It's not reductionist BS. I have no idea how a team forms an identity, but all the winning teams do it, apparently. Can you pinpoint Colorado's identity? How about Vegas? Tampa? Florida? These are all really good teams and the last 4 to win the Cup. They score goals and they play good defense, and they have some physical players, and some not-so-physical players. I'm sure every player on these teams could tell you what their identity was. I don't know that because I'm not on the team, but it all amounts to the same idea. None of these teams are trying to reinvent anything.
Oh for FFS now I have to spell out every cup team's identity for you, just so you can dismiss those too? I'm not wasting my time. It's also funny that you only point to Stanley Cup winning teams. I guess Carolina's identity of being a physically punishing team with the heaviest forecheck in the league and who absolutely dominates possession is just a figment of our imagination, and doesn't count since they didn't win the Cup.
It absolutely is a goalpost shift. Lines can have good chemistry on teams that don't have identity (i.e. that don't win).
Yeah so what? I didn't say chemistry on one line automatically means you have an identity. But having an identity does require chemistry. This is a very obvious logical fallacy you're using here.
How was speed part of their defense? Severson and Marino are above-average skaters - I wouldn't describe anyone else on that blueline as being fast, and indeed Brendan Smith is probably slow. I do not understand how speed is an identity but okay, you just left out the part about how they want to force the opposition into turnovers via quicker skating and then transitioning the puck up ice.
? You literally answered your own question at the end. No idea what more you want here.
Jamie Langenbrunner played the fewest minutes of the 3 over the 3 seasons between 2008 and 2010. He played 2961 minutes 5v5. What percentage of those would you guess he played with Zach and Travis? And sure shifts bleed over and whatnot and there's the end of served penalties and so on, so obviously something like 90% isn't possible, that's not how hockey works. But what percentage would you guess?
That's not the relevant question. The relevant question would be, is there another winger who played more minutes with Zach and Travis than Jamie did? If there is please feel free to correct me here. Even worst case scenario where 2009 is the only year they played together consistently, that's still more chemistry and consistency than any of our top forwards have shown as a group for the last four years.
Timo has not had a full season here where he wasn't injured for half of it. Travis Green had the bad Jack almost exclusively and then not at all. So basically, you have one coach who didn't stick with those pairings.
Somewhat fair points, so like so much else with this team, this should be the year we see things stick and some consistent chemistry right? I'm certainly hoping for it. Let's see what happens.
It's not really the case, either. How does Nico Hischier not fit that? How does Timo Meier not fit that?
Nico fits it. I would not say that Timo is good defensively. So that's 1 guy in the top six.
Oh, okay. Wow, what a list they've got, incredible they manage to find their guy every time. It's not reductive - Tampa looks for good players first and foremost. Yes, they look for speed, and yeah, they like grit.
Who said they find their guy every time?
lol, then why did you bring it up at the beginning of the post? There's reason for you to bring it up but not me, got it.
Being intentionally obtuse here, OK. I'm citing the last time the Devils had an identity. The time period is incidental. I'm not interested in this team being the same team from the 90's. I think you know the difference, but sure, pretend otherwise.
I scoff at the notion of identity because I do not have access to the Devils' locker room or their coaching staff. Sure, teams have to understand how to play as teams, to trust that their teammate will be in the place they expect them to be. But for me, yes, it is just a nebulous ascription to winning, you've gotten that exactly correct. Losing teams don't have identity, that's their problem. If they had it, they would've won. But they didn't, so they don't.
You could have reduced your entire response to just this paragraph. There are losing teams that have an identity, because being more talented than the opposition is still required to win too. The Flyers have an identity even though they've been losing the last couple of seasons, for example.