On May 15 2012 13:02 BloodNinja wrote: Quick question, how did Hunter develop a goalie he only brought up due to the fact his two starting goalies got injured? Maybe Hunter is really good at grooming young talent, but to give him credit for grooming Holtby is a joke (as it appears you are implying). He brought up a young goalie, who caught fire, and then rode the hot hand in the playoffs. Standard hockey 101, absolutely nothing new there.
Also, lets not get ahead of ourselves. We have zero idea who the next Caps coach will be. To say whoever they hire will do nothing is simply ridiculous. No one knows how Ovie (or any other Cap for that matter) will respond to the new coach, unless your goal is to be the TL version of Don Cherry (in which case you need to start wearing bright clown suits and post photo evidence).
What the GMGM needs to figure out is what kind of team he wants. Depending on which direction he wants to go with this new coach will dictate what kind of personnel changes need to occur on the team.
Watch how Bowman, lamoriello and Torterella have controlled their superstars over their careers. That's how its done. Hunter did this with Ovechkin.
By being Holtby's head coach before he'd ever had a full year in the NHL and creating a defense first system that allowed Holtby to look good. This is how he contributed to Holtby's development. Hunter knows how to develop young hockey players.
As i've said... to go 7-7 against those 2 teams requires more than just "riding a hot goalie". And Hunter's defense first methods help make the goalie appear "hot". THe Bruins are Rangers are well coached, well rounded complete hockey teams. Two of the Ranger wins occurred in overtime.
The Washington Capitals will once again cater to Ovechkin's every whim whoever the new coach is because of the money invested in him. He will go back to running around for 25 minutes a game. This is why they will go no where no matter who the coach is. You need 20 guys on board going in one direction not a bunch of factions running their own agenda. This is what Bowman, Lamoriello and Torterella make happen with their teams.
Did Lemieux (Lamoriello), Lafleur (bowman) or Lecavalier (torterella) ever get the kind of rock star treatment Ovechkin gets under previous coaching regimes. NEVER.
You can't really label me as "Don Cherry" because I've used french players in my positive examples. And, Gretzky is about to name one in the example i've chosen. So that's a total of 4 french guys.
Here is an excerpt from Gretzky's autobiography.
"We both knew we were going to have to walk by the Islander locker room, and we were dreading it: having to see all the happy faces, the champagne shampoos, the girlfriends' kisses, the whole scene we wanted so much. But as we walked by, we didn't see any of that. The girlfriends and the coaches and the staff people were living it up, but the playeres weren't. Trottier was icing what looked like a painful knee. Potvin was getting stuff rubbed on his shouler. Guys were limping around with black eyes and bloody mouths. It looked more like a morgue than a champion's locker room. And here we were perfectly fine and healthy. That's why they won and we lost. They took more punishment than we did. They dove into more boards, stuck their faces in front of more pucks, threw their bodies into more pileups. They sacrificed everyting they had. And that's when Kevin said something I'll never forget He said, 'That's how you win championships'
Hey Jimmy, just a quick question here What did Bylsma did to make it happen for his Pens to win the Cup (having such stars as Crosby and Malkin in the roster)?
I think that the brand of hockey brought in would be way better in the long run than the high flying teams of Bodereau's past (minus his last year or so). Even still, that last year was nothing like this because Ovechkin was still getting 2minute shifts and other shit like that.
Granted, I think Hunter went a bit off of the deep end on it when Jay Beagle is getting 20+ to Ovechkin's 17, but I think the overall concept of defense first was fairly successful towards the end of the season. If they were to build around that concept for another year or two, using players made for that vs using the players from the firewagon days and shoehorning them in, they'd be real good. A defensive team that can immediately shift to offense with those type of players is real dangerous.
Last night's Ranger game ruled. They looked like shit for a large chunk of the second though.
Derp, I did not realize that Holtby had passed through the Kngihts. My bad there.
That being said, I still believe you are discrediting Holtby's much too much and putting way too much credit onto Hunter's style of play. But thats my opinion and one you obviosuly dont share.
On May 15 2012 21:23 Hawk wrote: I think that the brand of hockey brought in would be way better in the long run than the high flying teams of Bodereau's past (minus his last year or so). Even still, that last year was nothing like this because Ovechkin was still getting 2minute shifts and other shit like that.
Granted, I think Hunter went a bit off of the deep end on it when Jay Beagle is getting 20+ to Ovechkin's 17, but I think the overall concept of defense first was fairly successful towards the end of the season. If they were to build around that concept for another year or two, using players made for that vs using the players from the firewagon days and shoehorning them in, they'd be real good. A defensive team that can immediately shift to offense with those type of players is real dangerous.
This is exactly what GMGM needs to figure out. If he wants to take this path then he needs to make some player changes. We can only wait and see right not.
Holtby was great, but make no mistake, the way that team plays D is absolutely huge for any goalie, much less a rookie. They mop up rebounds really well, don't let a lot of quality chances on net.
As for the Caps, right now no one on that D really stands out as a complete dman. To me, it reminds me of the Rangers in the Renney days vs now. Back then, they were a pretty good defensive team because of the sytem they played, but that system and Hank really masked how mediocre those dmen were at the time. Under Torts, they arguably have one of the best top 4s in the game right now. I can't tell if it is injuries or just that Green doesn't know how to play as anything other than a 4th forward, but he has looked shitty in the new system. Carlson and Alzner are good, but I think that transition takes time and they looked just ok this season. Everyone else is mediocre at best. It's hard to be a defensive team without the right parts
On May 15 2012 21:56 Hawk wrote: As for the Caps, right now no one on that D really stands out as a complete dman.
+1
On May 15 2012 21:23 Hawk wrote: I think that the brand of hockey brought in would be way better in the long run than the high flying teams of Bodereau's past (minus his last year or so). Even still, that last year was nothing like this because Ovechkin was still getting 2minute shifts and other shit like that. Granted, I think Hunter went a bit off of the deep end on it when Jay Beagle is getting 20+ to Ovechkin's 17, but I think the overall concept of defense first was fairly successful towards the end of the season. If they were to build around that concept for another year or two, using players made for that vs using the players from the firewagon days and shoehorning them in, they'd be real good. A defensive team that can immediately shift to offense with those type of players is real dangerous. Last night's Ranger game ruled. They looked like shit for a large chunk of the second though.
Ovechkin was cherry pickin' way too much and not paying the price in the defensive zone.
When your captain and leader does not "buy in" this sets the tone for the entire organization and the "foot soldiers" are far less likely to follow the coach and team system. Soon you've got guys running around doing whatever they want.
Every great coach controls the team and its stars. Their hammer to enforce their methods is playing time.
Of course Hunter expressed this in politically correct terms when limiting Ovechkin's minutes.
Green is a terrible defensive defenseman. His whole game is based around being an offensive threat. That being said, most Caps fans have been begging for a big defensman to get brought in.
I think Carlson and Alzner could turn into complete defensemen in the future. People forget, this was the first full season for each of them.
Like I said, it reminds me of the Rangers a few years back under Renney. You had two good young dudes in Girardi and Staal that were getting better but not there yet. They were surrounded by overrated and over the hill dmen who were ok but far from worth what they were paid. Definitely not great.
On a side note, it really sucks that cbc doesnt have every game of the conference finals. They used to have it, I believe this is the first year they don't? I guess it's about contracts and stuff...
Shane Doan and Martin Hanzal are jerkoffs and should be suspended for the next game. Doan should get two for his history of being a jerkoff. That was such a stupid hit. He watches the dude turn and goes full force into the numbers.
On May 17 2012 00:13 Hawk wrote: Shane Doan and Martin Hanzal are jerkoffs and should be suspended for the next game. Doan should get two for his history of being a jerkoff. That was such a stupid hit. He watches the dude turn and goes full force into the numbers.
Doan should not get suspended. Hanzal should be given 3 games.
Hanzal was definitely was the more egregious of the two. And although that Kings player turned, it wasn't so late that Doan was committed, and he came through full force.
The Rangers are going to need to do something more than having a few short bursts of good hockey surrounded by shit play for that to happen though. Fuck.
EPT
