Also, why do you always resort to statements like that?
Big deal, like he could break the line up after they played the way they did. What statement, that you are lost? You are, anyone who tries to say that line's success was due to playing Sutter hockey despite everything pointing to otherwise is lost in being stubborn and sticking to their guns despite being wrong. It doesn't matter the evidence points to the opposite and everybody could totally see that line played the way they wanted to play so they could be successful, that people in the know have confirmed as much, you are going to stick to your opinion no matter what. That is lost in my opinion.
It is factually accurate but you do you. At no time did that line just play the puck back to the point constantly for low danger long distance shots. They looked for high danger passes in the slot. What did the other three lines do stats wise? How did Kopitar in LA go from an offensive beast to Huberdeau like numbers from last year?
This is not a fact. This is a statement backed up with a clumsy at best use of statistics.
First, the Kopitar red herring. Dude is the Swiss watch of offensive production. He's had 2 outliers, Sutter's last year when the milk went sour, and first year after he was gone, he got a bit of a post Sutter dead cat bounce. Making it out to be like he was an offensive Dynamo, then he had 6 down years under Sutter, then became the offensive player he was born to be when he left. Not remotely true. Arguing anything but Sutter was the perfect coach for Kopitar is pretty daft.
Second "Sutter hockey". The takes on Sutter hockey are so kind numbingly simplistic sometimes. There's levels to this ####. Johnny's line played the gold standard version of it. Their own zone play was an aggressive man pursuit. The players played if each other well and made smart exits and got the puck to either Johnny or weak side D with speed. Zone entries were smooth because their D were being backed in with speed and by an elite puck carrier. And in the o zone, that line took more risks because A. They worked and B. They were in a position to support the transition to D. Lindholm hovered in the high slot looking for a soft spot for a one timer but was always in position. They were quick, sneaky and creative and aggressive and READY to go back on defense. Sutter's system is not risk averse, it is screw up averse and it is no support averse.
I'm not apologizing for whatever happened this year. Sutter clearly had them on some kind of foundational level. First structure than freedom were his exact words. But the team never got there and he couldn't put the lineup in a spot to succeed. Then he inexplicably got distracted by his media grudges which sent poison through the whole team. Crazy to think his media interactions are what sunk him. But I honestly think his lineups, his comments on young players etc were all to flip the bird at Salim and Eric. Rookie level stubbornness from an HOF coach.
But I'm not so drunk with recency to forget how the team played under him last year. And not giving him credit for that and only remembering the guy's firing year at every stop is just so basic. We're legitimately talking about one of the greatest coaches of all time who had coaching success in 5 different decades. You think this was a one gear guy? You think his message to all those teams was, get it to the point guys!?
Credit where it's due, blame where it's due. If you can't do that, you are the one who has the agenda.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Major Major For This Useful Post:
This is not a fact. This is a statement backed up with a clumsy at best use of statistics.
First, the Kopitar red herring. Dude is the Swiss watch of offensive production. He's had 2 outliers, Sutter's last year when the milk went sour, and first year after he was gone, he got a bit of a post Sutter dead cat bounce. Making it out to be like he was an offensive Dynamo, then he had 6 down years under Sutter, then became the offensive player he was born to be when he left. Not remotely true. Arguing anything but Sutter was the perfect coach for Kopitar is pretty daft.
Second "Sutter hockey". The takes on Sutter hockey are so kind numbingly simplistic sometimes. There's levels to this ####. Johnny's line played the gold standard version of it. Their own zone play was an aggressive man pursuit. The players played if each other well and made smart exits and got the puck to either Johnny or weak side D with speed. Zone entries were smooth because their D were being backed in with speed and by an elite puck carrier. And in the o zone, that line took more risks because A. They worked and B. They were in a position to support the transition to D. Lindholm hovered in the high slot looking for a soft spot for a one timer but was always in position. They were quick, sneaky and creative and aggressive and READY to go back on defense. Sutter's system is not risk averse, it is screw up averse and it is no support averse.
I'm not apologizing for whatever happened this year. Sutter clearly had them on some kind of foundational level. First structure than freedom were his exact words. But the team never got there and he couldn't put the lineup in a spot to succeed. Then he inexplicably got distracted by his media grudges which sent poison through the whole team. Crazy to think his media interactions are what sunk him. But I honestly think his lineups, his comments on young players etc were all to flip the bird at Salim and Eric. Rookie level stubbornness from an HOF coach.
But I'm not so drunk with recency to forget how the team played under him last year. And not giving him credit for that and only remembering the guy's firing year at every stop is just so basic. We're legitimately talking about one of the greatest coaches of all time who had coaching success in 5 different decades. You think this was a one gear guy? You think his message to all those teams was, get it to the point guys!?
Credit where it's due, blame where it's due. If you can't do that, you are the one who has the agenda.
This is just Sutter apologist garbage, the whole bit.
This is just Sutter apologist garbage, the whole bit.
Which part? The one where I accurately depicted kopitar's career stats or the part where I said Sutter is responsible for this past season's failures? Refusing to give the man any credit for his coaching successes is wack as hell.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Major Major For This Useful Post:
Which part? The one where I accurately depicted kopitar's career stats or the part where I said Sutter is responsible for this past season's failures? Refusing to give the man any credit for his coaching successes is wack as hell.
I never denied his coaching successes, I denied the top line played Sutter hockey, because they didn't. No matter how much you natter on they did everybody who watched the team last year know they didn't. This is like if you posted a picture of an orange and claimed it was in fact a banana. We can all see the orange, we all know it's an orange, but feel free to continue and argue it is a banana.
I never denied his coaching successes, I denied the top line played Sutter hockey, because they didn't. No matter how much you natter on they did everybody who watched the team last year know they didn't. This is like if you posted a picture of an orange and claimed it was in fact a banana. We can all see the orange, we all know it's an orange, but feel free to continue and argue it is a banana.
I don't know, I don't think you'd find a shortage of people who felt that top line matched up pretty well with "Sutter hockey." They also just-so-happened to be the highest skill line he's ever had to work with, with one of the best all-around players in the league and a current Hart nominee.
I think it's possible to say that firing Sutter was 100% the right call and that he was to blame for a lot of what went wrong last year, without rewriting everything.
I didn't see anybody complaining about Sutter hockey and praising the top line for being the only line not playing it in 21/22. Not once that I can remember.
Just listened to the Dubas conference call. Sounds like he was about to cry when talking about family considerations. At first I thought it was a throwaway line (as all hockey people say they'll consult with their family). He seemed to have had some family difficulties, so we'll see what that means. I think they'll be challenged to walk away from millions of dollars. Leafs have no choice but to bring him back with tight timelines.
Just listened to the Dubas conference call. Sounds like he was about to cry when talking about family considerations. At first I thought it was a throwaway line (as all hockey people say they'll consult with their family). He seemed to have had some family difficulties, so we'll see what that means. I think they'll be challenged to walk away from millions of dollars. Leafs have no choice but to bring him back with tight timelines.
Dubas isn't even under contract next season right now. Of course they have a choice.
Dubas isn't even under contract next season right now. Of course they have a choice.
Of course they technically have a choice but he's the guy who knows the organization and the players. If they don't sign him they have to do a quick search. The ball is totally in his court. Unless Shanahan decides to take on those duties. They truly don't have much of a choice here if they want to make a big move with the most options available before July 1st.
