Softest team in league history

[Ugene Magic]

We don't want prevention. We want revenge.

How about we be the first to initiate?

I'm going with a Marchand type player. Not tough.

I think we have a couple guys to stir the Plot.

 

[lastcupever75]

I actually know people who think they are missing Glass' toughness. People are brainwashed so easily.



When Simmonds and the Schenns are the big nasties we are worrying about... I mean seriously?

The Pens can always throw Farnham in the lineup for Philly and let him go after their stars. It's not like there is some rule agt the Pens doing it. Rust and Uher can do it as well, but they can actually play hockey.

Again, I'd love to have a Kane in the lineup, but there are a limited amount of these guys around. I see people whining about the Pens being soft, but they just whine. They don't offer solutions. The rare time these posters do, it's some goon or halfwit.

You don't find these players in FA because their teams lock them up, or in the rare cases they hit the market, they get overpaid.

The leftovers are guys with warts. Usually big warts like Downie. This is why the org ended up with Adams and Glass.

You need to develop these kind of guys internally. This notion that they can just run out and find big, physical players that can play the game whenever they want, needs to stop. Those kind of guys are at a premium.

i'm with ya, for the most part. and not really advocating an enforcer just a tougher, bigger line up, like you said.
scoff at simmonds and the shenns, but when we back away from their physical play ...we'll scream for someone to combat that. our grittiest player (hornquist) is lying on the ice half the time when trying to be in front of the net.

solutions have been offered. both now and in the past. for around the same price we could have resigned cooke instead of dupuis.

stewart didnt sign for a whole lot this year
billick is rumored to be up for grabs
dealt away despres for no reason
dealt away bortuzzo

etc etc

 

[duffy9748]

Chicago is not soft at all. Don't understand where that comes from.
Pittsburgh typically falls apart mentally and it usually starts with core players in Malkin and Letang.

 

[SaturdayNightSlegr]

Chicago is not soft at all. Don't understand where that comes from.
Pittsburgh typically falls apart mentally and it usually starts with core players in Malkin and Letang.

Great point. This team needs more mental toughness. The 08-09 wings had tons of it. Its all about ability to stay disciplined when the other team starts taking runs and/or frustrating you with a trapping style. The whole "initiate don't retaliate thing".

Hornqvist is all about this type of mental toughness. I could see a guy like Oskar Sundqvist helping in this regard; as well as Niclas Andersen if he plays. Considering all the Swedes on the Wings teams maybe its a Swede thing. I don't know.

 

[Darth Vitale]

Doesn't matter how physical you are (Anaheim) or how soft you are (Chicago) - it matters how you play the game.

Anaheim vs. Chicago was the exact case in point to this discussion..

Not only that but I find the original post sort of ironic. On the one hand complains it was the softest team he's seen in 30 years, on the other hand complains about all the "tough" players we lost this summer. Those "tough" players obviously didn't do their jobs very well / didn't make us tougher, so really who gives a crap? Despres is the one that really hurts because he had the ability to play both a skill game and a physical game, but otherwise most of those guys are dime-a-dozen acquisitions; we can pick guys like that up or develop them pretty much any time.

The system that's in place is what matters most. I don't deny you want a balance in terms of having both skill and sandpaper on your team, but it's pretty clear loading up with sandpaper doesn't automatically make your team "tough".

The system, the attitude the players carry, that stuff all matters in the "tough to play against" equation. If a team with an edge is what you're hoping for, Mike Johnston is not your coach.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

i'm with ya, for the most part. and not really advocating an enforcer just a tougher, bigger line up, like you said.
scoff at simmonds and the shenns, but when we back away from their physical play ...we'll scream for someone to combat that. our grittiest player (hornquist) is lying on the ice half the time when trying to be in front of the net.

solutions have been offered. both now and in the past. for around the same price we could have resigned cooke instead of dupuis.

stewart didnt sign for a whole lot this year
billick is rumored to be up for grabs
dealt away despres for no reason
dealt away bortuzzo

etc etc

I think it's universally accepted the Despres trade was idiotic. He would have made this team pretty complete. As for Bort, I was pretty outspoken about the writing being on the wall for him.

There are a few guys in WBS that can replace what Bort brought, but not Despres.

If Plotnikov and Sundqvist can translate their games to the NHL, they should have a real nice mix in their fwd lineup.

I've mentioned it several times, but Dumo is their biggest hope for having a physical presence back on the blueline. Like Despres and Bort, he isn't naturally that way, but he can learn to be.

If people want more size and toughness, then pull for guys like McNeill, Ruopp and Biggs (I guess).

Biggs can handle himself and could skate up and down the ice and look better than Adams I guess. Just don't expect anything in the way of offensive production unless he has had some dramatic improvements this summer.

 

[Darth Vitale]

Also regarding the Lucic debate earlier in the thread. You'd be nuts not to want that guy on our team right now. He has had a couple off years at random times but he's still 27. He's not in the Dustin Brown "fading fast" category just yet. I think he'll do well on that top line.

The thing about teams like the Kings, it's really hard for them to stay at the top two years running because the way they play it just beats the hell out of them. Won't be surprised to see them back in the fold next year. At all.

 

[Ogrezilla]

at his price? I think its certainly debatable.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

This is pretty much where I stand as well. It doesn't need to be an either or situation, we can be a skilled team while still having some grit and tenacity. There's a big difference between wanting some good forechecking forwards to wear down the other team's defensemen and a tough, crease clearing defenseman and employing a bunch of plugs like Glass and Adams.

It's too bad they couldn't have gotten Devane instead of Biggs in the Kessel trade. The jury is still out on Biggs, but Devane is also a huge guy with a real mean streak that skates and handles the puck well enough to take a regular shift. I think he was viewed as one of "Burke's guys" sort of like Biggs and kind of shoved to the back burner with the Marlies. It'll be interesting to see if either of them can bounce back with their new teams. Devane's a pretty unique player, he just has that "oh ****" presence about him. I'm glad he went to Nashville instead of Philly or the Isles.

Based on their reps, both Devane and Biggs seem like the type of player we could use, anyway. Doesn't seem that either's a very good bet to be a regular NHLer, but if we're taking a flier on a guy we might as well try to address a weakness.

I'm not expecting a lot with Biggs, but who knows? Maybe without the burden of expectation he can turn things around and become a 4th line bruiser.

 

[eXile59]

Chicago is not soft at all. Don't understand where that comes from.
Pittsburgh typically falls apart mentally and it usually starts with core players in Malkin and Letang.

Yes they are. They are consistently in bottom 5 in hits and penalty minutes. They rely on talent to win games.

I don't understand how people are even trying to make the argument they aren't.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Yes they are. They are consistently in bottom 5 in hits and penalty minutes. They rely on talent to win games.

I don't understand how people are even trying to make the argument they aren't.

Its a bit silly, yeah. If Hornqvist played for Chicago, I assume these same people would prop him up as some sort of physically dominant deity. Really, Seabrook is the only guy they have who adds a physical kind of game that we are missing. The only other real physicality they have is Bickell, Shaw and Roszival, who I think align pretty comparatively with what I expect from Plotnikov, Sundqvist and Cole.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Its a bit silly, yeah. If Hornqvist played for Chicago, I assume these same people would prop him up as some sort of physically dominant deity. Really, Seabrook is the only guy they have who adds a physical kind of game that we are missing. The only other real physicality they have is Bickell, Shaw and Roszival, who I think align pretty comparatively with what I expect from Plotnikov, Sundqvist and Cole.

A lot's contingent on those guys coming through on that front. We're basically counting on two rookies who've never played an NHL game (or any NA hockey) to be our grittiest forwards.

I'm more than willing to run with that, but if they falter, we're gonna have to get it from somewhere.

 

[Ogrezilla]

A lot's contingent on those guys coming through on that front. We're basically counting on two rookies who've never played an NHL game to be our grittiest players.

I'm more than willing to run with that, but if they falter, we're gonna have to get it from somewhere.

Well, Kunitz, Letang, Hornqvist and Perron are also all more physical than their counterparts on the Hawks line-up. Hell, so are Sid and Geno.

 

[Jacob]

I think hit totals are misleading because the Blackhawks' forecheck specifically discourages finishing checks, they have more of a swarm-the-puck style of forechecking and there's not a lot of initiating contact. PIM totals are misleading because they don't fight much, because they don't need to, they're frequently in the lead very early in games.

I wouldn't say they're one of the tougher teams to play against but they're not soft either. They have big bodies, some guys that'll plaster you against the glass, some trash talkers and rats, some net-crashers, and a lot of guys willing to take hits and to block shots, which I count towards the physicality of a team. They're middle of the pack in my opinion.

 

[Ogrezilla]

I think hit totals are misleading because the Blackhawks' forecheck specifically discourages finishing checks, they have more of a swarm-the-puck style of forechecking and there's not a lot of initiating contact. PIM totals are misleading because they don't fight much, because they don't need to, they're frequently in the lead very early in games.

I wouldn't say they're one of the tougher teams to play against but they're not soft either. They have big bodies, some guys that'll plaster you against the glass, some trash talkers and rats, and a lot of guys willing to take hits and to block shots, which I count towards the physicality of a team. They're middle of the pack in my opinion.

If Chicago isn't a soft team, then neither are we. That's what I'm trying to say really.

 

[Jacob]

I don't really see us as having had a Seabrook or Bickell equivalent down the stretch and in the playoffs last year. The closest we had to Bickell was Winnik. I think we were a smaller team than Chicago last year but this year we might be more even with them, but we don't know how Plotnikov and Sundqvist's physical games are going to translate if they even make the team in the first place. They might not.

I just think there's a lot of variables that go into being a soft or physical team other than hits and fighting majors. You gotta include size (and where that size is in the line-up), shot blocking, willingness to take hits to make plays, guys that crash the net, chirpers and rats and trash-talkers, etc.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Well, Kunitz, Letang, Hornqvist and Perron are also all more physical than their counterparts on the Hawks line-up. Hell, so are Sid and Geno.

I understand the raw total comparison, but I think we can both understand the difference between 5'11", 195-200 lb players being physical and 6'4", 220-230 lb players doing the same.

 

[Ogrezilla]

I understand the raw total comparison, but I think we can both understand the difference between a 5'11, 195-200 lb players players playing physical and 6'4", 220-230 lb players doing the same.

so we're missing a Seabrook, and Plotnikov is a little smaller than Bickell. And Sundqvist is 30 lbs heavier than Shaw.

 

[BustaKapanen]

at his price? I think its certainly debatable.

Boston retained half of lucic's salary, although it's moot point I'd take lucic at alil over 3mil all day everyday. Great addition for the kings at that price imo.

 

[Darth Vitale]

at his price? I think its certainly debatable.

I more meant in general terms. Some folks were talking like he's washed up. That's far from being true IMO. Whether he's too expensive or not is another thing but the 2.5M+ retained salary certainly helps LA's argument for this upcoming season. What happens after that, who knows.

 

[Ogrezilla]

I more meant in general terms. Some folks were talking like he's washed up. That's far from being true IMO. Whether he's too expensive or not is another thing but the 2.5M+ retained salary certainly helps LA's argument for this upcoming season. What happens after that, who knows.

right, its a fine move for LA with the retention. At his full price its at least a risk.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

so we're missing a Seabrook, and Plotnikov is a little smaller than Bickell. And Sundqvist is 30 lbs heavier than Shaw.

But again, this is contingent on both rookies' physical games translating seamlessly across continents and up a level or two in competition.

If they do, great. If not, it needs to be addressed.

 

[Ogrezilla]

But again, this is contingent on both rookies' physical games translating seamlessly across continents and up a level or two in competition.

If they do, great. If not, it needs to be addressed.

If our rookies are not effective hockey players at this level, our team is in trouble. That's a problem we've been asking to have for years.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

If our rookies are not effective hockey players at this level, our team is in trouble. That's a problem we've been asking to have for years.

That's another issue. Maybe they're fine players but their physical play just doesn't work the same way on this side of the pond, or maybe it'll take a year or two.

Like I said, I'm fine with giving them the reins here. But it's not a sure thing, and if their physical play doesn't translate it needs to come from somewhere else.

 

[Ogrezilla]

That's another issue. Maybe they're fine players but their physical play just doesn't work the same way on this side of the pond, or maybe it'll take a year or two.

Like I said, I'm fine with giving them the reins here. But it's not a sure thing, and if their physical play doesn't translate it needs to come from somewhere else.

If they are fine players but are less physical, I really don't care. Size is just one of many tools to help a player be effective. An effective player is an effective player.