Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Who has more playing experience WITH Brodie? Stone or Engelland? Has the obvious gap been a product of lack-of-depth all the way through the bottom three that made it more pragmatic to play Engelland on the third pair rather than with Brodie where he has looked very good in the past?
Again, this decision is not "obvious" because there is multiple factors to consider when adding a new player to the lineup.
|
Nah. I don't think Engelland sits behind wideman in TOI because it was more pragmatic to have him on 3rd pair. He has shown to be solid when called upon to play top 4. No doubt. And he looks ok next to Brodie the last couple games. I think it's pretty simple to understand that the team would ideally like DE in the bottom pair IF they could find someone to sit in top 4. So my point was....the obvious choice from the outside looking in is to have stone top 4. I get that an explanation could be that it takes a game or two to loosen up so play him in 5/6. Just to be clear....do you see Engelland with more TOI than Stone...say....5 games from now? Or do you like to nitpick my use of the word "obvious"?