- Jun 6, 2011
- 1,819
- 2,089
Hey everyone. Lots of talk about this season and this latest play-off disaster. I thought I'd chime in with some analysis and hopefully lay out the blueprint of what I'd like to see going forward. First, allow me to start by posting my similar post to last year's play-off defeat, and build off of that.
This is what I wrote last year the day after we lost to the Kings:
********************************************************
"Here are my thoughts about a lot of things after sleeping on it:
First off, we are SO CLOSE. I know a lot of people on here are upset, and rightfully so. But we are literally one, maybe two, pieces away from going on a 5-8 year run where we should challenge for a Stanley Cup. Any other first round match-up we would have crushed. Even Chicago. You have to walk before you can run in the NHL, and this was our coming out party. We honestly out-played the Cup Champions and every game was as razor thin for an outcome as it could have been. The big challenge this off-season will be to not panic, and perhaps make the one-two moves that will swap players we don't see with us long term as being effective to fill the holes we have on our roster.
Here are some thoughts along those lines, going by positions:
1) Coaching: Hitch got out-coached during this series, and it's not even close. Breaking up the CPR line, not using Tarasenko in a role he could be effective in at all, not sitting ineffective players, D-pairing mayhem, etc. All that being said, I want him back next year. Overall he's a good coach, plus I'm tired of us changing coaches and letting the players off the hook. I think unless we miss the playoffs next year, Hitch should be here for two more years at least. I think his messages post game were the right messages to send, especially after the Game 5 and 6 losses. He needed to be positive when it was necessary, but it's obvious that there's a lack of personal accountability in the room right now according to what I've read from JR, and that needs to change. If anyone can affect that kind of change, it's a crotchety, tough-as-nails older coach with a Cup ring on his finger.
2) Goaltending: I like Brian Elliott. He's a guy that's easy to root for. (Plus he won us a National Championship when I was at Madison) I think that he played very well during this series. He gave up -maybe- two goals (I would argue only one) that were soft. We obviously didn't lose this series because of him. I am not a Halak fan. I think he's soft, and -totally- overrated. He's played 7 amazing play-off games in his entire career. That's it. He's been living off them ever since. (He's actually been pulled almost as many times in the play-offs as he's had great games.) I would have no issue moving forward with an Elliott/Allen tandem, or making a trade to get a "True #1 goalie" and have Elliott back-up. Personally, I think we should save money at this position, so I'm all for the Elliott/Allen tandem.
3) Defense: I think it's pretty clear that Jordan Leopold (Even with all the slobbering Hitch gave him via the media) was a huge weak link. He did nothing on the PP once he came over, and other then his first 3-4 games, became increasingly more ineffective every night. I'm pretty sure that had Armstrong known Jay-Bo was going to be available to us, we would never have traded for Leopold. I think next year it's again pretty obvious what we should do at this position; let Leo walk, lock up AP and Shatty, then go back to the D-pairings everyone with eyes knows work well, Jay-Bo/AP, Jax/Shatty, Russell/Polak, with Cole as our extra. I'm not as down on Polak and Jackman as some on these boards, I thought that overall they played well. I think that you almost have to throw out games 5 and 6 as to the effectiveness of the players, b/c everyone was so banged up and tired, everyone was making mistakes. The Kings D were doing the same thing. Polak was a monster in games 1-4. I would like to have seen more from Shatty, but I think Leo was really holding him back, both on the ice and from a Hitch confidence perspective.
4) Forwards: Here's where it gets interesting. To me, this is where we need to focus on making changes. They don't -have- to be during the off-season though. Obviously AMac is gone, and good riddance. I think after their performance in this series, the CPR line is here to stay, maybe not together all the time, but all three of those guys earned a spot in the NHL next year. I think Sobotka, Backes, Tarasenko, Steen, and Schwartz have done enough that we should feel comfortable holding on to them. That leaves Stewart, Oshie, Perron, and Berglund. These guys have all under-preformed at one time or another and are clearly the "Home grown" talent Hitchcock was talking about after Game 6. The trick for management is figuring out which guys can rebound and continue to grow, and which guys can't. I think a lot of who gets moved out of this group (I see a possibility of us moving between all, some, or none of them) depends on which team we're trading with, who we're asking for, and what they need. Also, what the RFAs are asking for contract-wise will make a difference as well. As much as I think a Carter type sniper would be nice, we have guys that can turn into that type of player in Tarasenko and Rattie. What we really need is a #1 C that can distribute, but also play well defensively.
I'll break down my thoughts on each player we might move:
Stewart - Pros: When he's on, he's on. Guy can score like a machine. Drops the mitts. Good size. GREAT speed for his size. Excellent eye-hand coordination. Great hands. Cons: Streaky. Too often doesn't use his size to gain position. Horrible on battles against the wall. Soft. When not scoring, affects other areas of his game. Poor hockey sense and vision. Currently an RFA, I wouldn't offer him more then 3.5 over 4 years.
Berglund - Pros: Works hard, and is hard on himself to improve. Great shot. Size. Improved on face-offs every year. Can win board battles consistently. Defensively sound. Cons: Skating. Skating. Skating. Horrible acceleration and agility. Below average vision and hockey sense. Skating. Lacks willingness to go to the dirty areas. So hard on himself that it affects his confidence. Skating. Currently an RFA, wouldn't offer him more then 3 million on a one year deal.
Perron - Pros: Hard worker. Always striving to improve. Passionate about hockey. Smaller player that is always chippy. Amazing hands/dekes. Vision. GREAT along the boards, excellent at puck control. Cons: Takes stupid penalties. Tries to do too much with the puck at times. Streaky. Gets lazy at times with checking. Currently signed at 3.8 million for the next 3 years.
Oshie - Pros: Hard working. Hustle. Decent hands and vision. Can play all situations. Physical. Average to above average hockey sense. Cons: Streaky scorer. Doesn't shoot enough. Sometimes tries to do too much, and turns the puck over. Injury prone a bit. Can't keep his feet. Currently signed at 4.2 for the next 4 years.
Of those four I think Oshie is the one that is least likely to be moved. We don't look to him for scoring the way we do with Berglund/Perron/Stewart, and he actually has a role on this team when he isn't scoring, unlike Berglund/Perron/Stewart.
Final analysis: As I said before, this team is so close. I know that staying the course is not a popular idea at this time, but I personally think it's the right one. The only moves I think we should make this off-season are locking up our RFAs to affordable deals, and look to move Halak for a decent return. At next year's trade deadline, look to make a deal to fill the holes we still have.
Reasoning: Hitchcock still has yet to get a full training camp in his tenure as our head coach. Another off-season of training for young guys like Rattie, Schwartz, Tarasenko, and Jaskin along with a full training camp/pre-season will do wonders for those guys. I think the condensed schedule hurt us this year, as we have a lot of bigger guys like Backes and Berglund that couldn't really recuperate as much as they had in the past. I'd like to see us bring Lethera over to create some competition for the Center position. I think I'd be less angry with Berglund if he played Wing and shot the puck every time he had it on his stick like Steen. We will have an absolute glut of NHL talented forwards starting next year. That's when we can start making deals for big name superstar players that can put us over the top. Remember, Malkin is a UFA after next season ^.^
Final thought: Have faith. Our ownership and management has shown that they have the savvy and business sense to do what is right for this team. It hurts right now, trust me I know it does. But we have so much good to look forward to."
********************************************************
Well. First thing I noticed when reading that today was how my faith in this organization has taken quite a hit. I'm not nearly as optimistic this off-season as I was last off-season. That's mainly b/c I don't view Army in the same way I did last year. Army's moves this season have been disastrous. We also have no clue what the plan for this team is anymore. We spent years building up all this "depth" that we could score with by exploiting match-ups and grinding down the other team. I can understand that strategy, and support it. Yet we gave up almost all of our "Depth" assets for nothing that helped us score more, or even really improved our team at all. We traded Perron and Stewart for MPS and Ott, with some draft picks thrown in on both sides. Ott didn't score a single goal for us in 25+ games, and MPS didn't even see the ice during the playoffs. Completely unacceptable asset management. And don't give me that line of reasoning about getting Schwartz and Tarasenko more ice time. The coach decides who gets ice time, not the players. If you want Perron to play 3rd line minutes, there's nothing stopping Hitch from doing that. Tarasenko wasn't seeing PP time at the beginning of the year without Perron anyway.
This is my biggest point of contention with Armstrong this year. As I said in my last end-of-year post, forward was our most glaring need, especially at Center. We finally have all these assets we've developed, to the point where we have a surplus. Yet instead of trading that surplus in a depth-for-best-player move, which I advocated for, we went.......horribly wrong. I don't think Army should be fired yet, but he should absolutely be on the hot seat with how he handled our assets this season. We're clearly not good enough as currently constructed to beat the top teams in the West, what was our record (not counting shootouts) against the Kings/Ducks/Sharks/Hawks? Pretty bad if I remember right. I don't accept the excuse that we had a crappy match-up for the first round having to play the Hawks this year, we were going to have to go through them and also one of the Pacific Big Three to get to the SCF anyway, so who cares (Other then for financial reasons, which I get) if we played them in the first round or the second round. Other then play-off revenue, getting Minnesota in the first round and beating them would have been irrelevant to how good this team really is.
Going by the same format, I'm going to break down our positions with some analysis:
1) Coaching: I still like Hitch. He's done something multiple other head coaches couldn't do with this team, and that's make us a legit contender. Not to mention I don't think there's really anyone else out there that's better. He does need someone to help him with adjustments though, it doesn't seem like he's very good at them. Then again, with our roster and injuries, what was he supposed to do? Play Tarasenko and Schwartz with Berglund? With Roy? Those two aren't finishing the chances that Sobotka missed on. Oshie and Steen were supposed to be centered by whom exactly after Backes went out? Roy? Berglund? Lapierre? I will say that he misused Reaves. Reaves is a great 4th line player, but he's not a 3rd line player. Neither are Porter or Cracknell. Reaves was very effective in game 1 until Hitch shortened up bench b/c the game was close. After the Seabrook hit, the NHL made it clear that no shenanigans were going to be allowed. Hell Reaves got a penalty for hitting a Chicago player clean at the beginning of G3. After that he really didn't have a role in this series. Misusing Reaves wasn't the reason we lost this series.
What I would like to see this off-season is a big push to get Adam Oates to come here and run our PP. He has run the best PP in the League two-three years in a row with different teams. If he can't fix it, then we just have ****** players.
2) Goaltending: Ryan Miller.....yeeech. I wasn't a fan of the trade at the time, not because I think he's a bad goalie, but because I don't think this team needs to pay big money to a goalie, or needed to give up huge assets to get a marginal upgrade in net. We're build as a team. We don't have superstars like Crosby or Getzlaf or Toews that are supposed to carry the mail. When our team is playing well, we win. When it's playing poorly, we lose. I think Detroit had it right all these years, you pay a goalie that's competent, and then use the savings from that position to craft the best team you can have. Worked out pretty well for them. In my last end-of-year post, I advocated for going with Elliott and Allen for this season. I'm going to reiterate that here now. Clearly Allen is ready for the show. He has nothing left to prove in the AHL. I'm also not comfortable just handing him the keys. I think Elliott gets none of the credit he deserves. He has now statistically out-played Halak AND Miller in his tenure with the Blues. I don't get what the guy has to do to be given a shot to be our starting goaltender, and running a 50-32 or 55-27 tandem with Allen. Resign Elliott for 2-3 years at 2.5-3 AAV and have Allen as the backup. Miller can go play wherever he wants, as long as it's not St. Louis. No reason to throw good draft picks after bad.
3) Defense: I think our defense is pretty great, but I wouldn't be opposed to change. AP and Jay-Bo are going to be studs for the next 5 years together. We should be a Cup Contender with those two guys alone on our blue-line for the next half-decade. Neither of them should go anywhere. I've seen a lot of people pretty casually throwing Shattenkirk's name around in an attempt to get that #1 C, but I personally think that's a mistake. The only thing that would change my mind is if we can sign Matt Niskanen, and I'd want him signed first before we trade Shatty. Don't make the Perron mistake again.
A couple of thoughts on Shattenkirk: I've seen a lot of negative press on these boards about Shattenkirk, so I thought I'd give him some personal attention. First off, he was our leading scorer this post-season. That's pretty impressive, and one of the reasons why I don't see how trading him really helps us offensively. Second, we didn't shelter him. Sure, he had his rough moments, but the Hawks are the best scoring team in the League. They have superstar offensive players throughout their line-up. Yet we had the confidence in Shatty to play with them, and frankly, he did. He put up points and he was a -1 for the series. In comparison, his partner, the guy who's supposed to be the rugged stay-at-home D-man that allows Shatty to be more aggressive offensively while protecting the fort, Jackman, was a -5, while also being on the ice for pretty much every breakaway opportunity the Hawks had. Now I am by no means a Jackman hater, I love his heart and grit, but for the guy on the pairing who's supposed to be the shut-down guy, he didn't do his job nearly as effectively as Shattenkirk did his. If we do end up trading Shattenkirk, it better be for a total overpayment.
Finally we get to the bottom three. I'm pretty ambivalent on what we do with Polak/Cole/Leopold. If we keep all three, fine. If someone wants to trade us a great Center and they want one of those guys, I'm fine with that too. My only last stray thought on this topic is that either next year or the year after Father Time is going to start catching up with Jackman and we're going to have to move him down to the third pairing. When that happens I want Polak to be no where near him.
4) Forwards: Ah, the proverbial fly in the ointment. Really not too much to say here that hasn't been hashed out in a million other threads, or in my last end-of-year post. It's pretty simple, not enough skill. Horrible asset management. Gaping, glaring hole at Center. Clearly where we need to spend the most time and money to upgrade. Here are a couple of scenarios that I could see working out well for us:
Morrow, Ott, and Roy walking. I understand that some people think Ott might be worth re-signing, but honestly, Jaskin can fill the role Ott played here for 3 million dollars less. If Jaskin can work on his skating, a la David Backes, he might even become an impact player for us. These three should not be back.
Then it gets a little hazier, due to UFA. If we can get Stastny, that solves our problems without having to go the trade route. We can still choose to trade a guy like Berglund or MPS for more futures, but now we don't have to. If Stastny isn't available, then we absolutely need to make a trade for a Center that can work b/t Schwartz and Tarasenko. Spezza is too old/injury prone. Kesler is a bit beat up, but I wouldn't be opposed to him as he's a bit younger then Spezza, and he'd be getting out of Tortorella's, "Gotta abuse your body" system. Staal is fine if Carolina eats 40% of his salary. I'd like to target a younger guy though, like a Stepan. I see a few teams out there with a ton of Center depth, especially young Center depth: Colorado, NYI, Florida, and to a lesser extent Pittsburgh and NYR if they keep Richards.
Now the question becomes who we trade. I'm actually not that interested in trading Shattenkirk, mainly b/c I think players of his type are almost as hard to come by as a #1 Center. Until Schmaltz or Vanelli are ready to step in for him, I won't feel comfortable moving him. If we somehow luck into getting Niskanen, who is going to get PAID this off-season, as he's the only prime-aged offensive defenseman on the market, then my mind changes as well.
The guy I think we should seriously consider making the main piece in a trade package for a Center is Steen. I love Steen, but there are a few thoughts here.
1) He's one of our older players. True, he's only 30, but for us that's a bit older. I said before the series started (In the Army/Hitch job security thread) that if we bow out again in the first round, we should think about taking a page out of Boston's book and retooling our team around Schwartz and Tarasenko, much like they did with Bergeron. This would be a step in that direction, especially if we can get a young Center from Colorado, NYI, or Florida in return.
2) He's coming off a career year. We already sold low on Perron, missed out selling high on Stewart, and then sold low on Stewart. Let's not continue that trend. Steen is a great player, but I don't think he's cracking 30 goals and a point-per-game next year, or really ever again. I'd mark him down for 22-25 goals and 50-55 points next year, which is solid, but not amazing. That wouldn't be a huge issue, except for that fact that Army just paid him pretty sizable money to be a point per game type player.
3) The UFA market is FILLED with guys who are around Steen's age, and either match or better his career production, who also play LW. Vanek(30), Moulson(30), Gaborik(32), Cammalleri(32), and Jokinen(31) are all around Steen's age, can all match his production, for around the same price. Maybe a bit higher for Vanek, but he really is a better player then anyone else out there.
4) We don't need everyone to be a defensive juggernaut. Backes and Oshie are excellent defensively. We could easily afford to put a player like Vanek or Moulson with them, and not see a drop-off in defensive acumen.
So we have two routes to try. If Stastny is available, then we HAVE to sign him. We could ship out Berglund or MPS for some futures if we chose, perhaps near the deadline to help us recoup the loss of our 1st from the Miller debacle. I don't love Berglund, but I don't think he's been right most of this season. If he wants more then 2.8 million, trade him, otherwise I'm willing to keep him, so long as he plays on the Wing. Our lines would look something like:
Schwartz/Stastny/Tarasenko
Steen/Backes/Oshie
Berglund/Sobotka/Jaskin
MPS/Lapierre/Reaves
Cracknell/Porter
Same D
Elliott
Allen
Not bad overall. It gets a little crazier if we miss on Stastny and trade Steen, b/c Steen alone isn't going to get it done, and we're going to have to convince a UFA to come here. If we miss on the UFA, like we did with VL, that's no good. But in this situation we trade Steen+Berglund/MPS/one of the bottom three Dmen (Polak, Cole, Leopold)+futures. That leaves us looking like:
Schwartz-Center-Tarasenko
Vanek-Backes-Oshie
MPS-Sobotka-Jaskin
Porter/Lapierre/Reaves
Cracknell/XXX
Same D
Elliott
Allen
Definitely a different look. Not really sure which one I like better. Either way should work, and won't handcuff us for the immediate (Schwartz/Tarasenko contracts) future. Should still allow us a solid 5-8 year window.
TLDR: GET AN EFFIN CENTER!
Ok, I'm spent. Feel free to agree, disagree, or flame.
This is what I wrote last year the day after we lost to the Kings:
********************************************************
"Here are my thoughts about a lot of things after sleeping on it:
First off, we are SO CLOSE. I know a lot of people on here are upset, and rightfully so. But we are literally one, maybe two, pieces away from going on a 5-8 year run where we should challenge for a Stanley Cup. Any other first round match-up we would have crushed. Even Chicago. You have to walk before you can run in the NHL, and this was our coming out party. We honestly out-played the Cup Champions and every game was as razor thin for an outcome as it could have been. The big challenge this off-season will be to not panic, and perhaps make the one-two moves that will swap players we don't see with us long term as being effective to fill the holes we have on our roster.
Here are some thoughts along those lines, going by positions:
1) Coaching: Hitch got out-coached during this series, and it's not even close. Breaking up the CPR line, not using Tarasenko in a role he could be effective in at all, not sitting ineffective players, D-pairing mayhem, etc. All that being said, I want him back next year. Overall he's a good coach, plus I'm tired of us changing coaches and letting the players off the hook. I think unless we miss the playoffs next year, Hitch should be here for two more years at least. I think his messages post game were the right messages to send, especially after the Game 5 and 6 losses. He needed to be positive when it was necessary, but it's obvious that there's a lack of personal accountability in the room right now according to what I've read from JR, and that needs to change. If anyone can affect that kind of change, it's a crotchety, tough-as-nails older coach with a Cup ring on his finger.
2) Goaltending: I like Brian Elliott. He's a guy that's easy to root for. (Plus he won us a National Championship when I was at Madison) I think that he played very well during this series. He gave up -maybe- two goals (I would argue only one) that were soft. We obviously didn't lose this series because of him. I am not a Halak fan. I think he's soft, and -totally- overrated. He's played 7 amazing play-off games in his entire career. That's it. He's been living off them ever since. (He's actually been pulled almost as many times in the play-offs as he's had great games.) I would have no issue moving forward with an Elliott/Allen tandem, or making a trade to get a "True #1 goalie" and have Elliott back-up. Personally, I think we should save money at this position, so I'm all for the Elliott/Allen tandem.
3) Defense: I think it's pretty clear that Jordan Leopold (Even with all the slobbering Hitch gave him via the media) was a huge weak link. He did nothing on the PP once he came over, and other then his first 3-4 games, became increasingly more ineffective every night. I'm pretty sure that had Armstrong known Jay-Bo was going to be available to us, we would never have traded for Leopold. I think next year it's again pretty obvious what we should do at this position; let Leo walk, lock up AP and Shatty, then go back to the D-pairings everyone with eyes knows work well, Jay-Bo/AP, Jax/Shatty, Russell/Polak, with Cole as our extra. I'm not as down on Polak and Jackman as some on these boards, I thought that overall they played well. I think that you almost have to throw out games 5 and 6 as to the effectiveness of the players, b/c everyone was so banged up and tired, everyone was making mistakes. The Kings D were doing the same thing. Polak was a monster in games 1-4. I would like to have seen more from Shatty, but I think Leo was really holding him back, both on the ice and from a Hitch confidence perspective.
4) Forwards: Here's where it gets interesting. To me, this is where we need to focus on making changes. They don't -have- to be during the off-season though. Obviously AMac is gone, and good riddance. I think after their performance in this series, the CPR line is here to stay, maybe not together all the time, but all three of those guys earned a spot in the NHL next year. I think Sobotka, Backes, Tarasenko, Steen, and Schwartz have done enough that we should feel comfortable holding on to them. That leaves Stewart, Oshie, Perron, and Berglund. These guys have all under-preformed at one time or another and are clearly the "Home grown" talent Hitchcock was talking about after Game 6. The trick for management is figuring out which guys can rebound and continue to grow, and which guys can't. I think a lot of who gets moved out of this group (I see a possibility of us moving between all, some, or none of them) depends on which team we're trading with, who we're asking for, and what they need. Also, what the RFAs are asking for contract-wise will make a difference as well. As much as I think a Carter type sniper would be nice, we have guys that can turn into that type of player in Tarasenko and Rattie. What we really need is a #1 C that can distribute, but also play well defensively.
I'll break down my thoughts on each player we might move:
Stewart - Pros: When he's on, he's on. Guy can score like a machine. Drops the mitts. Good size. GREAT speed for his size. Excellent eye-hand coordination. Great hands. Cons: Streaky. Too often doesn't use his size to gain position. Horrible on battles against the wall. Soft. When not scoring, affects other areas of his game. Poor hockey sense and vision. Currently an RFA, I wouldn't offer him more then 3.5 over 4 years.
Berglund - Pros: Works hard, and is hard on himself to improve. Great shot. Size. Improved on face-offs every year. Can win board battles consistently. Defensively sound. Cons: Skating. Skating. Skating. Horrible acceleration and agility. Below average vision and hockey sense. Skating. Lacks willingness to go to the dirty areas. So hard on himself that it affects his confidence. Skating. Currently an RFA, wouldn't offer him more then 3 million on a one year deal.
Perron - Pros: Hard worker. Always striving to improve. Passionate about hockey. Smaller player that is always chippy. Amazing hands/dekes. Vision. GREAT along the boards, excellent at puck control. Cons: Takes stupid penalties. Tries to do too much with the puck at times. Streaky. Gets lazy at times with checking. Currently signed at 3.8 million for the next 3 years.
Oshie - Pros: Hard working. Hustle. Decent hands and vision. Can play all situations. Physical. Average to above average hockey sense. Cons: Streaky scorer. Doesn't shoot enough. Sometimes tries to do too much, and turns the puck over. Injury prone a bit. Can't keep his feet. Currently signed at 4.2 for the next 4 years.
Of those four I think Oshie is the one that is least likely to be moved. We don't look to him for scoring the way we do with Berglund/Perron/Stewart, and he actually has a role on this team when he isn't scoring, unlike Berglund/Perron/Stewart.
Final analysis: As I said before, this team is so close. I know that staying the course is not a popular idea at this time, but I personally think it's the right one. The only moves I think we should make this off-season are locking up our RFAs to affordable deals, and look to move Halak for a decent return. At next year's trade deadline, look to make a deal to fill the holes we still have.
Reasoning: Hitchcock still has yet to get a full training camp in his tenure as our head coach. Another off-season of training for young guys like Rattie, Schwartz, Tarasenko, and Jaskin along with a full training camp/pre-season will do wonders for those guys. I think the condensed schedule hurt us this year, as we have a lot of bigger guys like Backes and Berglund that couldn't really recuperate as much as they had in the past. I'd like to see us bring Lethera over to create some competition for the Center position. I think I'd be less angry with Berglund if he played Wing and shot the puck every time he had it on his stick like Steen. We will have an absolute glut of NHL talented forwards starting next year. That's when we can start making deals for big name superstar players that can put us over the top. Remember, Malkin is a UFA after next season ^.^
Final thought: Have faith. Our ownership and management has shown that they have the savvy and business sense to do what is right for this team. It hurts right now, trust me I know it does. But we have so much good to look forward to."
********************************************************
Well. First thing I noticed when reading that today was how my faith in this organization has taken quite a hit. I'm not nearly as optimistic this off-season as I was last off-season. That's mainly b/c I don't view Army in the same way I did last year. Army's moves this season have been disastrous. We also have no clue what the plan for this team is anymore. We spent years building up all this "depth" that we could score with by exploiting match-ups and grinding down the other team. I can understand that strategy, and support it. Yet we gave up almost all of our "Depth" assets for nothing that helped us score more, or even really improved our team at all. We traded Perron and Stewart for MPS and Ott, with some draft picks thrown in on both sides. Ott didn't score a single goal for us in 25+ games, and MPS didn't even see the ice during the playoffs. Completely unacceptable asset management. And don't give me that line of reasoning about getting Schwartz and Tarasenko more ice time. The coach decides who gets ice time, not the players. If you want Perron to play 3rd line minutes, there's nothing stopping Hitch from doing that. Tarasenko wasn't seeing PP time at the beginning of the year without Perron anyway.
This is my biggest point of contention with Armstrong this year. As I said in my last end-of-year post, forward was our most glaring need, especially at Center. We finally have all these assets we've developed, to the point where we have a surplus. Yet instead of trading that surplus in a depth-for-best-player move, which I advocated for, we went.......horribly wrong. I don't think Army should be fired yet, but he should absolutely be on the hot seat with how he handled our assets this season. We're clearly not good enough as currently constructed to beat the top teams in the West, what was our record (not counting shootouts) against the Kings/Ducks/Sharks/Hawks? Pretty bad if I remember right. I don't accept the excuse that we had a crappy match-up for the first round having to play the Hawks this year, we were going to have to go through them and also one of the Pacific Big Three to get to the SCF anyway, so who cares (Other then for financial reasons, which I get) if we played them in the first round or the second round. Other then play-off revenue, getting Minnesota in the first round and beating them would have been irrelevant to how good this team really is.
Going by the same format, I'm going to break down our positions with some analysis:
1) Coaching: I still like Hitch. He's done something multiple other head coaches couldn't do with this team, and that's make us a legit contender. Not to mention I don't think there's really anyone else out there that's better. He does need someone to help him with adjustments though, it doesn't seem like he's very good at them. Then again, with our roster and injuries, what was he supposed to do? Play Tarasenko and Schwartz with Berglund? With Roy? Those two aren't finishing the chances that Sobotka missed on. Oshie and Steen were supposed to be centered by whom exactly after Backes went out? Roy? Berglund? Lapierre? I will say that he misused Reaves. Reaves is a great 4th line player, but he's not a 3rd line player. Neither are Porter or Cracknell. Reaves was very effective in game 1 until Hitch shortened up bench b/c the game was close. After the Seabrook hit, the NHL made it clear that no shenanigans were going to be allowed. Hell Reaves got a penalty for hitting a Chicago player clean at the beginning of G3. After that he really didn't have a role in this series. Misusing Reaves wasn't the reason we lost this series.
What I would like to see this off-season is a big push to get Adam Oates to come here and run our PP. He has run the best PP in the League two-three years in a row with different teams. If he can't fix it, then we just have ****** players.
2) Goaltending: Ryan Miller.....yeeech. I wasn't a fan of the trade at the time, not because I think he's a bad goalie, but because I don't think this team needs to pay big money to a goalie, or needed to give up huge assets to get a marginal upgrade in net. We're build as a team. We don't have superstars like Crosby or Getzlaf or Toews that are supposed to carry the mail. When our team is playing well, we win. When it's playing poorly, we lose. I think Detroit had it right all these years, you pay a goalie that's competent, and then use the savings from that position to craft the best team you can have. Worked out pretty well for them. In my last end-of-year post, I advocated for going with Elliott and Allen for this season. I'm going to reiterate that here now. Clearly Allen is ready for the show. He has nothing left to prove in the AHL. I'm also not comfortable just handing him the keys. I think Elliott gets none of the credit he deserves. He has now statistically out-played Halak AND Miller in his tenure with the Blues. I don't get what the guy has to do to be given a shot to be our starting goaltender, and running a 50-32 or 55-27 tandem with Allen. Resign Elliott for 2-3 years at 2.5-3 AAV and have Allen as the backup. Miller can go play wherever he wants, as long as it's not St. Louis. No reason to throw good draft picks after bad.
3) Defense: I think our defense is pretty great, but I wouldn't be opposed to change. AP and Jay-Bo are going to be studs for the next 5 years together. We should be a Cup Contender with those two guys alone on our blue-line for the next half-decade. Neither of them should go anywhere. I've seen a lot of people pretty casually throwing Shattenkirk's name around in an attempt to get that #1 C, but I personally think that's a mistake. The only thing that would change my mind is if we can sign Matt Niskanen, and I'd want him signed first before we trade Shatty. Don't make the Perron mistake again.
A couple of thoughts on Shattenkirk: I've seen a lot of negative press on these boards about Shattenkirk, so I thought I'd give him some personal attention. First off, he was our leading scorer this post-season. That's pretty impressive, and one of the reasons why I don't see how trading him really helps us offensively. Second, we didn't shelter him. Sure, he had his rough moments, but the Hawks are the best scoring team in the League. They have superstar offensive players throughout their line-up. Yet we had the confidence in Shatty to play with them, and frankly, he did. He put up points and he was a -1 for the series. In comparison, his partner, the guy who's supposed to be the rugged stay-at-home D-man that allows Shatty to be more aggressive offensively while protecting the fort, Jackman, was a -5, while also being on the ice for pretty much every breakaway opportunity the Hawks had. Now I am by no means a Jackman hater, I love his heart and grit, but for the guy on the pairing who's supposed to be the shut-down guy, he didn't do his job nearly as effectively as Shattenkirk did his. If we do end up trading Shattenkirk, it better be for a total overpayment.
Finally we get to the bottom three. I'm pretty ambivalent on what we do with Polak/Cole/Leopold. If we keep all three, fine. If someone wants to trade us a great Center and they want one of those guys, I'm fine with that too. My only last stray thought on this topic is that either next year or the year after Father Time is going to start catching up with Jackman and we're going to have to move him down to the third pairing. When that happens I want Polak to be no where near him.
4) Forwards: Ah, the proverbial fly in the ointment. Really not too much to say here that hasn't been hashed out in a million other threads, or in my last end-of-year post. It's pretty simple, not enough skill. Horrible asset management. Gaping, glaring hole at Center. Clearly where we need to spend the most time and money to upgrade. Here are a couple of scenarios that I could see working out well for us:
Morrow, Ott, and Roy walking. I understand that some people think Ott might be worth re-signing, but honestly, Jaskin can fill the role Ott played here for 3 million dollars less. If Jaskin can work on his skating, a la David Backes, he might even become an impact player for us. These three should not be back.
Then it gets a little hazier, due to UFA. If we can get Stastny, that solves our problems without having to go the trade route. We can still choose to trade a guy like Berglund or MPS for more futures, but now we don't have to. If Stastny isn't available, then we absolutely need to make a trade for a Center that can work b/t Schwartz and Tarasenko. Spezza is too old/injury prone. Kesler is a bit beat up, but I wouldn't be opposed to him as he's a bit younger then Spezza, and he'd be getting out of Tortorella's, "Gotta abuse your body" system. Staal is fine if Carolina eats 40% of his salary. I'd like to target a younger guy though, like a Stepan. I see a few teams out there with a ton of Center depth, especially young Center depth: Colorado, NYI, Florida, and to a lesser extent Pittsburgh and NYR if they keep Richards.
Now the question becomes who we trade. I'm actually not that interested in trading Shattenkirk, mainly b/c I think players of his type are almost as hard to come by as a #1 Center. Until Schmaltz or Vanelli are ready to step in for him, I won't feel comfortable moving him. If we somehow luck into getting Niskanen, who is going to get PAID this off-season, as he's the only prime-aged offensive defenseman on the market, then my mind changes as well.
The guy I think we should seriously consider making the main piece in a trade package for a Center is Steen. I love Steen, but there are a few thoughts here.
1) He's one of our older players. True, he's only 30, but for us that's a bit older. I said before the series started (In the Army/Hitch job security thread) that if we bow out again in the first round, we should think about taking a page out of Boston's book and retooling our team around Schwartz and Tarasenko, much like they did with Bergeron. This would be a step in that direction, especially if we can get a young Center from Colorado, NYI, or Florida in return.
2) He's coming off a career year. We already sold low on Perron, missed out selling high on Stewart, and then sold low on Stewart. Let's not continue that trend. Steen is a great player, but I don't think he's cracking 30 goals and a point-per-game next year, or really ever again. I'd mark him down for 22-25 goals and 50-55 points next year, which is solid, but not amazing. That wouldn't be a huge issue, except for that fact that Army just paid him pretty sizable money to be a point per game type player.
3) The UFA market is FILLED with guys who are around Steen's age, and either match or better his career production, who also play LW. Vanek(30), Moulson(30), Gaborik(32), Cammalleri(32), and Jokinen(31) are all around Steen's age, can all match his production, for around the same price. Maybe a bit higher for Vanek, but he really is a better player then anyone else out there.
4) We don't need everyone to be a defensive juggernaut. Backes and Oshie are excellent defensively. We could easily afford to put a player like Vanek or Moulson with them, and not see a drop-off in defensive acumen.
So we have two routes to try. If Stastny is available, then we HAVE to sign him. We could ship out Berglund or MPS for some futures if we chose, perhaps near the deadline to help us recoup the loss of our 1st from the Miller debacle. I don't love Berglund, but I don't think he's been right most of this season. If he wants more then 2.8 million, trade him, otherwise I'm willing to keep him, so long as he plays on the Wing. Our lines would look something like:
Schwartz/Stastny/Tarasenko
Steen/Backes/Oshie
Berglund/Sobotka/Jaskin
MPS/Lapierre/Reaves
Cracknell/Porter
Same D
Elliott
Allen
Not bad overall. It gets a little crazier if we miss on Stastny and trade Steen, b/c Steen alone isn't going to get it done, and we're going to have to convince a UFA to come here. If we miss on the UFA, like we did with VL, that's no good. But in this situation we trade Steen+Berglund/MPS/one of the bottom three Dmen (Polak, Cole, Leopold)+futures. That leaves us looking like:
Schwartz-Center-Tarasenko
Vanek-Backes-Oshie
MPS-Sobotka-Jaskin
Porter/Lapierre/Reaves
Cracknell/XXX
Same D
Elliott
Allen
Definitely a different look. Not really sure which one I like better. Either way should work, and won't handcuff us for the immediate (Schwartz/Tarasenko contracts) future. Should still allow us a solid 5-8 year window.
TLDR: GET AN EFFIN CENTER!
Ok, I'm spent. Feel free to agree, disagree, or flame.
