I still don't see this. Ceci, Broberg and Desharnais were really that good? Ceci was rightfully a whipping boy his last two seasons here, Desharnais was press-boxed in the playoffs (and healthy scratched early with the Nucks) and Broberg didn't even play 90% of the games. Or are you referring to the team defense? If so, Foegele, Holloway and McLeod (the best defensively of the three but humiliated in the playoffs) made such a big difference in the defensive play of the team? Doubtful
This is on the forwards not giving a shit about the system and goaltending, full stop. You could put all three of those D back on this team and they'd have a similar record. The D being "bad" because they lost the 3 least impactful D from the team last year is a distraction, all due respect. It's flabbergasting to see so much digital ink spilled on it being the primary issue with the team.
It is a big issue. Complain on Ceci all you want, there is a reason he has been a #2/#3 D man most of his career, and very good GA/60 numbers to back that up. Dehairnais was not exactly great against the real high end competition (we saw that as the playoffs progressed), but he was a good defender and PKer in the regular season and only petered out at the end. If Broberg had not been so rested, Dehairnais would have been back in.
But its the little things. When you lose players that make small contributions in critical areas (team speed, defending, physicality) other players have to compensate for those new weaknesses, taking them out of the game they were playing last year. Nurse, as bad as he was last year now has to play with a guy on the waiver wire one year ago and a PTO player instead of a guy with a proven defensive track record? That puts more pressure on the third pairing when the shutdown pair falters badly, which is also downgraded, then causing the first pairing to try and do to much as the other pairs falter. That is not a recipe for success. For all the complaints on Foegle and McLoed (and even Holloway), that extra speed on the fore or back check can cause other teams to have to make decisions quicker, resulting is less than optimal plays.
The team is out of whack trying to figure out how to deal with those losses. They may seem unimportant, but the sheer number of them adds up. Yes, they are losing by larger numbers than those players mean, but a lot of that has seemed to be "giving up" after a bit of adversity. They won last year not by blowing people away with scoring, but by their defensive play and thats taken a major hit and the result is players are trying to compensate in areas they are just not good at.
for years the lament was on the weakness of D and the 3rd and 4th lines. no surprise when they take a hit, we are back to where we were 5 years ago ....