Talk Slowly and Use Small Words, its the Michael Del Zotto Thread

[Kwayry]

It was a bad mistake, but in fairness, he made the exact same play a few minutes earlier, and it led directly to a goal (I think it was on Moore's goal). Doesn't excuse the poor decision to be overly aggressive when 2 goals up, but you can't mention one without the other.

And just to bring something up from earlier in the thread -- I do remember questions about his skating in his draft year.

Looking back at the replay again, I will disagree with that.
And that's exactly when you pinch, when the forward is facing his own net with his back to you.

Somebody last night had a screenshot of Brass infront of DZ, but looking at the different angles from MSG, it must have been for a split second, Brass came from the bench and should have clearly seen DZ took a step to pinch, not sure why he made a beeline for the puck eventhough DZ was there.

Biron made a similar argument on the highlight package.

 

[Rangers ftw]

I love the thread title. Always makes me smile. MDZ need to play on the left, to do that he need to be traded. It's that simple really.

 

[aufheben]

But why even pinch in that situation? It's nearing the end of the game, we're up by 2. Just let the forwards handle it. The highlight of DZ's game could have been his play on the Moore goal; Whether that bad pinch was DZ's fault, Brassard's fault, 50/50, 25/75, what will be remembered is him being involved in a costly play.

Let's be frank, costly pinches aren't exactly rare with Del Zotto. Right side, left side, I've seen him make that same play countless times.

 

[Off Sides]

Good season or not if he is not moved we are looking at a new contract for him next year. Do we give what will be a 24 year old 3rd pairing d-man next year a 2 year $3.5 mil per year contract for say a 25 point season this year?--if he even gets to that.

They would probably have to start negotiations at what he could get in arbitration since he's eligible.

Any offers lower than what he thinks he could get in arbitration, he might as well take the Rangers to it and see what happens. The comparable players and their contracts are not very favorable to the Rangers getting him cheaply through the process considering his stats.


If this is accurate and I think it is
http://www.wingingitinmotown.com/2013/7/12/4514168/cba-arbitration-boolsheet

The other issue would be the new rule about not being able to walk away from a player if he gets awarded less than 3.5M per.

If MDZ gets an award of less than 3.5M per the Rangers have to sign him to that deal.

If he gets more than the 3.5M per year award, are the Rangers going to walk away and lose him for nothing?

That also effect his value on the trade market, any team that is thinking about acquiring him will have the same concerns about what his next contract is going to look like.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

Looking back at the replay again, I will disagree with that.
And that's exactly when you pinch, when the forward is facing his own net with his back to you.

Somebody last night had a screenshot of Brass infront of DZ, but looking at the different angles from MSG, it must have been for a split second, Brass came from the bench and should have clearly seen DZ took a step to pinch, not sure why he made a beeline for the puck eventhough DZ was there.

Biron made a similar argument on the highlight package.

Nope. Brassard was ahead of MDZ the entire time he crossed the red line in front of MDZ, and was across the blue line before him as well. I'll post pictures when I get home. The picture you posted is from after the pinch. With Brassard leaning toward the Stars player giving the illusion he is behind Del Zotto. If he was behind him it was after the pinch because he engaged first.

 

[eco's bones]

They would probably have to start negotiations at what he could get in arbitration since he's eligible.

Any offers lower than what he thinks he could get in arbitration, he might as well take the Rangers to it and see what happens. The comparable players and their contracts are not very favorable to the Rangers getting him cheaply through the process considering his stats.


If this is accurate and I think it is
http://www.wingingitinmotown.com/2013/7/12/4514168/cba-arbitration-boolsheet

The other issue would be the new rule about not being able to walk away from a player if he gets awarded less than 3.5M per.

If MDZ gets an award of less than 3.5M per the Rangers have to sign him to that deal.

If he gets more than the 3.5M per year award, are the Rangers going to walk away and lose him for nothing?

That also effect his value on the trade market, any team that is thinking about acquiring him will have the same concerns about what his next contract is going to look like.

It looks like an eventuality that we're moving Del Zotto. For what?--is the question. AV--like him or not does not seem to like Del Zotto and IMO and the opinions of many others (some who think DZ should be given more chance and some who think he is overrated) is not giving him the ice time that plays to what should be his strengths. Personally if it were me McDonagh and Staal are more than capable of giving us 25 good minutes of ice time each on the left side if they're healthy.

I really don't see the point of giving a big contract to a player that has been marginalized as much as Del Zotto has been in the Rangers scheme of things. Even if he were getting the ice time he'd have to produce more than he has in the past to justify a bigger contract. The automatic raises to qualify young RFA's who are not improving enough to justify them--the arbitration process when it applies only complicates even more. A third pairing maybe 15 minute a night guy who finds himself scratched now and again in a cap world becomes a problem. The same principle of paying bottom line forwards or backup goalies applies to bottom pairing defensemen. You don't give backup goalies or 4th line wingers $3.5 mil per year contracts either. Now it is true that on a lot of teams DZ would be a top 4 d-man but not on this Rangers team--the cap ceiling applies to all teams though. Any team has to make up its mind who gets the money.

 

[Off Sides]

It looks like an eventuality that we're moving Del Zotto. For what?--is the question. AV--like him or not does not seem to like Del Zotto and IMO and the opinions of many others (some who think DZ should be given more chance and some who think he is overrated) is not giving him the ice time that plays to what should be his strengths. Personally if it were me McDonagh and Staal are more than capable of giving us 25 good minutes of ice time each on the left side if they're healthy.

I really don't see the point of giving a big contract to a player that has been marginalized as much as Del Zotto has been in the Rangers scheme of things. Even if he were getting the ice time he'd have to produce more than he has in the past to justify a big contract. The automatic raises to qualify young RFA's who are not improving enough to justify them--the arbitration process when it applies only complicates even more. A third pairing maybe 15 minute a night guy who finds himself scratched now and again in a cap world becomes a problem. The same principle of paying bottom line forwards or backup goalies applies to bottom pairing defensemen. You don't give backup goalies or 4th line wingers $3.5 mil per year contracts either. Now it is true that on a lot of teams DZ would be a top 4 d-man but not on this Rangers team--the cap ceiling applies to all teams though. Any team has to make up its mind who gets the money.

I agree and will sort of reiterate what you wrote but... I'm really not sure what they'd get back in trade for Del Zotto, guess that is the other thread discussion but most of those players being discussed seem like long shots.

Del Zotto himself going forward, if the Rangers were to resign him, I'm not sure where he fits. McD is here, Staal is signed for next season, so unless either are moved he is still 3rd pair. If Moore is being groomed for that spot at a cheaper rate, MDZ is moved to the right.

If Girardi and Stralman are both here, he is 3rd pair RD. If either leave that makes MDZ 2nd pair, if both leave, he is top RD and he's just not very good over there.

He has to be traded but unless some other team has a similar player in a similar situation, or if they would rather have MDZ than whatever return they could get for a rental, or if they wanted him as part of a package, I guess it could make sense.

Del Zotto on his own just does not hold that much value. Not sure a rebuilding team is going to want his new contract, not sure a contender is going to be able to afford it, or choose to afford it under the cap if they have other options.

I think the longer they wait, the more his value goes down. At least if they made the move early enough the other team might find some value in having him for the rest of the season to help them this year and maybe see if he becomes worth that next contract in the mean time.

 

[smoneil]

See for me, I just think there are too many things we haven't tried. Why is Del Zotto the only one who can be tried on the right side of a pair? Before moving MDZ, we should definitely see what a MDZ-Staal pair looks like. We should see what a MDZ-McD pair looks like (I think MDZ-Girardi is too risky due to relative lack of speed on the part of both players). Frankly, I think a top four D of MDZ-McD and Staal Girardi is ideal--puck movers with solid D on one pair, and a shut-down pair (with experience playing together) on the other.

I also want Staal re-signed and committed to the team before moving the only player on the roster who has proven to be capable of top 4 LD (after McD and Staal). If there's even a chance that Staal is looking to move on, then we need to hold on to MDZ and play him 3rd pair LD with PP and PK time.

People on here have dismissed that concern because we apparently can't make decisions based on what might happen in the future, but I've seen many of those same people claiming that MDZ needs to be moved because of some huge contract...that he might get...in the future...

Regardless, if you can't get fair value for a 23 year old 35-40 point, top 4 d-man, then you don't move him. We have not yet exhausted our options on that front--there are a LOT of things AV hasn't tried (like seeing if McD, Staal, or Moore can play the right side).

 

[SKjEi o2]

See for me, I just think there are too many things we haven't tried. Why is Del Zotto the only one who can be tried on the right side of a pair? Before moving MDZ, we should definitely see what a MDZ-Staal pair looks like. We should see what a MDZ-McD pair looks like (I think MDZ-Girardi is too risky due to relative lack of speed on the part of both players). Frankly, I think a top four D of MDZ-McD and Staal Girardi is ideal--puck movers with solid D on one pair, and a shut-down pair (with experience playing together) on the other.

I also want Staal re-signed and committed to the team before moving the only player on the roster who has proven to be capable of top 4 LD (after McD and Staal). If there's even a chance that Staal is looking to move on, then we need to hold on to MDZ and play him 3rd pair LD with PP and PK time.

People on here have dismissed that concern because we apparently can't make decisions based on what might happen in the future, but I've seen many of those same people claiming that MDZ needs to be moved because of some huge contract...that he might get...in the future...

Regardless, if you can't get fair value for a 23 year old 35-40 point, top 4 d-man, then you don't move him. We have not yet exhausted our options on that front--there are a LOT of things AV hasn't tried (like seeing if McD, Staal, or Moore can play the right side).

I don't think we should mess with McDonagh by switching his position. I think switching Staal to the Right Side is a great idea though.

 

[eco's bones]

See for me, I just think there are too many things we haven't tried. Why is Del Zotto the only one who can be tried on the right side of a pair? Before moving MDZ, we should definitely see what a MDZ-Staal pair looks like. We should see what a MDZ-McD pair looks like (I think MDZ-Girardi is too risky due to relative lack of speed on the part of both players). Frankly, I think a top four D of MDZ-McD and Staal Girardi is ideal--puck movers with solid D on one pair, and a shut-down pair (with experience playing together) on the other.

I also want Staal re-signed and committed to the team before moving the only player on the roster who has proven to be capable of top 4 LD (after McD and Staal). If there's even a chance that Staal is looking to move on, then we need to hold on to MDZ and play him 3rd pair LD with PP and PK time.

People on here have dismissed that concern because we apparently can't make decisions based on what might happen in the future, but I've seen many of those same people claiming that MDZ needs to be moved because of some huge contract...that he might get...in the future...

Regardless, if you can't get fair value for a 23 year old 35-40 point, top 4 d-man, then you don't move him. We have not yet exhausted our options on that front--there are a LOT of things AV hasn't tried (like seeing if McD, Staal, or Moore can play the right side).

A lot of people were happy when Torts got fired. Now that we have AV--some would like to do his coaching for him because what you're talking about is precisely that. And in this case it amounts to about the same as saying why don't we change something that the coaching staff is satisfied is working to something that may work or may work but not as all or might not work at all. It just may be in their minds the time for experimentation with the defense pairs is over. We could similarly say that we need to get Benoit Pouliot going so we're now going to take Chris Kreider away from Zuccarello and Stepan.

I don't think we should mess with McDonagh by switching his position. I think switching Staal to the Right Side is a great idea though.

I'd leave Staal where he is most comfortable. He's gone through enough in the last two years. I wouldn't **** with him.

 

[smoneil]

A lot of people were happy when Torts got fired. Now that we have AV--some would like to do his coaching for him because what you're talking about is precisely that. And in this case it amounts to about the same as saying why don't we change something that the coaching staff is satisfied is working to something that may work or may work but not as all or might not work at all. It just may be in their minds the time for experimentation with the defense pairs is over. We could similarly say that we need to get Benoit Pouliot going so we're now going to take Chris Kreider away from Zuccarello and Stepan.

I'd leave Staal where he is most comfortable. He's gone through enough in the last two years. I wouldn't **** with him.

For the record, I had nothing against Torts, but it was clear that the team tuned him out. Further, the first part of your post is a crap argument unless you can honestly say that you have never questioned a coach's decisions. Have you griped about Pyatt's minutes? Pou's time? Boyle's use?--then you are doing the SAME thing you criticize me for doing, and you can get right down from your high horse.

Regarding Staal--seriously? He's "been through enough"? This is a hockey team, not a nursery. Yeah, they have two d-pairs that sometimes work (people have been railing about MDZ's pinch because it led to a goal--there were far worse giveaways by more than one of the other defensemen). Frankly, the only guy who has consistently played to expectations this season is McDonagh.

Bottom line--this is a business. The team has a proven asset who has a track record for being the best player on the team at what he does. Yet rather than try to find solutions within the team, I keep hearing inconsistent arguments from folks on here:

On the one hand, MDZ has to play the right side with Moore because he's the vet and the vet should play out of position.

and yet...we CAN'T move McD or Staal to the right side because they are more comfortable on the left and they've "been through enough." (but wait--isn't Staal a vet? I thought vets should play out of position due to experience and what not?).

On the one hand, we have to move MDZ now because we can't think about things in the future (like Staal's health or long-term intent).

and yet...we HAVE to move MDZ now because we HAVE to think about things in the future (like some massive contract he's supposedly going to get).

Make up your minds, people. To be fair to eco's bones, I'm not really aiming this at you. It's clear that your mind is made up regardless of what MDZ does. You stated it yourself earlier--the only way you see MDZ as a success is if he plays like Doughty, Karlsson, Pietrangelo and the other half dozen top young D in the game. If he can't be the best in the league, we need to move him for a marginal return without trying to find ways to get him going, amiright?

If we throw away a prime asset without trying to do everything possible to get him going first, then that's just idiotic asset management. The fact that you think Pouliot (a FA brought in to be a stop-gap on the bottom 6) and MDZ are similar scenarios just further goes to show that you are out to lunch on this topic.

 

[eco's bones]

For the record, I had nothing against Torts, but it was clear that the team tuned him out. Further, the first part of your post is a crap argument unless you can honestly say that you have never questioned a coach's decisions. Have you griped about Pyatt's minutes? Pou's time? Boyle's use?--then you are doing the SAME thing you criticize me for doing, and you can get right down from your high horse.

Regarding Staal--seriously? He's "been through enough"? This is a hockey team, not a nursery. Yeah, they have two d-pairs that sometimes work (people have been railing about MDZ's pinch because it led to a goal--there were far worse giveaways by more than one of the other defensemen). Frankly, the only guy who has consistently played to expectations this season is McDonagh.

Bottom line--this is a business. The team has a proven asset who has a track record for being the best player on the team at what he does. Yet rather than try to find solutions within the team, I keep hearing inconsistent arguments from folks on here:

On the one hand, MDZ has to play the right side with Moore because he's the vet and the vet should play out of position.

and yet...we CAN'T move McD or Staal to the right side because they are more comfortable on the left and they've "been through enough." (but wait--isn't Staal a vet? I thought vets should play out of position due to experience and what not?).

On the one hand, we have to move MDZ now because we can't think about things in the future (like Staal's health or long-term intent).

and yet...we HAVE to move MDZ now because we HAVE to think about things in the future (like some massive contract he's supposedly going to get).

Make up your minds, people. To be fair to eco's bones, I'm not really aiming this at you. It's clear that your mind is made up regardless of what MDZ does. You stated it yourself earlier--the only way you see MDZ as a success is if he plays like Doughty, Karlsson, Pietrangelo and the other half dozen top young D in the game. If he can't be the best in the league, we need to move him for a marginal return without trying to find ways to get him going, amiright?

If we throw away a prime asset without trying to do everything possible to get him going first, then that's just idiotic asset management. The fact that you think Pouliot (a FA brought in to be a stop-gap on the bottom 6) and MDZ are similar scenarios just further goes to show that you are out to lunch on this topic.

You have a point. I gripe about Pyatt a lot. I don't ***** much about Pouliot (though I'm not too happy with him) but I do think Boyle is a very useful player. One of the main points I was trying to make (perhaps badly) is that coaches don't usual change defense pairings or line combinations they're more or less happy with. To be honest I think AV wants to more or less find line combinations that he can keep together such as Stepan, Zuccarello, Kreider for a long period of time which is usually what happens with the better defense pairings--the pairs stay together.

On Staal I would not move him after the eye injury if he were at all uncomfortable with the move.

Back to DZ I've reiterated over and over this season that I don't like him on the right side. The problem is there is almost no ice time on the left side. I don't consider him a prime asset either. Two seasons ago I did. I've seen literally no improvement in his game the last two seasons. I always looked at him before as a very possible answer to our pwp qb problem. His last three seasons (including this one) he's put up 1 goal and 22 assists on the pwp in 140 games or about 1 point every 7 games. He's had plenty of opportunity (at least until this season) there. His next contract is another issue--I've commented on that above. There is a finite amount of cap $ and how you spend it and on who makes or breaks teams. I consider DZ as an underperformer at this stage of his career--not worthy of a bigger contract than he carries right at this moment. He's a good player at $2--2.5 mil per. Much less so at $3 mil per and not at all at $3.5 mil per.

His role on the team has been marginalized by two factors--better players at his left side defense position and a coaching staff that does not seem to have enough faith in him in what he should do best--create offense from a defense position. It doesn't mean that his career is shot or that I would just give him away for anything but it does appear that he is on his way out.

 

[eco's bones]

For the record, I had nothing against Torts, but it was clear that the team tuned him out. Further, the first part of your post is a crap argument unless you can honestly say that you have never questioned a coach's decisions. Have you griped about Pyatt's minutes? Pou's time? Boyle's use?--then you are doing the SAME thing you criticize me for doing, and you can get right down from your high horse.

Regarding Staal--seriously? He's "been through enough"? This is a hockey team, not a nursery. Yeah, they have two d-pairs that sometimes work (people have been railing about MDZ's pinch because it led to a goal--there were far worse giveaways by more than one of the other defensemen). Frankly, the only guy who has consistently played to expectations this season is McDonagh.

Bottom line--this is a business. The team has a proven asset who has a track record for being the best player on the team at what he does. Yet rather than try to find solutions within the team, I keep hearing inconsistent arguments from folks on here:

On the one hand, MDZ has to play the right side with Moore because he's the vet and the vet should play out of position.

and yet...we CAN'T move McD or Staal to the right side because they are more comfortable on the left and they've "been through enough." (but wait--isn't Staal a vet? I thought vets should play out of position due to experience and what not?).

On the one hand, we have to move MDZ now because we can't think about things in the future (like Staal's health or long-term intent).

and yet...we HAVE to move MDZ now because we HAVE to think about things in the future (like some massive contract he's supposedly going to get).

Make up your minds, people. To be fair to eco's bones, I'm not really aiming this at you. It's clear that your mind is made up regardless of what MDZ does. You stated it yourself earlier--the only way you see MDZ as a success is if he plays like Doughty, Karlsson, Pietrangelo and the other half dozen top young D in the game. If he can't be the best in the league, we need to move him for a marginal return without trying to find ways to get him going, amiright?

If we throw away a prime asset without trying to do everything possible to get him going first, then that's just idiotic asset management. The fact that you think Pouliot (a FA brought in to be a stop-gap on the bottom 6) and MDZ are similar scenarios just further goes to show that you are out to lunch on this topic.

You have a point. I gripe about Pyatt a lot. I don't ***** much about Pouliot (though I'm not too happy with him) but I do think Boyle is a very useful player. One of the main points I was trying to make (perhaps badly) is that coaches don't usual change defense pairings or line combinations they're more or less happy with. To be honest I think AV wants to more or less find line combinations that he can keep together such as Stepan, Zuccarello, Kreider for a long period of time which is usually what happens with the better defense pairings--the pairs stay together.

On Staal I would not move him after the eye injury if he were at all uncomfortable with the move.

Back to DZ I've reiterated over and over this season that I don't like him on the right side. The problem is there is almost no ice time on the left side. I don't consider him a prime asset either. Two seasons ago I did. I've seen literally no improvement in his game the last two seasons. I always looked at him before as a very possible answer to our pwp qb problem. His last three seasons (including this one) he's put up 1 goal and 22 assists on the pwp in 140 games or about 1 point every 7 games. He's had plenty of opportunity (at least until this season) there. His next contract is another issue--I've commented on that above. There is a finite amount of cap $ and how you spend it and on who makes or breaks teams. I consider DZ as an underperformer at this stage of his career--not worthy of a bigger contract than he carries right at this moment. He's a good player at $2--2.5 mil per. Much less so at $3 mil per and not at all at $3.5 mil per.

His role on the team has been marginalized by two factors--better players at his left side defense position and a coaching staff that does not seem to have enough faith in him in what he should do best--create offense from a defense position. It doesn't mean that his career is shot or that I would just give him away for anything but it does appear that he is on his way out.

 

[Brooklyn Ranger]

He was OK. Made a pretty bad decision on the 3-2 goal, but other than that, I didn't notice any mistakes. Made a couple of nice passes and made a nice pinch on Moore's goal.

For the record, here's what AV had to say about the play when he was asked:

And speaking of Del Zotto, Vigneault was asked about Alex Chiasson’s third-period goal against the Rangers and whether Del Zotto erred in his positioning.

“It’s all Brass (Derick Brassard), it has nothing to do with Del Zotto,†Vigneault said. “His read is the right one. The goaltender rims the puck, he’s got to keep the puck in, go down the wall and the F3 (forward three) is Brass, that’s his play. If he just goes right behind him, picks up the puck and throws it back in, instead he goes to the same man, that should be his man.â€

Guess things looked different from the bench.

http://blogs.northjersey.com/blogs/...join_rangers_on_trip_j._moore_breaks_drought/

 

[Kwayry]

For the record, here's what AV had to say about the play when he was asked:



Guess things looked different from the bench.

http://blogs.northjersey.com/blogs/...join_rangers_on_trip_j._moore_breaks_drought/

Ok, makes a lot of sense, because from the highlights, the best angle is Hank's POV. It shows how far Brass had to skate to get to the puck and how he should have seen DZ engaging. Brass had the puck and DZ in his field of vision coming from center ice. DZ had his eyes on the puck directly in front of him, Brass was at best on the periphery.

On Moore's goal, DZ did the exact same thing, except this time, Hagelin was backing him up as he is supposed to, instead of going for the puck like Brass did on the Dallas goal.
That's the right pinch for DZ given where the puck was and the forward facing his own net. Pretty obvious to me who should have seen who.

 

[Vickers8]

But why even pinch in that situation? It's nearing the end of the game, we're up by 2. Just let the forwards handle it. The highlight of DZ's game could have been his play on the Moore goal; Whether that bad pinch was DZ's fault, Brassard's fault, 50/50, 25/75, what will be remembered is him being involved in a costly play.

Let's be frank, costly pinches aren't exactly rare with Del Zotto. Right side, left side, I've seen him make that same play countless times.

No need to pinch at that point of the game, he has the same mistakes every game...he needs a change of scenery

 

[TheTakedown]

Nope. Brassard was ahead of MDZ the entire time he crossed the red line in front of MDZ, and was across the blue line before him as well. I'll post pictures when I get home. The picture you posted is from after the pinch. With Brassard leaning toward the Stars player giving the illusion he is behind Del Zotto. If he was behind him it was after the pinch because he engaged first.

This. MDZ Pinched, period

 

[Kwayry]

No need to pinch at that point of the game, he has the same mistakes every game...he needs a change of scenery

This. MDZ Pinched, period

Yeah he did and that was absolutely the correct play.
You guys might want to complain to AV about it.

I asked Vigneault if the Stars’ second goal on Thursday night was Michael Del Zotto’s fault for pinching too high up the wall. The puck got past him and led to a Dallas 2-1 and an Alex Chiasson goal.

Vigneault, however, said center Derick Brassard was to blame. Del Zotto made the correct read, the coach said, in stepping up along the boards, and it was Brassard’s responsibility to replace him at the blue line so he would be able to dump any puck that trickled out right back in.

Instead, Brassard went to the same man that Del Zotto already had taken along the boards, so when the puck popped out, there was no one there except a retreating John Moore, who was outnumbered on the rush.

 

[Kwayry]

del zottos problems are obvious.

first, hes mentally fragile. his play has been so-so and his psyche seems damaged. bad combo.

Who are you describing? This is like way out there man.

I don't get this mentally fragile meme, psyche is damaged? You are a doctor now or just play one on the internet?
For DZ to play under Torts his first 4 years in the league starting at 19, you better be freaking strong mentally. Torts is a tough coach and holds no punches. Guess what, when given the chance to play under pressure, he delivered. Remember when Staal was injured who filled in for him, or is that too ancient history for you Doc?

second, his skills arent good enough to allow him to escape from the situations he creates for himself. he panics with the puck frequently and he doesnt have the recover speed to hide his mistakes like ryan mcdonagh, stralman and moore can. hes just too slow.

Yeah he doesn't have the recovery speed like McDonagh, Stralman and Moore. I'd agree with that. But his skating is more than fine for the NHL. This ain't speed skating you know.
Wait ... did you forget Staal or is he slow too?

third, hes an " offensive specialist" type dman and in this league, that means you have to shoot it or skate it really well. he does neither. hes really in a bad spot because defensively he isnt strong and offensively he um... isnt particularly strong. bad combo again.

Except he produces at 0.42 PPG clip. Facts are such stubborn things, very inconvenient aren't they?
23 year old players that can produce .42 PPG do not grow on trees, no matter how much you hate their skating style.

his real problem is there are 5 dmen on this team that play that position either better than or equally as well as he does. add his sloth like skating and ineffective-nonproductive play ( 4 points in 16 games and a -4 )and you end up with a coach asking for more and a player not able to produce more.

bad combo.

Small sample size, don't you think? Why don't we go back a 1 year or 2 to get a better picture of his point production, but it's not convenient for you, might as well ignore them, right Doc?
Edit: Or maybe show some patience for the kid to adjust to the right side, but that's asking too much I presume.

 

[Mikos87]

Pinching is what puck possession oriented teams do. Brass missed his man on the rotation, which lead to a lot of open ice for Dallas. Moore had a chance to make himself look big and takeaway the 2 on 1. I know Marc Staal spoils everyone with his ability, but big time defense men can make assertive plays on odd man rushes.

Stralman has been very impressive breaking up plays like that, so hopefully Moore gets it down, same for DZ.

That play was Brass not being focused. Anyone whose ever played D on NHL's create a player knows what's supposed to happen on a pinch, especially if the forward misses his backcheck.

 

[Fanned On It]

Coach said it was Brass' fault.. I think we should probably take his word for it.

 

[007]

Based on AV's comments, it seems to me that MDZ did exactly what he has been told to do by the coaches with that pinch. Didn't work out, but you can't blame his decision-making on that play if he's doing what he's been coached to do.

 

[Kwayry]

He seems to be at loggerheads with the coaching staff and playing the right side is not helping.

Do you have links for this explosive charge? I looked and looked and couldn't find anything.

 

[Guyute]

anybody have that picture of del zotto playing guitar hero?

 

[wafflepadsave]

anybody have that picture of del zotto playing guitar hero?

Why? Wanna see if his eyes are red?