If you're not 6'-6", 240 pounds, fast as a pylon -> GTFO
Tocchet's demise, eventually, maybe his lust for these kind of defensemen
Tocchet's demise, eventually, maybe his lust for these kind of defensemen
If you're not 6'-6", 240 pounds, fast as a pylon -> GTFO
Tocchet's demise, eventually, maybe his lust for these kind of defensemen
I would love to see how conversations between management and the coaching staff go in these situations.
Rick: "We want big physical defensemen and forwards that are gritty."
Allvin: "Ok so we brought in an undersized soft defenseman and a forward who doesn't care to play defense (Sprong). Give them a chance...."
Rick: "Uhhh ok sure."
I could tell you in October this wasn't gonna work out because Tocchet hates these guys. Why bother even bringing them in? How do we know better than Allvin? We should have just signed Philippe Myers....
Defensive depth and puck-moving are for losers!!
Generally, he just isn't very good. Willy is going to be plunked in the roster down the road plus there will likely be a trade so Brannstrom is definitely expendable at this point.Problem is that he hasn't been able to move the puck effectively while at the same time he was getting absolutely caved defensively in the last 10-15 games he played.
If you're not 6'-6", 240 pounds, fast as a pylon -> GTFO
Tocchet's demise, eventually, maybe his lust for these kind of defensemen
Overall you are right, but he has done it a few times this season. I am just showing it doesn’t have to be as it isn’t always.
The fact of the matter is, you need some of what Branstrom brings on the backend. He is a very limited player, and if this was last years team, he would.d have probably been the first guy I would waive easily… but this you need what he has, cause NO OTHER DMAN on the team does it… besides Hughes.
In 1993 when we selected the WJC team one thing was said, "if they duck to come into the room, we can teach them to skate"I was joking earlier about how, if you're 6'4 and can skate, one can be employed as a Canuck dman.
because more Juulsen...Some folks appear pretty upset by this, it's like they waived Alex Biega.
Juulsen isn't particularly good but RH vs LH, Juulsen plays the PK and the Canucks are actually 12th in the league there so far, and he also starts in the DZ 69% of the time at ES vs Brannstrom at 33.5%.because more Juulsen...
unless Hronek is that close
If you're 6'7" and can't skate at all you're still in the mix.I was joking earlier about how, if you're 6'4 and can skate, one can be employed as a Canuck dman.
no joke. One of my beer leauge (now former) beer leauge teamates is 6'11 I kid you not. good times.If you're 6'7" and can't skate at all you're still in the mix.
Overall you are right, but he has done it a few times this season. I am just showing it doesn’t have to be as it isn’t always.
The fact of the matter is, you need some of what Branstrom brings on the backend. He is a very limited player, and if this was last years team, he would.d have probably been the first guy I would waive easily… but this you need what he has, cause NO OTHER DMAN on the team does it… besides Hughes.
Well he hasn't even played since the triassic, all while the team was garnering some pretty bad results. It just seems hard to justify sticking with the status quo while the team was struggling to move the puck (and offense = defense at the end of the day – both involve moving the puck away from your net toward the other one). I know you don't like these comparisons in the abstract, but the numbers do suggest he was a better option for the element the back end was sorely missing.Problem is that he hasn't been able to move the puck effectively while at the same time he was getting absolutely caved defensively in the last 10-15 games he played.
In 1993 when we selected the WJC team one thing was said, "if they duck to come into the room, we can teach them to skate"
I think they need to move the puck out of their own end.Juulsen isn't particularly good but RH vs LH, Juulsen plays the PK and the Canucks are actually 12th in the league there so far, and he also starts in the DZ 69% of the time at ES vs Brannstrom at 33.5%.
I like Brannstrom, but they need 2 LHD to regularly play the PK, or they're playing a RHD on his offside, or it's Hughes. Brisebois took his job.
Well he hasn't even played since the triassic, all while the team was garnering some pretty bad results. It just seems hard to justify sticking with the status quo while the team was struggling to move the puck (and offense = defense at the end of the day – both involve moving the puck away from your net toward the other one). I know you don't like these comparisons in the abstract, but the numbers do suggest he was a better option for the element the back end was sorely missing.
If you're not 6'-6", 240 pounds, fast as a pylon -> GTFO
Tocchet's demise, eventually, maybe his lust for these kind of defensemen
Tocchet doesn't believe you need what Brannstrom brings beyond what Hughes already does.
At the margins, it's the correct strategy to demote/waive him. He introduces uncertainty in a very static system. The forwards come low to support and skate the puck up. The Dmen make the short pass in zone. Down low, they "protect the house". Are very focused on breaking cycles and far less focused on breaking out. Once in the Ozone, a point shot is all that is required. This is not a system conducive to a variable puck rusher looking to make stretch passes. (Unless you do it at a high level and have the defense be at least even)
Now, if you had multiple PMDs (even low end ones like Brannstrom) and forwards were directed to rush, then a stretch passer with Ozone creativity would take advantage of unset defenses. You may even improve upon being dead last in rush chances and xGF...
But Tocchet has chosen his course.