My opinion of Torts has nothing to do with PLD. I loved the Torts hire and loved what he did here. But just like every organization that isn't winning the championship, a time will come when the players need to here from a different voice. We went all in on the Torts and Panarin group (I was all for it), it didn't work out. That was the end of that group. Move on and rebuild.
That’s fine and I respect the response, however, how much really of a “different voice” is Larsen over Torts?? Larsen has been in the organization longer than Torts, and it’s safe to say that Larsen has probably already had a pretty big impact on the strategies and overall style of play over the last handful of years. Although it’s been reported that it was Larsen (and not the initial stereotypical thought it was Torts) who got into it with Laine on the bench, the 1 thing that SEEMS to be different between Torts and Larsen is the whole “water under the bridge” concept.
Seems that 1 guy is (RELUCTANTLY) capable of accepting the directive from the front office of forgiving and forgetting actions that arguably SHOULDN’T be accepted. Whether that’s mouthing off on the bench or playing lazy/loose coverage in the D zone that regularly leads to goals. I don’t think this is something that should be looked at as a positive regarding the difference between the 2 coaches, that our current guy is just less strict.
I don’t know what Jarmo/JD and the front office really feels about Laine, but, I don’t think it’s promising that Larsen is at a point in his coaching career that he pretty much has to do whatever he is told when it comes to “managing” the team on the ice.
This concept of “Torts wants to leave CBJ” or that “his heart wasn’t in it anymore” or whatever shit was said, is something I find fascinating. I also find it even more fascinating that people didn’t ask more questions
WHY?? He never “retired”, and now with him coming back to coach so soon should have people ask WHY he wanted to leave so soon. Look at how emotional he was to leave the team. Playoffs nearly every year. All for a guy with a good snap shot??
Whether people like his supposed style or not, and I disagreed with many of his lineup decisions and lack of adaptability at times, but, Torts was absolutely a voice and leader of the team. Something (IMO) Larsen seems to NOT BE ALLOWED TO BE.
Again, this idea that ACCOUNTABILITY and TWO WAY PLAY on the ice is a “bad thing” is outrageous to me. This idea of completely open offensive hockey winning ANYTHING worthwhile IS FALSE. Sure, if you are absolutely loaded roster wise like COL or TB you can play a more open/offensive style, but, what makes those teams “great” and actual Cup champions is their ability to adapt, change styles on the fly and play hard grinding games at the same time. Same goes for the PIT teams of the past.
I think this idea that I (or any CBJ fan) should just suck it up and accept this “new core” is bogus. And by “new core”, I mean Patrik Laine and the style of play he seems to breed on the ice. To be clear, the problems are not just Laine, just that him being implemented as a “leader” of the overall group multiplies all the (similar) issues many of the other offensive/younger players have.
People had plenty of issues in the past with the ideas of “building” behind certain players or cores/groups of guys, yet, with Laine it’s completely out of line because he has a good shot and was drafted 2nd overall?? People complained every year we kept the “grinder core” around that ended up having GREAT YEARS and won playoff series’. I mean people literally had issues building behind Nash because he was a winger, and other complaints about his play, but, Laine (and shitty Roslovic/Boqvist/Peeke/Gavrikov/Merzlikins-yea the “hater” list is long) deserves to be removed from all questions of commitment or risk to the team long term??
We’ll see how happy you guys all are after 3 more years of no playoffs, maybe a top-5 draft pick, a traded Laine and Werenski, and ANOTHER “direction change” BACK to playing to win games not get goals for Laine.
