Yeah, and there are some big objections that can be made about the N-S narrative. We must no doubt become much more physical, much tougher to play against in front of the net and so forth. Stand up for each other better, battle harder.
But is it a good idea that we don’t take the puck to the net and dump it into the corner instead? Is it a good idea that when there is a line change, we don’t try to keep possession of the puck but instead dump it in to avoid mistakes? Is it a good idea to rush the transition play? The first two are clear no’s from my POV. The third is something we can improve, but not by just giving the puck away. Both the second and third essentially means that we give away momentum and the last thing we want is of course to be pushed back and run over in our own zone.
Playing “N-S” that way worked 17 years ago in the NHL and still in the AHL, but it doesn’t even remotely work well in the NHL today. No good team plays that way, and all other good teams will just push you back significantly if you do. Hence why it’s really important to have a management that just don’t do what “everyone” sloppishly talks about. Quinn was totally clueless here. And if you bring in people who had success with this style while it worked before the lockout or potentially in the AHL. Every time there is a big change in hockey or other sports, some brilliant minds are totally blind to changes that obviously must be made.
