Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
I guess it could be less fun for players, but I strongly disagree with the notion that it is less entertaining for fans. Sutter's teams have historically been quick thinking/reacting, good at transitions, relentlessly fore-checking, and dominant in possession. I guess it could be less entertaining when the other team rarely ever has the puck, but that is just a silly complaint in the end.
Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
|
Now I didn't say it was boring to watch did I?
It's meat and potatoes hockey. Full speed simple North South hockey. From a fan perspective I fully believe we all agree its far more entertaining hockey to watch than what we have been watching.
From a player perspective it has to be more boring to boil your respective games down to their simplest forms and execute at 100 percent instead of executing pretty and creative plays at 50 percent. Add in the effort you have to give to just execute simple hockey to it fullest potential and yeah, it's about as exciting as watching paint dry. Sutters not here to help the players paint a Picasso but to paint a fence properly.
Either way, my main point was he is implanting a brand of hockey that wins championships. That's how it's done and there will be no deviation.
I certainly don't think what we have seen the last two games boring not in the slightest.