Still pretenders

[glen a richter]

If Hitch is to be believed, I don't know how much of an emphasis will actually be put on the defense next year anyway.

Of course he could be all talk (probably) but if the goal of next year is to get up to speed (pun intended) with the rest of the NHL, we''ll be looking at a lot of 6-3 games where the goalie will be expected to come up big a lot for both teams. I wonder if these players have the fortitude to block a shot, get right up and make a great outlet pass to lead an odd man rush repeatedly for 60 minutes every night. All signs point to no, but if that's the game Hitch claims he wants them to play next season, Nash wouldn't be the worst fit. Dude can score goals--just not in the playoffs.

[gaijin]

If Hitch is to be believed, I don't know how much of an emphasis will actually be put on the defense next year anyway.

Of course he could be all talk (probably) but if the goal of next year is to get up to speed (pun intended) with the rest of the NHL, we''ll be looking at a lot of 6-3 games where the goalie will be expected to come up big a lot for both teams. I wonder if these players have the fortitude to block a shot, get right up and make a great outlet pass to lead an odd man rush repeatedly for 60 minutes every night. All signs point to no, but if that's the game Hitch claims he wants them to play next season, Nash wouldn't be the worst fit. Dude can score goals--just not in the playoffs.

This is my biggest concern with the "improving speed" theory- it will most likely come at the expense of stable defense, which I felt all season was already underperforming compared to previous years. Way too many defensive lapses and odd-man rushes given up.

*edit: Now Ken Hitchcock is going to focus on speed and offense? Something about old dogs and new tricks comes to mind. I fear I see only more status quo this next year.

[ecbm]

Maybe I should've just tweaked what I said... I know it's not unprecedented but is it really a good idea to start a rookie? Yea I guess you have some exceptions here but I don't think it'd be right to pat a rookie on the head and then tell him "Go be Patrick Roy or Ken Dryden"

But who were Ken Dryden or Patrick Roy before their brilliant rookie years? Just unproven goalies. You go with whoever is playing well, right now, unless you have some reason to think recent results are a fluke.

And why is everyone so down on Osh? I understand he was invisible come playoffs, but seriously? 21 should've been dealt a long time ago.

I think we all would trade #21 before almost anyone except possibly Bouwmeester or Ott. Those guys, however, have no value-in the case of Berglund, he's a straight-up overpaid, NTC-holding albatross. So Oshie is a better candidate to move out in terms of getting back pieces for re-build. If getting rid of Berglund and his ridiculous contract, however, isn't a priority than DA is as mediocre a GM as some say he is.

*edit: Now Ken Hitchcock is going to focus on speed and offense? Something about old dogs and new tricks comes to mind. I fear I see only more status quo this next year.

I hear you. Yeah, sure-we're going to re-up a 20 year veteran NHL head coach at what must be one of the bigger salaries in the league so he can...coach in a completely different way to how he has in the past? Yeah, yeah-definitely not DA using the fact that he has Stillman on a string and coming up with some nice-sounding rationalization for throwing his boy KH a bone he didn't earn. Nope, definitely not that.

[cprice12]

If Hitch is to be believed, I don't know how much of an emphasis will actually be put on the defense next year anyway.

Of course he could be all talk (probably) but if the goal of next year is to get up to speed (pun intended) with the rest of the NHL, we''ll be looking at a lot of 6-3 games where the goalie will be expected to come up big a lot for both teams. I wonder if these players have the fortitude to block a shot, get right up and make a great outlet pass to lead an odd man rush repeatedly for 60 minutes every night. All signs point to no, but if that's the game Hitch claims he wants them to play next season, Nash wouldn't be the worst fit. Dude can score goals--just not in the playoffs.

This is my biggest concern with the "improving speed" theory- it will most likely come at the expense of stable defense, which I felt all season was already underperforming compared to previous years. Way too many defensive lapses and odd-man rushes given up.

*edit: Now Ken Hitchcock is going to focus on speed and offense? Something about old dogs and new tricks comes to mind. I fear I see only more status quo this next year.

How do you figure?
Playing at a quicker pace doesn't have to come at the cost of defense.
The quicker pace that was described was meant to mean more and better scoring chances on the rush and moving the puck quicker through the neutral zone.
If you have the talent, you can have a quicker pace without hurting the defense.

[ecbm]

How do you figure?Playing at a quicker pace doesn't have to come at the cost of defense.The quicker pace that was described was meant to mean more and better scoring chances on the rush and moving the puck quicker through the neutral zone.If you have the talent, you can have a quicker pace without hurting the defense.

KH pointed to no specific changes to be made but many have discussed possible ways to generate more speed and consistent offense. Ideas discussed include not having the third man high and getting the puck off the boards more. Many that this will lead to a faster offense and an increase in scoring chances but it also more rushes against. I think that's his point. Personally, I don't worry about that-I think the Blues' talent is concentrated in players who are most effective attacking. I think this squad playing a modern style can easily score enough to make up for any additional defensive lapses. But I also think KH is full of it and even if the Blues start differently, it'll last long enough for the team to hit a couple bumps in the road allowing KH to say "see: it doesn't work, back to grinding".

[theohall]

KH pointed to no specific changes to be made but many have discussed possible ways to generate more speed and consistent offense. Ideas discussed include not having the third man high and getting the puck off the boards more. Many that this will lead to a faster offense and an increase in scoring chances but it also more rushes against. I think that's his point.

Exactly this. If you watch how Tampa plays most of the time in the offensive zone, their forwards attack the center of the ice relentlessly if/when they get possession. During game 7, if they didn't get clear possession or they judged they couldn't, they did use a 3rd-man high sometimes to help reduce odd-man chances against. It worked for them in Game 7. However, throughout most of their series, they don't leave the 3rd-man high and attack, instead trying to force the TO which puts extra pressure on the D and goaltender. Will KH be willing to make this type of adjustment - allowing all 3 forwards to work below the circles or will he continue to insist on the ever-present, 3rd-man high, defense first philosophy?

Saying he will somehow rely on speed more - not sure how that works when coaching a defense first, grind it out, no risky shots through defenders, not working the front of the net type of team. Screw the pass off the boards thing when all it takes is a forward going to the front and firing the puck at that forward relentlessly from wherever possession is obtained. Works for Tampa.

It should be noted the first goal vs the Rangers in game 7 - where are all of the Lighting forwards? All 3 below the faceoff dots in the offensive zone. Same thing on the 2nd goal. This is what Hitchcock's 3rd-man high philosophy prevents from ever happening except on power plays. It takes sacrificing some defense sometimes to create offensive opportunities. There were numerous times in Game 7 where the Rangers just missed getting odd-man rushes passed the lone defender for Tampa capable of breaking up the rush, because there was no 3rd-man high to prevent the guy from breaking out if the defender missed. In Tampa's losses, that defender wasn't making those plays.

[glen a richter]

I would be cool with winning 6-4 instead of 1-0 if it meant going deeper in the playoffs. At some point you have to just tell your goalie that you trust them to make the necessary saves. The defense won't forget how to play defense, they'll just play it differently. The individual plus/minuses won't be as gaudy, but the goals and assists columns will look stunning and opponents won't know how to adjust if we have three or four different looks that are all built around speed, solid outlet passing and odd man rushes into the zone.

But, as ECBM said, the minute the team loses two games, Hitch will say that it didn't work and go right back to coaching like it's 1999.

[Oaklandblue]

Coach Hitch can not do this. It is totally counter to his tactics. He's a D-first guy and the system he runs limits quite abit of offense. Making them faster won't change the layout of his strategy, it just makes them faster. Speed in a system that doesn't work is just going to fatigue and frustrate the players.

With the players we got, we should adopt a run and gun strategy that crashes the net. We don't have snipers or any real -realiable- tactics-based players on the roster to try setups; without a go-to/set-up player on the team or a playmaker, both things we badly lack, that will never work. Frank doesn't count as the majoirty of opportunities he gets, he seems to make on his own or with limited help.

Most of them came up as grinders with exception, which gives them in my eyes the only advantage they got: They're highly durable and tempered to deal with a great deal of physical checking. In the right system that can make the difference.

[glen a richter]

There was a 3 or 4 game stretch a couple seasons ago that I remember the team was playing poorly and then they rattled off a few high scoring wins against LA and I don't remember who else. But I do remember they were 5-3, 6-4 finishes, games like that. That's the kind of game this team should play. They proved they're capable of scoring in bunches when I guess Hitch must have told them just be creative and let's see what's possible. Why he ever went back is a mystery to me, but the fact that he went back even when it was obvious what they were doing was working proves to me that he won't be able to sustain a run and gun format for more than maybe the first 10 games of next season. Oh, he'll try it for sure, but he'll never stick with it. The man can't deal with having a goalie with a high GAA but who cares if you're winning with regularity? Wear down the other team with speed, not hard hitting.

[theohall]

With the players we got, we should adopt a run and gun strategy that crashes the net. We don't have snipers or any real -realiable- tactics-based players on the roster to try setups; without a go-to/set-up player on the team or a playmaker, both things we badly lack, that will never work. Frank doesn't count as the majoirty of opportunities he gets, he seems to make on his own or with limited help.

Lehtera - set-up player. Clearly.
Schwartz - can be a set-up and go-to player if not forced to play that grind it on the walls BS. He wins on the boards and in space. Let him play in space more.
Stastny - should be a setup guy, but that's not happening playing with Berglund and Jaskin.
Tarasenko still counts as a go-to guy. He got plenty of opportunities on one-timers other's set up (Lehtera and Schwartz). This should be the #1 line.

Then the Blues have problems. Big problem - none of our supposed 1st line is a setup or go-to guy and almost every team has at least one or the other, if not both, on their #1 line. I wouldn't mind seeing Stastny between Steen and Oshie as a 2nd line. Drop Backes to the 3rd line. That would make a huge 3rd line in size and Jaskin actually plays aggressively in the offensive zone. Maybe Berglund (if not gone like he should be) would actually be somewhat relevant then.

Don't know after that. This is assuming the Blues don't make the roster moves we assume aren't happening based on press conference blips.

[Frusciante]

I wouldn't mind seeing Stastny between Steen and Oshie as a 2nd line. Drop Backes to the 3rd line. That would make a huge 3rd line in size and Jaskin actually plays aggressively in the offensive zone. Maybe Berglund (if not gone like he should be) would actually be somewhat relevant then.

Correct me if I'm wrong (which I might very well be), but I seem to recall the Blues playing Bergie-Backes-Jaskin for a couple of games in the Minny-series? Didn't work out very well.

[glen a richter]

Jaskin needs to get himself some real linemates before his talent gets wasted too. Maybe a kid line Jaskin/Rattie/Fabbri? At the very least, you'd have some youthful energy to add to the STL line and make the other two lines look at them and say "man, we need to keep up with these kids!"

[theohall]

I wouldn't mind seeing Stastny between Steen and Oshie as a 2nd line. Drop Backes to the 3rd line. That would make a huge 3rd line in size and Jaskin actually plays aggressively in the offensive zone. Maybe Berglund (if not gone like he should be) would actually be somewhat relevant then.

Correct me if I'm wrong (which I might very well be), but I seem to recall the Blues playing Bergie-Backes-Jaskin for a couple of games in the Minny-series? Didn't work out very well.

One game with a few shifts isn't enough to actually make a judgement, IMO. Of course, Berglund still being around doesn't help any.