View Single Post
06-01-2012, 08:29 PM
Registered User
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 24,378
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Wouldn't you say that there was structure while under Martin? Surely, you'd agree.
That's why I take whatever the players are saying with a grain of salt.
How can players play for themselves, and not necessarily for the coach, yet still follow the structure?
Easy. Xs and Os are for the coach, intensity/effort is for each other. I mean, if you don't mind me painting a black/white picture to a situation that isn't.

Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
It seems they would have liked to be a little more aggressive, so why didn't they?
Because they'd get benched? Martin didn't bench his veterans other than AK.

As MM also pointed out, they claim to have been playing a chip-and-chase style, but that's not what they were doing at all, at least not defensively.
They say Gomez can't be asked to dump it, but all I remember from Gomez is him taking the puck, carrying it though the zone and stopping around the boards at the top of the circle, and then cycling it around.

So again, whatever style they seem to think they were playing doesn't really reflect the style they were actually playing.
Unless, of course, they created their own system as players and followed that instead of whatever Martin was telling them. But that doesn't make sense because they say they wanted to be more aggressive, so surely, they would have done it if they had the power to create their own system.

All in all, it just doesn't add up.

To me, it's simple, he just didn't mind him. He didn't have a problem with him. That's usually what it means when I use that expression. Especially considering that the question came from a critical side.

If a vet like Spacek tuned out the coach, you'd imagine that other vets also had. If that's the case, then I'm sure they would have stopped playing his style, but they never did that.
Weren't the players surprised when Jacques got fired as well? You have to wonder why that was the case if they started tuning him out.

I don't care for Martin, I'm actually glad this all happened so we can start fresh, but the man was not as bad as some are trying to paint him, and some of the things the players are saying just don't add up.
You don't have to wonder why. Cammalleri, Spacek and Gill have told you. There's also a WHOLE lot that hasn't been told to us, as well, apparently. And the Xs and Os for the coach vs effort/intensity for each other applies to a lot of this half of your post as well, I think. I'm not as interested in the finer details as some (or the necessity of knowing them), and I'm not as quick to dismiss the entire thing because "not enough" exact details are "known". I'm content in having a pretty good understanding that a group of guys that learned to play together so recently (and feel good about themselves and the results) can't possibly be as much to "blame" for such an unexpected failure (2011/12) as the coach(es) and general manager whose "faults" have been expanded on by those around them - regardless of which specific detail or incident happens to be the precise topic of conversation at the time.

For the record, though, I'm not necessarily happy with the timing of Martin's dismissal; mostly because there really didn't seem to be a legitimate plan for finding and placing the best possible man to fill the vacated position.

Ohashi_Jouzu is online now   Reply With Quote