Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Brew
I see a gigantic difference between Lindholm and Bennett.
Remember the point made was that Bennett should be gifted 10 games to diffuse/defuse the situation.
If the coach wants to give someone 10 games on the top line or at a particular position then they should. Since he hasn’t done it to date, I’d assume the coach doesn’t see it as a good idea.
If you want to argue that 10 games of Bennett on the top line suddenly makes the team better, then sure. Or that the coach should stop blending lines, sure.
Personally I don’t see what Bennett has done to earn anything more than what he has received. Although the healthy scratch and the coaches public comments about giving Bennett what he wants were unnecessary IMO.
|
I notice you prefer to talk about Lindholm and ignore the Mang situation. He did nothing for a solid 10 games to earn anything, but they had patience and gave him stability with good linemates. So the idea of earning what you receive is not really something applied uniformly.
Also whatever you think the coach thinks, you do realize that coaches prioritize ideas. Lindholm playing with 13 and 23 is a good idea because it adds a high skilled, defensively responsible guy to the line. Not happening because having him at C, also a good idea, has been prioritized
Then again, we have a coach that does things I don’t think are good ideas.
Clearly the coach prioritized looking at Simon and Leivo on that line. These guys are <$1 M castoffs. Good idea? I dunno.
Plunking Rittich in to the playoff game - good idea? Nah.
So as for what Ward thinks is a good idea, well... not sure what that has to do with what an actual good idea is
But yeah, I am quite aware that some people don’t have any interest in listening to the same argument many people have made for years, so there is really no point in anyone going through the whole exercise, pulling out the line combo data yet again, restating the reasoning and whole case.
One guy thinks the coach should give him a long look. You don’t.
Fine. Whatever