View Single Post
05-06-2012, 02:07 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,199
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by BourqueBourqueBork View Post
While Weber and Suter aren't making highlight reel plays, they've been very solid all playoffs. Weber did make a thunderous hit...and got called for boarding. Weber also lost his cool and slammed Henrik Zetterberg's head into the glass, nearly getting him suspended. Last year, Weber played mad all series against Vancouver, and got abused by Ryan Kesler. So do we really want to see mad Weber out there? I know it's fun to see him wreck people...but I rather like his smooth controlled game, which he's been displaying now. He's virtually eliminating opponents along the boards...cleanly. His puck possession may be the best I've ever seen it. He's strong and confident with the puck in the D zone. The only complaint I have is that he's not asserting himself enough on offense. I know Phoenix is blocking the shooting lanes...but for Christ's sake, you can shoot the puck 106 mph. Blast a few of those, and guys are going to think twice about getting in the way.

Suter looks a lot more "in it" than he did through stretches of the regular season. He's not doing anything above and beyond special, but he's back to his normal self, making mostly heady defensive plays, handling the puck, and using his silky smooth skating to his advantage. He even seems to have gotten his offense back on track, after basically being a zero in round 1.

I don't think they're being soft or "gentlemenly" out there. They're playing a very clean game, though. And for Weber, that's a good thing...because the next time he crosses the line, he'll be gone for a few games, and it could cost us the series.

I still don't get why people put David Legwand's failures on Trotz. Yes, he was the number 2 pick. Yes, we all hoped he would be our offensive superstar franchise player. No, that hasn't panned out. But whose fault is it? Lots of guys don't live up to their expectations. That doesn't mean it falls on the coach. Legwand has also battled a lot of injuries, hurting both his numbers and his consistency.

Hartnell was in the doghouse for good reason, too. The guy took some ridiculously stupid penalties early in his career. Hell, he took stupid penalties when he moved to Philly, too. He's just now starting to show his maturity. I think that has more to do with age than coaching. His offensive numbers with us were good.

Why should Rads and Wilson be given more to work with than the other players on the roster? I get that they are used to a different style...but that doesn't mean you can't be successful offensively, but being defensively reliable.

With Wilson, especially, he hasn't proved that he deserves more free reign, because his numbers simply don't justify it. Radulov at least has a 58 point season under his belt...but Wilson isn't putting up 50 point seasons. If you want to justify being a defensive liability, at least be an offensive superstar.

I don't disagree with the idea of mixing lines of players with different skill sets. In some cases, it's a logical choice. However, I will say that players who are drafted are unfinished molds. They aren't through learning, they aren't without the need of further coaching. Yes, it's great if they have a certain skill set...but what stops them from learning a new system? I would argue that purely offensive players that learn to play two ways become a lot more valuable to their teams, because they can be used in any situation.

I do think Trotz has been a bit hard on Colin Wilson...but at the same time, it's time for Wilson to grow up and realize that he's not living up to his own potential...and that just playing his game isn't going to cut it in the NHL.

I think the reason why people use the "who do you replace him with" argument is because replacing Trotz after back to back second round appearances with a "calculated risk" is an outright stupid gamble. We miss the playoffs a couple of times, or just have a year that we bomb...sure, then you can talk about maybe thinking outside of the box with a replacement. But after this? You want to replace a guy that you KNOW what you're going to get with a big ?? No. That's where I draw the line. That's silly talk. Are we so damn impatient that we're willing to risk pissing away what we have just to get there more quickly?

And he has done nothing to slow down the Coyotes? 9 GA in the first two games. 1 GA in the last two. I'd say that's a successful adjustment.

Why is a change warranted? Coming into this season, a lot of people were predicting gloom and doom...and we have ended up right where we were last season...and we're not finished yet.

Look at the teams still in the playoffs: they are all good teams. They were last year as well. We have a great group of players...but who is to say that any other coach in the league would definitely lead this group past the second round? Maybe? Sure. But a lot of good teams -- teams that could beat us -- teams with superstar players -- teams with good coaches -- even two teams picked to win it all....are golfing right now.

What exactly do you see about this team that makes you think that not winning a Stanley Cup means firing the coach is warranted?
While I do not think your coach should be fired, I do agree that he, for whatever reason has not "developed any truly skilled prospects. You mention learning a new system etc. if it means that all your young, skilled creative players turn into a Legwand, is that what you want?
Every team needs someone like Legwand....but I would be interested in, if he had ever gone to another team early on, might he have been a different player he is now? I guess we will never know.
If you call developing young guys by not just " sitting them out for a few" to learn a lesson, but sitting them for a month or more like Smith and Wilson, I would argue that this is not great for development.
Really though,I guess what iamgetting at is, could someone name me ANY young talented prospects that have come to your team and flourished under Trotz?

Fortheloveofthegame is offline   Reply With Quote