Jeff Blashill

[Juklitz 85]

Quite curious if Blashill is going to restart Helm together with Vanek and Nyquist line...

For sure Miller is odd man out, worst player there so far.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

AA and Larkin need to move up the depth chart. If we're gonna be losing get those guys some extra minutes.

Personally, I want Vanek and MANtha on the same line centered by Z. Then we'll at least have 15 minutes of interesting hockey to watch each night outside of AA breakaways

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

I think the AA-Neilson-Vanek line has been too good to mess with right now. I hope we keep Larkin at center instead of moving him up with Helm coming back and put Helm as the 4th line center. I think it's going to be Ott or Miller out. I thought Sheahan was better this past game though his offence is still nonexistent.

Edited January 17, 2017 by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

[krsmith17 7,191]

14 - 40  39

72 - 51 - 62

21 - 71 - 26

8 - 43 - 41 / 15

65 - 25

2 - 3

61 - 48

Never going to happen, but that's my optimal lineup with everyone healthy... Imagine having three scoring lines and a 4th line that can shut down top lines while actually generating offense... Imagine having 6 defensemen in the lineup that can skate and move the puck... Imagine having a coach that didn't rely on grit and didn't have a defense first approach...

[NerveDamage 4,176]

On 1/12/2017 at 1:49 PM, joesuffP said:

Please stop spelling in MANtha it is so lame 

Just follow the path Mabus has shown us and call him AntMan.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2017/01/jeff_blashill_blasts_red_wings.html#incart_river_index

 

Quote

The Red Wings coach laid into his players, sparing no feelings while expressing his displeasure. The harsh words hit their mark as the Red Wings came out and scored three goals in the second period to tie it before sending the game into overtime and winning a wild 6-5 shootout.

Blashill wouldn't get into specifics as to what was said but the players confirmed he was angry.

Channeling his inner Torts

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

http://www.mlive.com/redwings/index.ssf/2017/01/jeff_blashill_blasts_red_wings.html#incart_river_index

Channeling his inner Torts

I thought this quote from Blash was interesting:

 "Nobody's perfect in their life every day. Just the reality of life. I've read some of your guys' articles. Some of them are really good and some of them aren't."

Just a light-hearted joke or is Blash upset about some coverage. I'm sure some paper out there has speculated about his status through the last while.

[Echolalia 2,961]

2 minutes ago, PavelValerievichDatsyuk said:

I thought this quote from Blash was interesting:

 "Nobody's perfect in their life every day. Just the reality of life. I've read some of your guys' articles. Some of them are really good and some of them aren't."

Just a light-hearted joke or is Blash upset about some coverage. I'm sure some paper out there has speculated about his status through the last while.

I think he's just making a point that nobody is perfect in their job everyday.  Taken in context of what he's discussing it seems more likely.

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

4 minutes ago, Echolalia said:

I think he's just making a point that nobody is perfect in their job everyday.  Taken in context of what he's discussing it seems more likely.

I think that's likely, but, he's still telling reporters to their faces that some of their articles aren't so good - seems like an awkward thing to do. Maybe it was said in a light-hearted way, though.

[kipwinger 8,770]

I think the problem with Blashill, and a lot of other coaches, is that he's so convinced that the NHL is too good, and too tight, that you can't afford to make any mistakes.  As a result he tends to be too conservative with players (and strategy).  This, in turn, can stifle players' ability to make plays.  If you're always being reactive you tend not to have any margin for error.  I advocate identifying your strengths, and doing what you're good at SO WELL that other teams have to react to you.  In our case I think that means emphasizing our speed, skill, and aggressiveness.  If you're attacking all the time teams will be on their heels and will be more likely to abandon their game plan as a reaction to you. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

5 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I think the problem with Blashill, and a lot of other coaches, is that he's so convinced that the NHL is too good, and too tight, that you can't afford to make any mistakes.  As a result he tends to be too conservative with players (and strategy).  This, in turn, can stifle players' ability to make plays.  If you're always being reactive you tend not to have any margin for error.  I advocate identifying your strengths, and doing what you're good at SO WELL that other teams have to react to you.  In our case I think that means emphasizing our speed, skill, and aggressiveness.  If you're attacking all the time teams will be on their heels and will be more likely to abandon their game plan as a reaction to you. 

Total agreement here.

It boggles my mind that this team does not utilize our speed more effectively. We are not a slow group, especially at forward.

[kipwinger 8,770]

1 minute ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Total agreement here.

It boggles my mind that this team does not utilize our speed more effectively. We are not a slow group, especially at forward.

Personally, I'd pursue the most aggressive schemes possible in all scenarios.  2-1-2 forecheck, 1-3-1 powerplay, and highly active defensemen.  Sure you'll give up more goals, but you'll score more.  And scoring should be a strength for a team that has drafted for skill since the dawn of man.  Look how effective Jensen was last night by using his skating to advance the puck and attack the offensive zone.  He made things happen.  Didn't lead to a goal last night, but over a season those types of chances generally will.  Way better than completely disarming his potential by forcing him to stay back and rarely take those kinds of chances.  And it's not like we're some great team when we're being conservative.  We've been amongst the best teams in the league at shot suppression all season and we sucked, so obviously being conservative isn't translating to wins. 

[Echolalia 2,961]

The people who progress our society are the ones who aren't afraid to make mistakes.  Thus far Blash has been an underwhelming coach, and if he's electing to continue to coach "safe and traditional defensive hockey" he's gonna get burned, because there are many coaches out there obviously better than him at that strategy and several of them have better pieces to play with to boot.  Blash needs to pave his own way here and as mentioned above I think that means taking chances other coaches might not be comfortable with to optimize our lineup.  At worst we continue losing and still miss the playoffs.  At best Blashill redefines this team and his role on it and this roster starts playing to its full potential.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

40 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Personally, I'd pursue the most aggressive schemes possible in all scenarios.  2-1-2 forecheck, 1-3-1 powerplay, and highly active defensemen.  Sure you'll give up more goals, but you'll score more.  And scoring should be a strength for a team that has drafted for skill since the dawn of man.  Look how effective Jensen was last night by using his skating to advance the puck and attack the offensive zone.  He made things happen.  Didn't lead to a goal last night, but over a season those types of chances generally will.  Way better than completely disarming his potential by forcing him to stay back and rarely take those kinds of chances.  And it's not like we're some great team when we're being conservative.  We've been amongst the best teams in the league at shot suppression all season and we sucked, so obviously being conservative isn't translating to wins. 

Agree on the forecheck. I want to see our forwards up high in the D zone in man coverage and leaving the zone early on turnovers. Utilize the speed to keep up on defence, and cash in on some odd man breaks.

I like a mobile D but im not sure we have the personnel to pull it off yet. Jensen is certainly a good skater for a Dman. Ideally i want maybe 2 bigger slower D-men who can clear the crease and the rest mobile puck retreivers.

[krsmith17 7,191]

I agree 100% with everything you guys are saying except this...

25 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Ideally i want maybe 2 bigger slower D-men who can clear the crease and the rest mobile puck retreivers.

Ericsson is that guy and although he's not near as bad as some make him out to be, he shouldn't be in our top 6... We should be rolling 6 defensemen that can skate and move the puck. DeKeyser, Green, Smith, Sproul, Ouellet, Jensen and possible Kronwall if his knees hold up... I'd like to see us trade Ericsson if at all possible, even if it means eating half of his cap hit, and trade / waive Marchenko. The two of them as a pairing is awful in my opinion...

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

9 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

I agree 100% with everything you guys are saying except this...

Ericsson is that guy and although he's not near as bad as some make him out to be, he shouldn't be in our top 6... We should be rolling 6 defensemen that can skate and move the puck. DeKeyser, Green, Smith, Sproul, Ouellet, Jensen and possible Kronwall if his knees hold up... I'd like to see us trade Ericsson if at all possible, even if it means eating half of his cap hit, and trade / waive Marchenko. The two of them as a pairing is awful in my opinion...

The Ericsson-Marchenko tandem is bad one no doubt.

They don't HAVE to be slow, but you do need some size and strength on D for when the other team is in the zone or on the powerplay. E doesn't use size or strength enough.

I'm thinking Gudas, Byflugien, Ristolainen, Orpik, Zadorov, Klein, Boychuck, Phaneuf, Weber etc.

[krsmith17 7,191]

What about this guy?...

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

4 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

What about this guy?...

Why do you tease me so?

[krsmith17 7,191]

 

[kipwinger 8,770]

I don't think you need a big, tough, rugged, stay at home defenseman to "clear the crease".  I think that's a thing you used to need and so everyone believes you still do.  Who's Chicago's big crease clearer?  Pittsburgh's? We should be trying to be more like those teams, given our current make up.  Not pretending to be something we're not (i.e. a big, tough, team). 

 

[krsmith17 7,191]

I agree. What would your ideal defense look like kip?

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

24 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I don't think you need a big, tough, rugged, stay at home defenseman to "clear the crease".  I think that's a thing you used to need and so everyone believes you still do.  Who's Chicago's big crease clearer?  Pittsburgh's? We should be trying to be more like those teams, given our current make up.  Not pretending to be something we're not (i.e. a big, tough, team). 

 

CHI: Seabrook and to an extent Hjalmarsson

PIT: Dumoulin/Cole and to an extent Daley

I don't think they all need to be Radko Gudas, Brook Orpik level... but you can't ice 6 Torey Krugs either. I more or less want 1 or 2 guys that do the opposite of Holmstroms job on the PK. And i'd be willing to sacrifice a little mobility on D to have that guy.

I think Dekeyser can to an extent be that player for us going forward

Edited January 19, 2017 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Look at Brendan Smith. He's go wheels. Yet, I'd take Orpik over him everyday.

[Echolalia 2,961]

One thing I noticed at last night's game was that defensively, our team tends to overload to the strong side of the ice.  When the puck eventually gets to our defensman who goes behind the net and shoots it up the weakside to establish the breakout/relieve pressure, we have no forward in position to get to the puck.  This leads to in-zone turnovers, icings, or out-of-zone turnovers with the puck eventually working its way back to our end.  It wasn't every time, sometimes our D had the time and space to look for the open man or let the play develop, but under pressure it was a recurring theme.  I don't like the heavy defensive pressure, particularly because our team isn't technically pressuring heavy anyway, just applying a s***ty overzealous swarm defense without actually doing anything productive.  We have speedy guys, I think they can handle spreading out even just a little if it will promote more breakouts with puck possession. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 minute ago, Echolalia said:

One thing I noticed at last night's game was that defensively, our team tends to overload to the strong side of the ice.  When the puck eventually gets to our defensman who goes behind the net and shoots it up the weakside to establish the breakout/relieve pressure, we have no forward in position to get to the puck.  This leads to in-zone turnovers, icings, or out-of-zone turnovers with the puck eventually working its way back to our end.  It wasn't every time, sometimes our D had the time and space to look for the open man or let the play develop, but under pressure it was a recurring theme.  I don't like the heavy defensive pressure, particularly because our team isn't technically pressuring heavy anyway, just applying a s***ty overzealous swarm defense without actually doing anything productive.  We have speedy guys, I think they can handle spreading out even just a little if it will promote more breakouts with puck possession. 

I'd like to do that, just... ya know... more productive.