Quote:
Originally Posted by Conroy4Mayor
...Part of Treveling's job is to determine who is holding the team back. I hope he thinks it's Engelland...
|
I thought a huge part of England's struggles last season had to do with the Engelland/Smid pairing. He is better with a partner who can skate.
I will say that given how Treliving has handled the lineup over the course of his tenure—especially in the current calendar year—he absolutely deserves the benefit of the doubt here. His job is to build a winning team, and at EVERY OPPORTUNITY Treliving has sounded a ringing endorsement of Engelland as a part of that. Is this him just covering his own ass at the expense of the team's potential for success, or does he actually believe that Engelland provides a better opportunity for the Flames to win hockey games than those other players competing for his job?
I know I am going to get panned by one or two posters for this, but it also seems to me that England's dressing room presence is something that the Flames do take very, very seriously. For Treliving and Hartley, the qualifications of the top 22 players for inclusion on the opening night roster has more to do with just their on ice abilities. So, while I would agree that Wotherspoon, Nakladal, or Wilson are probably capable of doing the same on-ice job as Engelland, is the removal of his dressing room presence enough of a positive trade off? I'm not convinced that it is, because let's face it: the decision about who is manning the bottom pairing and logging 8–11 minutes a night is not going to make or break the Flames' season.
With all that said, it never ceases to amaze me the level of angst some fans experience over the makeup of utility lines on the team.