Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyguy
I think we can all agree, our D are playing like ####.
How much of this is because they just are ####, or is it on GG?
|
First of all they are not ****. They are two games removed from putting on an absolute defensive clinic on a very long road trip. They are one game removed from having, on average, a very good game especially by our whipping boy pairing of Brodie-Hamonic (before Brodie lost the puck in what any sane person would identify as nothing other than bad luck). The issue in the Columbus game was that our forwards could not generate offense against an elite blue line puttiv on a defensive clinic of their own. In the last four they had one legitimately bad game @ Dallas, magnified by facing a hard forehecking team with elite finishers.
Second GG may not deserve the blame for their defensive play but he sure as hell needs to be identified as the cause of their offensive regression, which has resulted in the forwards (outside of one Midas Touch line) being absolutely underwhelming. Last night aside, it is usually a lot easier to simplify your defensive game with a lead and the best way to get a lead is to contribute offensively. This team is not built to score three on five yet our Brent Sutter offense does exactly that. Good offenses play a five man cycle, we do not. We used to, under Hartley, but Treliving was so intent on gettig the anti-Hartley that Gulutzan came an neutered a defense core that should consistently be top 5 in point production with the Preds, Blues, and Lightning. The only points our D picks up under Gulutzan are ticky tack assists for Brodie on the PP. And those are literally frustrating plays where Brodie needs to shoot.
What we needed was a middle ground between Hartley and Brent Sutter. A coach who would:
- Give the defense a green light to attack the middle and pinch aggressively, while making sure our F3s were always sharp (Hartley)
- Force the centermen to play deeper in the defensive zone (B.Sutter/Gulutzan)
- Give the wingers the green light to go early if they saw an opportunity (Hartley)
- Force the skater to play an aggressive defensive game in the neutral zone (B.Sutter, supposed to be Gulutzan, but I am skeptical as they have played the same loose gaps under him they did under Hartley, except without the benefits those loose gaps afforded Bob in always having guys in shot blocking position because we don't block shots anymore)
- Shorten his bench when needed (Hartley)
- Be willing to make the tough decision on an underwhelming vet like Versteeg, Brouwer, or Bartkowski sooner than later (Hartley)
- Be willing to make the tough decision on playing an underwhelming prospect aged player like Kulak, Bennett, Andersson, Familton, Jankowski (Hartley)
I don't believe I am asking for the impossible, as I have seen this sort of mix I describe succeed, recently under the Mike Sullivan Penguins and Lindy Ruff's version of the Stars that were a Lehtonen collapse away from the WCF. There were things that structurally needed changing, and there were things that, independent of those others, needed to be kept the same. Hartley was really, really close to the right coach for this group except for how he handled certain situations without the puck.
But Tre wanted the other extreme from Bob. It resulted in a team that plays a very forward-scoring dependent style, except we don't have the firepower (pure shooters of the James Neal vein) to work. We have forwards with the hockey sense, vision, and compete level to make a cycle work if we get guys like Stone, Brodie, Hamilton, Giordano, Kulak, Hamonic, Kylington, Andersson sneaking into the dangerous areas.
But Gulutzan's ask of the defense is to stand at or behind the blue lines staying at home. It's a waste. It magnifies their lesser defensive games because they don't do anything at the other end. It makes our forwards cycle until a goalie gets to make an easy save, even backups can stop a shot in the slot if they know it's coming and the finisher is not Sean Monahan.
But yes, Gulutzan isn't to blame for a random stretch where our defense coughed up the puck more than usual. I don't think that is a long term issue and I don't think this defense is especially bad defensively, even if they are not as good as the Hurricanes, Ducks, or Blue Jackets defensively. I'd however argue that our defense has less options when they are catching pucks in the corners from Smith than when they are collecting them in stride, but I don't have supporting evidence - it's just my opinion. I do like puck handling goalies and have seen the benefits that Holtby, Price, Rinne, Bishop, and before them Brodeur/Roy bring. But maybe Gulutzan's tweaks to the system were too much accomodation for Smith. I am fine with Smith making a stretch pass or going glass and out or finding a winger, but having him slow the puck down and throw suicide passes at our defensemen in the corners only works with Giordano because Giordano is probably the best player in the NHL not named Drew Doughty or Victor Hedman in that kind of situation.
He is to blame for:
- Versteeg-X-Brouwer being force fed down our throats in crunch time. They cost us the Stars game. Not the defense.
- the slow and non-threatening transition game this team plays
- the inevitible moment when Borderline AHLer Matt Bartkowski draws back in for Everyday NHLer Kulak (I pray it isn't tonight) and costs us another game with his awful passing, positioning, stick, and general hockeyIQ
- The Backlund and Jankowski lines' futile cycling action playing 3 on 5
- Bennett's steady decline from an important core piece to a Pray-He-Doesn't-Bust bottom 6er
