Does Defense Really Win Championships?

[kipwinger 8,772]

Here's a fun thing I just noticed. 14 of the 16 best defensive teams in the regular season made the playoffs this year. Two others (Edmonton and Florida) were just outside that group, and two other top defensive teams (Calgary and Nashville) just missed the playoffs. BUT once you get to the playoffs the trend reverses. All the top defensive teams have lost, or are losing, to the better offensive teams. It's almost across the board. So the old adage "defense wins championships" seems a little bit too simplistic. You HAVE to have a good defense to get to the playoffs, but once you're there the high flying teams seem to perform better...at least this year.

 

 

[The 91 of Ryans 3,019]

IMO the new answer is depth. More than ever. Whether it's up front, on D, in goal, or all of, or a combination of these things. 

For example, Florida is deeper than Toronto. Everywhere. 

For example, Seattle won last night 7-2 and had goals from 7 different players. 

For example, Carolina are making hay without Svechnikov or Pacioretty and are getting some sort of production from basically everyone. 

Oilers are a freaky outlier and if they lose it will be because they aren't deep enough. 

[kipwinger 8,772]

8 hours ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

IMO the new answer is depth. More than ever. Whether it's up front, on D, in goal, or all of, or a combination of these things. 

For example, Florida is deeper than Toronto. Everywhere. 

For example, Seattle won last night 7-2 and had goals from 7 different players. 

For example, Carolina are making hay without Svechnikov or Pacioretty and are getting some sort of production from basically everyone. 

Oilers are a freaky outlier and if they lose it will be because they aren't deep enough. 

I think there's an argument to be made that having super duper stars like TO or EDM have inhibits the ability to add that kind of depth. Or at the very least, if you're going to pay more than one guys 10+ million dollars you'd better hope they don't all play the same position.

[Walman6million 250]

It's more about having grit, determination, fortitude, gumption, willpower, and perserverance. If you can maximize those attibutes any team can win tactically. 

[kipwinger 8,772]

30 minutes ago, Walman6million said:

It's more about having grit, determination, fortitude, gumption, willpower, and perserverance. If you can maximize those attibutes any team can win tactically. 

I'm never quite sure when you're being a smartass or not, but I do think there's something to this. It's been proven over and over that players reach their peak production at a pretty early age. But most teams don't win Championships until their top guys are a little older. So you score more when you're 24, but you win more when you're 28 (more or less). I think a big part of that is learning how to win. And part of THAT is learning what you're willing to do to win that Cup. Because once you get to the playoffs every single team is good. You're not going to skate circles around playoff teams like you did during the regular season. The difference between winning and losing in the playoffs might be whether you're willing to lay down and block a shot on the PK, or bust your ass on a backcheck, or get run through the end boards by a forechecker to get the puck out of the defensive zone for a change. In other words, gumption. We didn't win in 2008 because we had the best players. We won in 2008 because Henrik Zetterberg would rather die than get scored on during a 5on3.

[Walman6million 250]

16 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I'm never quite sure when you're being a smartass or not, but I do think there's something to this. It's been proven over and over that players reach their peak production at a pretty early age. But most teams don't win Championships until their top guys are a little older. So you score more when you're 24, but you win more when you're 28 (more or less). I think a big part of that is learning how to win. And part of THAT is learning what you're willing to do to win that Cup. Because once you get to the playoffs every single team is good. You're not going to skate circles around playoff teams like you did during the regular season. The difference between winning and losing in the playoffs might be whether you're willing to lay down and block a shot on the PK, or bust your ass on a backcheck, or get run through the end boards by a forechecker to get the puck out of the defensive zone for a change. In other words, gumption. We didn't win in 2008 because we had the best players. We won in 2008 because Henrik Zetterberg would rather die than get scored on during a 5on3.

Seems we had a player like this. Have you met him? His name is Tyler Bertuzzi.

[kipwinger 8,772]

1 minute ago, Walman6million said:

Seems we had a player like this. Have you met him? His name is Tyler Bertuzzi.

He's gone man. He's gone.

[Axl Foley 334]

1 hour ago, kipwinger said:

I think there's an argument to be made that having super duper stars like TO or EDM have inhibits the ability to add that kind of depth. Or at the very least, if you're going to pay more than one guys 10+ million dollars you'd better hope they don't all play the same position.

yep

Also, I would argue that goaltending is the reason teams win or lose moreso than O or D.

Edited May 8, 2023 by Axl Foley

[kipwinger 8,772]

4 minutes ago, Axl Foley said:

yep

Also, I would argue that goaltending is the reason teams win or lose moreso than O or D.

I'll have to think about that. My knee jerk reaction is to disagree because there have been a lot of mediocre goalies who have outperformed their more dominant peers. Corey Crawford has more Cups than Lundqvist, Luongo, and Price combined, for instance. BUT you take any Cup winner in recent memory and go back through their playoff wins (or losses) and you'll find a million examples of moments when goalies made (or missed) huge stops that changed the complexion of a game or a series. It's an interesting take.

 

[Axl Foley 334]

mediocre in the playoffs tho? there have been series where the better goalie lost, but the better performer won. And some teams have made it deep because their G stood on his head.

Samsonov v. Bob comes to mind. He could take the Cats another round or 2 when they really shouldn't have gotten past Boston.

[kipwinger 8,772]

2 hours ago, Axl Foley said:

mediocre in the playoffs tho? there have been series where the better goalie lost, but the better performer won. And some teams have made it deep because their G stood on his head.

Samsonov v. Bob comes to mind. He could take the Cats another round or 2 when they really shouldn't have gotten past Boston.

I understand your argument and I think you’ve won me over. But if it’s true that a less talented goalie can get on a heater and beat a more talented counterpart it only highlights the A) razor thin margins between NHL goalies, and B) the inherent unpredictability of the position. 

[Jonas Mahonas 1,872]

If we lock up Reinbacher and pick up Dumba, we could see a great defensive team next season.

 

Walman - Seider

Edvinsson - Dumba

Maata - Reinbacher

Johansson

 

That's tasty.

[Dabura 12,232]

Depth + willpower.

On 5/3/2023 at 12:35 AM, Dabura said:

Yeah, I don't think you and I really strongly disagree on anything we're talking about here. You may be a bit more bullish overall, but we agree that Yzerman's building a really solid team that's gonna be really hard to play against when it all comes together. When I said we're probably gonna be short on superstar talent, I wasn't really trying to be a buzzkill; all I meant was the vision is more "Big, lean, fast, aggressive, relentless" than "Look at how many $10M players we have; we're clearly the superior team here."

I don't want this to reply to read like cope, but on some level I feel like "elite, elite" star power means less and less as we get deeper and deeper into the age of parity. Or, rather, it's becoming more and more important that the star power is backed by teeth and claws and guts and smarts and give-a-s***. Stuff that wins when the games really, truly mean something (i.e. in the playoffs).

Can you roll four lines and three D pairings all game every game? Can your players consistently win their matchups at home and on the road? Can you execute your system better than the other team executes theirs? Are you loaded with forwards who'll empty the tank on the backcheck, steal the puck, and then hit a streaking teammate with a perfect stretch pass? If you struggle to hang with the opponent at even strength, can you win with your special teams?

^^^Those questions are, I feel, just as - if not more - important than, like, "Where's our 60-goal scorer?"

And so I look at our forwards and, while I certainly do lament the fact that we only have one proven young gun scoring winger after years of rebuilding...I'm not super-concerned. That's largely/mostly because of Edvinsson-Seider, but it's also because I do think one day we're gonna take a look at our forward lines and be like "Holy crap, we're actually really, really deep up front." That is, I'm thinking it's not gonna be evident...until it is. It'll slowly come together, and then it'll all click. I reckon that's how it's gonna go.

[Axl Foley 334]

19 hours ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

If we lock up Reinbacher and pick up Dumba, we could see a great defensive team next season.

 

Walman - Seider

Edvinsson - Dumba

Maata - Reinbacher

Johansson

 

That's tasty.

Chiarot isn't going anywhere.

[Jonas Mahonas 1,872]

5 minutes ago, Axl Foley said:

Chiarot isn't going anywhere.

Grand Rapids

[Axl Foley 334]

3 hours ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Grand Rapids

Lol. No.