Speculation: Who should be the new GM of the Washington Capitals?
- Thread starter ChibiPooky
- Start date
- Status
txpd
Registered User
rh, have you convinced yourself that a defense first is the way forward? you signing up for guy boucher's 5 man neutral zone trap?
Yeah, but Gretz was below average defensively, soft, and never much of an effort guy. His hands and vision were what was special about him. What's he going to tell a guy that plays a completely different style?
kmart
Registered User
- Jan 23, 2008
- 4,358
- 675
"...play harder..."
seriously its not hard to figure it out, obviously he is not a strategy wizard, like boudreau he goes the motivation route except he has less exp behind the bench. he is not a coach just another mascot for the fans. alone the consideration shows teds wisdom.
RandyHolt
Keep truckin'
- Nov 3, 2006
- 34,914
- 7,337
The 006, no thanks. But I do appreciate the ingenuity.
I think fans views are clouded by their own selfishness. Myself included. We want a cup as the highest priority.
When in in reality, we just want to be entertained. And the root of entertaining us through the long regular season, is an unleashed Ovi.
Only, unleashed Ovi had his fair shake to lead us to a cup. No spring chicken nearing age 30 now, I think we are seeing the youthful exuberance kind of wearing off. Is designing our team, making our coaching selection, designing our offense to be attack at all costs, going to be solely hinged on Ovi being Mr Offense and provide all the energy until he retires?
I think the fans are saying yes, just entertain me, but no one admits it. After 40 years, we all see there can be entertainment in losing.
txpd
Registered User
the word entertained or a form has been appearing in your posts a lot lately. you think caps fans are low iq fans that would rather be entertained than win. yes?
my point is pretty straight forward. to play that the kind of barren and boring defensive strangle game you seem to be hinting at with every post using this entertainment slam. you would think the caps have entirely the wrong kind of roster.
the caps would need to change out many to most to all of their best players for players that more perfectly fit that style.
unleash ov is typed in with almost dripping distain. are you over ov?
my point is pretty straight forward. to play that the kind of barren and boring defensive strangle game you seem to be hinting at with every post using this entertainment slam. you would think the caps have entirely the wrong kind of roster.
the caps would need to change out many to most to all of their best players for players that more perfectly fit that style.
unleash ov is typed in with almost dripping distain. are you over ov?
RockDaRed
Registered User
Two choke teams met for the SC. Canucks and Bruins. Someone had to win. I wouldn't get my hopes up too much.
They traded not one, not two, but three star players since AO came into the league trying to fight their chokiness. How about that?
txpd
Registered User
ok....maybe the caps should have traded ovechkin or backstrom. they might have beaten montreal as a result. maybe they should have trade alzner and varly and a 1st to get pronger. they traded varly anyway.
I am just saying that I want someone with a background of championship success rather than someone who has a track record of the same kind of struggles the caps have had.
I thought when Ottawa hired Bryan Murray that they were getting the wrong guy for exactly that reason. Murray has never had been able to back up his regular season success in the playoffs. that has continued in Ottawa.
txpd
Registered User
whats your definition of "won't accept excuses"?
no question that the capitals have a culture of failure. it goes back to rod langway and bryan murray. ovechkin and backstrom and any of the players that were part of the pens and habs series are swimming in it and defined by it.
when they return to the playoffs, it will be the first question asked of them. the coach and the gm can't change that. the only way to change that is to start from scratch again. to build a foundation that is not tainted by the failure.
its just a reality
- Mar 26, 2007
- 3,822
- 1,907
This times one billion. It's like putting together lines and pairings. It's not rocket science stupid.
trick9
Registered User
- Jun 2, 2013
- 12,587
- 5,747
Now we know why Burke hired Treliving.
From the Calgary Sun:
“One hundred percent, I think we need to get bigger,” Treliving said. “That’s not just a personal preference. Turn on the TV today and watch the games.
“This is about winning a championship, and there’s steps along the way – we’ve got to take a lot of steps – in order to be there at the end, in order to build a championship, you do have to have a blueprint and you look at the games that are being played right now and it’s hard hockey, it’s heavy hockey.
“It’s a man’s game, a big boy’s game out there.”
From the Calgary Sun:
“One hundred percent, I think we need to get bigger,” Treliving said. “That’s not just a personal preference. Turn on the TV today and watch the games.
“This is about winning a championship, and there’s steps along the way – we’ve got to take a lot of steps – in order to be there at the end, in order to build a championship, you do have to have a blueprint and you look at the games that are being played right now and it’s hard hockey, it’s heavy hockey.
“It’s a man’s game, a big boy’s game out there.”
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
"Excellent in their previous roles" doesn't require a Cup win. That's ludicrous.
Chiarelli, Bowman, Shero, Lombardi, Holland, Burke, and Rutherford are all the GMs of Cup winners since the 2004-05 lockout.
How many of them won Cups in their previous role? 0
Chiarelli, Bowman, Shero, Lombardi, Holland, Burke, and Rutherford are all the GMs of Cup winners since the 2004-05 lockout.
How many of them won Cups in their previous role? 0
Blades Ov Steel
Registered User
Been preaching this as a fan for years, the teams that are big and punishing are winning most of these playoff series, yeah the caps are a big team mostly, but also don't grab sacks often enough and make other teams pay for dirty areas. The Caps are soft, were built soft, and let's hope that changes. The ONE series where we stood a chance and played like men was against boston, under DALE HUNTER. If it were Oates in that series, we would've have been swept.
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
Haven't the Caps been among the biggest teams in the league for several years?
Size is largeley irrelevant.
Size is largeley irrelevant.
trick9
Registered User
- Jun 2, 2013
- 12,587
- 5,747
Forwards? for sure.
I think the D is among the smallest. Or then it just looks like that because they are often made look like boys against men.
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
Size is far from irrelevant when used correctly. The problem with focusing on size alone is that many large players got to the NHL thanks to their size at the expense of other skills, at least to an extent. Big guys that know how to use their size and have it as their primary attribute such as Staal, Hanzal, Gaustad, Playoff Penner are invaluable. Guys that know how to use their size as a deterrent are also invaluable. Big aggressive guys are invaluable but ones with skill are also very rare. Even Steckel carved out an NHL career despite only being good at faceoffs and being big. Most super successful high end NHL players are 5 '11 - 6'1 since at that point they're not small enough to be at a physical disadvantage but not big enough to have an easier road to the NHL.
Defensemen though need size (along with mobility) more since they're more disruption/zone coverage oriented.
Defensemen though need size (along with mobility) more since they're more disruption/zone coverage oriented.
strungout
Professional Killer
Blades Ov Steel
Registered User
Yep caps are a big team, but don't play like it unfortunately. I still think this will change really soon.
g00n
Retired Global Mod
- Nov 22, 2007
- 31,266
- 15,867
We talk about playing tough and physically and size is a PART of that. So why focus just on size? Is a team full of Jeff Schultz clones an automatic Cup favorite? **** no.
Of course size helps. It's a factor. It isn't the only factor and it isn't meant to be. GMGM was a guy who would draft or acquire guys based on height and weight and mobility. That was his dream combo. Rangey puckmovers who might wake up angry one day a year and tape their stick like Chara.
Of course size helps. It's a factor. It isn't the only factor and it isn't meant to be. GMGM was a guy who would draft or acquire guys based on height and weight and mobility. That was his dream combo. Rangey puckmovers who might wake up angry one day a year and tape their stick like Chara.
Hivemind
We're Touched
I approve of physicality and being a tough team, but it shouldn't be the driving factor in building a roster. Quality performance should be the driving factor. There are plenty of physical players who can't perform consistently in the NHL (Erskine). The next GM needs to be able to identify that performance, not size or "hits," is what drives success. Don't get players for the sake of being a "big" team or a "tough" team. Get offensive players that produce, defensemen that prevent goals, and build a team that drives possession forward.
Not being able to seperate correlation and causation is what dooms management.
Not being able to seperate correlation and causation is what dooms management.
- Status
