA, I wonder if the new coaching staff will try to recapture some of his offense now that he's shown he can be a adequate in his own zone.

It wouldn't be a stretch to say hes going to put up better number next year than he did last, especially if he and did are still together.

[kipwinger 8,524]

That's not a bad plan of action, maybe that's what babs saw in him and tried to push him into a more defensive role.

If he can become that, I'd be ecstatic.

As for the bolded, I said something about moving him to forward full time a while back, and if I recall correctly you were against that...

If it was, why would you be averse to that?

I'm also wondering about Quincey under blashill, he was becoming a decent point producer in Colorado and LA, I wonder if the new coaching staff will try to recapture some of his offense now that he's shown he can be a adequate in his own zone.

It wouldn't be a stretch to say hes going to put up better number next year than he did last, especially if he and did are still together.

Because I believe in specialization. If you've got more defense than forwards, trade the defense for the forwards you need. Don't try to convert one into the other.

Also, because we've got TONS of depth fowards (which is what he'd be), so why bother?

[jimmyemeryhunter 2,747]

Because I believe in specialization. If you've got more defense than forwards, trade the defense for the forwards you need. Don't try to convert one into the other.

Also, because we've got TONS of depth fowards (which is what he'd be), so why bother?

because his speed, his offensive awareness, and he hits.

I like what he brings to the team, and agree we have a a logjam of forwards, and probably some that can bring that in Cally and Ferraro, but I think smith could be a more offensive version of that.

Plus, his shot from the point isn't that great, but I have seen him let go a decent snapshot/wristshot, and with his size he'd be good net front.

I don't think he'd ever be as good as holmstrom in front of the goalie, but he's big, fast, and strong on the puck...

Like how they justified using Abby on the top line with pav and z to begin with,

Puck retrieval...

And its not like it would take long to get him into the groove of playing offense, he didn't look out of place at all on the fourth line when we were destroyed by injuries two years back...

He gave the fourth line someone who could Carry the puck up the ice, which it could have just been because of the fourth liners he was with at the time, but he stood out in a good way there.

Plus, having that kind of versatility would make him much more valuable to us...

I get that its a lot different moving up to forward from d, than from wing to c, but its the same general concept...

And I'm sure he's played forward before, I only got to bantam and I played everywhere but goalie, which I'm sure is the case for almost everyone of these guys

Edited June 12, 2015 by jimmyemeryhunter

[kipwinger 8,524]

because his speed, his offensive awareness, and he hits.

I like what he brings to the team, and agree we have a a logjam of forwards, and probably some that can bring that in Cally and Ferraro, but I think smith could be a more offensive version of that.

Plus, his shot from the point isn't that great, but I have seen him let go a decent snapshot/wristshot, and with his size he'd be good net front.

I don't think he'd ever be as good as holmstrom in front of the goalie, but he's big, fast, and strong on the puck...

Like how they justified using Abby on the top line with pav and z to begin with,

Puck retrieval...

And its not like it would take long to get him into the groove of playing offense, he didn't look out of place at all on the fourth line when we were destroyed by injuries two years back...

He gave the fourth line someone who could Carry the puck up the ice, which it could have just been because of the fourth liners he was with at the time, but he stood out in a good way there.

Why not save yourself the hassle, sign Drew Stafford, bump Helm into the bottom six, and trade Smith for something else you need/futures if you really don't want him on defense?

It's just a very round about way to get a gritty forward. And gritty, depth, forwards aren't exactly hard to find.

[jimmyemeryhunter 2,747]

Why not save yourself the hassle, sign Drew Stafford, bump Helm into the bottom six, and trade Smith for something else you need/futures if you really don't want him on defense?

It's just a very round about way to get a gritty forward. And gritty, depth, forwards aren't exactly hard to find.

Asset management.

That phrase gets alot of play around here, but why go out and give someone more.money to come here and be that, if you can do it with someone in house.

Plus, the potential for him to grow in that role, the forwards at this level, for the most part, you've seen what you're going to get... the fact that he's already so offensive minded leaves room to imagine hell grow as he learns the role.

Then trade other parts that'll take to upgrade the d, his value isn't great as it is, but if he doesn't start improving then its going to plummet as he ages. So I'd be fine with them trading him now, but I don't see that happening...

And if you can move around your pieces to a place that suits them better, why not get all you can out of him. They know who he is, they know his character, how he learns/how he doesn't...

Plus he's going to be relatively cheap for the next few years.

Stafford may or may not be a good guy to bring in, he looked like he was going to consistently score 50pts, but that's dropped off..

and someone's going to pay him more than he'd be worth just off the potential he'd recapture that, so why not pay smith half of what Stafford will get for those twenty points.

Which smith could score up front, he scored 19 two seasons ago on the back end, 13 last year which isn't far off what he brings anyway.

I know those guys aren't hard to find, but the devil you know blahblah.

But I get what youre saying, I just kind of want to see blash shake stuff up and try something different.

I know if won't happen, because your logic on it is more rational than mine, but still.

[kipwinger 8,524]

Asset management.

That phrase gets alot of play around here, but why go out and give someone more.money to come here and be that, if you can do it with someone in house.

Plus, the potential for him to grow in that role, the forwards at this level, for the most part, you've seen what you're going to get... the fact that he's already so offensive minded leaves room to imagine hell grow as he learns the role.

Then trade other parts that'll take to upgrade the d, his value isn't great as it is, but if he doesn't start improving then its going to plummet as he ages. So I'd be fine with them trading him now, but I don't see that happening...

And if you can move around your pieces to a place that suits them better, why not get all you can out of him. They know who he is, they know his character, how he learns/how he doesn't...

Plus he's going to be relatively cheap for the next few years.

Stafford may or may not be a good guy to bring in, he looked like he was going to consistently score 50pts, but that's dropped off..

and someone's going to pay him more than he'd be worth just off the potential he'd recapture that, so why not pay smith half of what Stafford will get for those twenty points.

Which smith could score up front, he scored 19 two seasons ago on the back end, 13 last year which isn't far off what he brings anyway.

I know those guys aren't hard to find, but the devil you know blahblah.

But I get what youre saying, I just kind of want to see blash shake stuff up and try something different.

I know if won't happen, because your logic on it is more rational than mine, but still.

Stafford will score considerably more than 20 points this year. He had 43 last season. Much of it on Buffalo's team.

But even if you didn't want him there are better options than trying to convert someone. I mean, there's a reason it rarely happens at the NHL level. I'd sign Scotty Upshall. He wouldn't cost much. He'd give you 20 points and be a hitting, agitating, pain in the ass too. And you wouldn't have to teach him how to be a forward.

I guess my point is, why spend the time, effort, and money to fit a square peg into a round hole? Just go get a round peg. They're common enough. I don't feel some pressing need to keep the guy in the organization. It's not like he's some kind of workhorse Dan Cleary type that's good to have around as an example. If he doesn't fit, get rid of him.

Edit: Or Shawn Matthias.

Edited June 12, 2015 by kipwinger

[jimmyemeryhunter 2,747]

Stafford will score considerably more than 20 points this year. He had 43 last season. Much of it on Buffalo's team.

But even if you didn't want him there are better options than trying to convert someone. I mean, there's a reason it rarely happens at the NHL level. I'd sign Scotty Upshall. He wouldn't cost much. He'd give you 20 points and be a hitting, agitating, pain in the ass too. And you wouldn't have to teach him how to be a forward.

I guess my point is, why spend the time, effort, and money to fit a square peg into a round hole? Just go get a round peg. They're common enough.

I get what you're saying, for sure, I can justify it very easily, which is why I wonder about it... but its probably also in large part to my attachment to players we draft and develop.

And on Stafford, I was looking at old stats, and going off of what he scored in the lockout shortened season+ next half season..

So my bad on arguing that point.