Confirmed with Link: [EDM/SJS] Jake Walman <--> Cond. EDM 1st '26 (Top-12 Protected) & Carl Berglund

This will be one of our very few disagreements. I think as fans we are hyper critical of our own. We focus on every mistake, even though this is fairly the domain of D. The D are not helped here either in that we have rather weak goaltending so any mistake they tend to make ends up being punished more, and thus magnified in GA highlights as well as in our minds. I think actually a lot of our D, Eckholm, Nurse, Booch in that order do a commendable job in all they do clean up in terms of rebounds, rush defense etc. All 3 are better defensive D than Walman is.

One other thing that hasn't been mentioned as much is its much harder to be a goto top 4 D continually, on a good club. Because the expectations are there and way higher. Walman hasn't really had to endure that. The 3 top 4 D we've had here have had to play through years of a ton of pressure, and they've played a ton of games. Do they leak at times. Every D does. For the most part they've done an impeccable job and Nurse and Booch are better here than given credit for. Ekholm of course has been outstanding but I feel Nurse is our best D this season.

All good buddy. I don’t disagree with much.

I like all four of the dman and want to see them succeed. I like dcore much better than the forward core minus the obvious and the goaltending.

I’m a Bouchard fan in general. I wish he played with more urgency in the regular season. But hes been lights out in the playoffs in previous years.

My patience for Nurse honestly has been declining over the years. But I have to admit that hes had a pretty good year. He hasn’t got to play with much of a partner. I do hope he has a good playoffs from an individual level.

We will see with Walman. I like the player so far, just expected more offense. I thought he would be worse defensively to be honest. He does have his moments though.

Hopefully the dcore is in unison going into the playoffs.
 
I just hope they keep him away from Nurse. Nurse has his random players he's competent with, and for whatever reason that seems to be primarily Stecher or Kulak. Him and Walman were a mess. I'd think about this with a full lineup:

Ekholm - Walman
Nurse - Stecher/Kulak Flex
Kulak - Stecher/Bouchard Flex

No particular order for these pairs either, can balance the ice out a bit. I think Ekholm - Bouchard just isn't working and needs a break (similar to the 93/97/18 line) and I think Nurse has to be with Stecher/Kulak primarily, so this is what we end up with.
 
I just hope they keep him away from Nurse. Nurse has his random players he's competent with, and for whatever reason that seems to be primarily Stecher or Kulak. Him and Walman were a mess. I'd think about this with a full lineup:

Ekholm - Walman
Nurse - Stecher/Kulak Flex
Kulak - Stecher/Bouchard Flex

No particular order for these pairs either, can balance the ice out a bit. I think Ekholm - Bouchard just isn't working and needs a break (similar to the 93/97/18 line) and I think Nurse has to be with Stecher/Kulak primarily, so this is what we end up with.
1743458869459.png


They seem to be doing pretty well together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: capazzo
Who would you prefer.

Walman or Broberg?

Broberg is the better player now, more of a playoff performer, but maybe Walman still has more to give in the future.
 
Broberg is the better player right now?

Brobergs playoff performance was him getting shit on but shooting at 20% so it made it seem like he was doing alright.
Have you watched any of the games that Broberg and Walman played this season? It's clear as day to me who's better.
 
Who cares what your eye test says when the results say otherwise.

My eye test saw that pair be abysmal reading and defending the rush, which resulted in them being scored on twice on the rush against the Jets, then once as a pair the next game against the Kraken. In the Jets game Nurse added another poor rush GA when Walman wasn't on the ice, then Walman did the same the next game against Seattle. The result? 3 GA's in two games (all off the rush) with them as a pair, then 3 additional goals with them making individual dumb plays while apart (2 of those rush).

Neither is good at rush defence, and Walman in particular is terrible at net front defence, especially off the rush there too. Sorry the charts don't show that fact well.
 
I guess the question is does that really matter when they're outscoring the opponent 3 to 1?

They aren't, so I don't know where that is coming from. 3 in their last two games together, all off the rush, all ridiculously preventable.

They had one good game against the Stars (Walman's first). The rest shaky at best.
 
They aren't, so I don't know where that is coming from. 3 in their last two games together, all off the rush, all ridiculously preventable.

They had one good game against the Stars (Walman's first). The rest shaky at best.
We might need @Fourier to confirm, but I'm pretty sure 6 GF and 2 GA translates to outscoring 3 to 1. ;)
 
Sure, if we want to include PK and empty nets.

I'd rather judge them on where they play the huge majority of their minutes.

I'd like to judge them on their skill sets and how they should be best deployed as a result. The empty net result you are choosing to ignore was a pretty bad break down, and pretty similar to all their other pretty bad rush break downs.

Neither are good at rush defending, and that showed up pretty obviously over their last two games together, and also when apart. Both would be better served on different pairs with a partner that actually can defend the rush.
 
I'd like to judge them on their skill sets and how they should be best deployed as a result. The empty net result you are choosing to ignore was a pretty bad break down, and pretty similar to all their other pretty bad rush break downs.

Neither are good at rush defending, and that showed up pretty obviously over their last two games together, and also when apart. Both would be better served on different pairs with a partner that actually can defend the rush.
You win games by outscoring the opponent not defending the rush though. Clearly they have other strengths that are making up for that weakness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: capazzo
You win games by outscoring the opponent not defending the rush though. Clearly they have other strengths that are making up for that weakness.

Which primarily occurred in one game where Walman had a pep in his step that we haven’t seen since. Or anything really close.

They haven’t been good.
 
Which primarily occurred in one game where Walman had a pep in his step that we haven’t seen since. Or anything really close.

They haven’t been good.
They've only doubled the opponents in scoring since. ;)

Also, if we're talking about cherry picking numbers without one game, they haven't been on the ice for a single 5v5 goal against without the Winnipeg game.
 
I'd like to judge them on their skill sets and how they should be best deployed as a result. The empty net result you are choosing to ignore was a pretty bad break down, and pretty similar to all their other pretty bad rush break downs.

Neither are good at rush defending, and that showed up pretty obviously over their last two games together, and also when apart. Both would be better served on different pairs with a partner that actually can defend the rush.
You can’t judge defensive metrics while playing with a pulled goalie. Defensive responsibility goes out the door as you push for offence. Or else the game is lost either way.

I mean they could always trap at that point of the game to keep their defence numbers up. But that would make zero sense.
 
You can’t judge defensive metrics while playing with a pulled goalie. Defensive responsibility goes out the door as you push for offence. Or else the game is lost either way.

I mean they could always trap at that point of the game to keep their defence numbers up. But that would make zero sense.

They were terrible on the goal I’m referencing in nearly every respect. The extra man wasn’t a factor.
 

Ad

Ad