HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Nashville Predators
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Barry Trotz' inability to develop offensive talent. (Very Long)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-30-2006, 09:49 AM
  #1
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Barry Trotz' inability to develop offensive talent. (Very Long)

Did you know that no player drafted by the Predators organization has ever scored 50 points in an NHL season? Legwand, Hartnell, and Erat have all run right up to that number, but we've never had any player crest 50. While 50 is a nice number to hit, it is a rather exclusive club for such young players. Here are the players in each of our drafts up to '02 that have scored 50 or more points;

1998: One player drafted before our first forward pick (#2 overall, Legwand) has scored 50 points. He did it 5 times. 13 players drafted after our first forward pick scored 50 points in a season a combined total of 31 times. 10 of those players were outside of the first round.

1999: Four players drafted before our first forward pick (#33 overall, Andersson) have scored 50 points in a season. They've done it a combined 7 times. Two players drafted after our first forward pick have scored 50 points in a season. They've done it a combined 5 times. Both were outside of the first round.

2000: Two players drafted before our first forward pick (#6 overall, Hartnell) have scored 50 points in a season. They've done it a combined 6 times. Six players drafted after our first forward pick have scored 50 points in a season. They've done it a combined 6 times. Two of those six where taken outside of the first round.

2001: Three players drafted before our first forward pick (#33 overall, Shishkanov) have scored 50 points in a season. They've done it a combined 7 times. Four players drafted after our first forward pick have scored 50 points in a season. They've done it a combined 4 times. All four were taken outside of the first round.

2002: One player drafted before our first forward pick (#6 overall, Upshall) has scored 50 points in a season. He's done it twice. Three players taken after our first forward pick have scored 50 points in a season. They've done it a combined 3 times. One player was taken outside of the first round.

In summary, 11 players drafted before our first forward picks in their respective drafts have scored 50 points in a season for a combined total of 27 times. 27 players drafted after our first forward pick have scored 50 points in a season. They've done it a combined total of 48 times. Of that group, 19 players were taken outside of the first round. They've done it a combined total of 30 times.

All told, 38 players were drafted from the years 1998-2002 that went on to score 50 points in at least one season. Of that group, they have accounted for 75 different 50 point seasons in their short careers. We drafted 27 forwards during that span. None, as mentioned before, are a part of that group.

At first glance, this would appear to be a drafting problem. But closer inspection reveals that it might be a developmental issue. Four Predator draft picks during this span hit 40 points very early on in their careers. David Legwand scored 41 points in his second NHL season at the age of 20. He would score 48 (age 22) and 47 (age 23) in the following years. Denis Arkhipov, drafted with David Legwand, scored 22 points in his second NHL season at the age of 22. He would never again hit 40. Scott Hartnell, in his second season, scored 41 points at the age of 19. He would follow that up with a season of 48 four years later at the age of 23. Martin Erat, in his third NHL season, scored 49 points at the age of 22. He followed that up with another 49 point season two years later at the age of 24.

If you were to graph this all, it would seem that the players plateau at a point and either regress statistically (Legwand, Hartnell, Arkhipov) and possibly to never recover (Arkhipov). Those that don't regress, don't seem to progress much either. Career years are never followed up with even better statistical years. In the cases of Legwand, Hartnell, and Arkhipov, there is a spike and then an immediate regression. Only Erat has been able to have his best year statistically and maintain that the following NHL season. And even he experienced significant regression after his rookie season. The other three followed up their 40 point breakout seasons with immediate drops in point totals. Legwand went from 41 to 30, a 27% drop. Hartnell went from 41 to 34, a 17% drop. And Arkhipov went from 42 to 35 to 21, a 50% drop over two years.

What this seems to imply is that we are finding talent, they are hitting the Preds with momentum, they play strong in their first few years, and then they stagnate. This can't be all Poile's fault. We could argue that these players were rushed into the league, but the data seems to imply that they could more than handle their first year or two in the NHL. But something happens after they've been in the league for 150 games. Their production falls of a table and usually struggles to recover.

Is Trotz the one to blame? Is he bringing these guys along and then, when he's comfortable with them, weighing them down with responsibilities? Is he not letting them progress naturally as players? Four players isn't a huge sample size, but there is a distinct trend going on here. What are your thoughts?

SmokeyClause is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2006, 10:17 AM
  #2
triggrman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
triggrman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 18,921
vCash: 500
None of this shocks me.

I think think their could be multiple reasons though. First with Legwand, being a playmaker with a 19 old winger and a ginder on you line isn't going to allow you a lot of finish on the product, especially starting your career as young as he did. That's goes with Hartnell and Erat too. Being stuck with a very young center or a career 3rd or 4th line center isn't going to help you a lot especially with a coach the demands defensive play. Injuries have also played a part. In the end though, a lot of blame has to go to Trotz and his system.

triggrman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2006, 10:49 AM
  #3
handtrick
Registered User
 
handtrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Posts: 3,161
vCash: 500
The first thought that comes to mind, Smokey, is that all of those players that you mention....Legwand, Hartnell, Arkhipov, and to a much lesser extent, Erat, have been rushed to the NHL without spending adequate or proper developmental time in the minor leagues. Of course, the bulk of this is due to the dire needs of the parent expansion club, and there has been a conscious effort to guard against that in the case of Radulov. Our blue chip d prospects have also been given more of the proper seasoning with Hamhuis and Suter, mainly because of the lockout, and even more so with Weber and Klein.

So, while your point has merit for consideration and discussion, I think we are in a different place now as an organization.

The fact that Trotz has a "unique way" of treating the young players as opposed to the veterans is real and palpable...but you still have to remember, he is known as a "player's coach." He appears to have a genuine repoire and fun with every member of the team on the ice during practices as was in complete evidence on our trip. I think he is much smarter in regards to psychological assessment of his players and motivational tools than he is given credit for. That being said, I do think that his message is beginning to get old, and I would be surprised if we ever get to see his developemental thumb print on Radulov to further assess your theory. Statistics are starting to catch up with him in regards to length of time with any one club, and I would be extremely surprised if he is still coaching the Preds for the 2008/9 season short of a Stanley Cup Finals appearance within the next 2 years.

The "stagnation" that you refer to may be the thing that is truly Trotz-induced, but at the same time, the sample size is small, and with Legwand, Arkhipov, and Hartnell...it may be more "player-related" than what you may consider on initial evaluation.
On the other hand, it may be more "system-induced," rather than "developmental-induced," as I would be more inclined to think this is the case for our centers....Legwand and Arkhipov....than Hartnell and Erat.

Anyway.....good topic for discussion, during the lull period before we get to see all the action of July 1st, however most likely we will be watching from the sidelines......

handtrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2006, 11:47 AM
  #4
vopatsrash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 578
vCash: 500
If any of these guys had the fortune to be drafted by the Avalanche or Red Wings, they would have been plugged in with the Sakics, Yzermans and Shanahans of the world and would have probably reached higher levels of offensive production. This circumstance is not Trotz’s fault because they were an expansion team and fiscally responsible. Legwand was rushed and he and Arkhipov seem to have more fragile personalities than Erat and Hartnell (from afar).

I think they built the team right and Barry Trotz is a very good expansion coach from the standpoint of getting the most out of marginal veterans.

Legwand (healthy scratched and called out), Erat (sent down to Milwaukee, called out), Arkhipov (called out unlike any athlete I’ve seen in any sport, not brought back), and Hartnell (benched and called out) have in common the very public molding of their all-around games in the form of media discipline.

It could be argued that these guys should toughen up and take their medicine when Trotz does this. It could be argued that we’d be a worse team if these guys each scored 30 goals while allowing 30 breakaways because they were offense-first.

But, it could also be argued that they would be better players now had they developed their offensive skills while the team was bad, then established discipline as they were surrounded by better veteran players. Now they seem confused and hesitant.

One theme that seems to be common amongst many Pred fans of varying opinions is that there is a fear of trading Legwand, Erat, and Hartnell because they’ll “go to another team and score 30+ goals and blossom offensively.” It seems like if you have to look at upgrading 3-5 young players because they underachieve, and there is no track record of consistent offensive development maybe you should look at the methods of one coach first.

I’m not saying fire Trotz. I can’t even begin to come up with a better available option. I’m just saying that it seems like he brings everyone to the middle. Talented guys are dragged down and mediocre guys are coached up. If that causes us to win 1999 Titans style, you can’t argue with the results, but we’ll always be frustrated with high draft pick forwards and the offense. The bottom line is to win, and Trotz has taken the team to the playoffs the past 2 seasons and his system can win with the right personnel, assuming he doesn't lose the team from being there too long.

I started a thread during the season on a similar topic. We have a coach that does not do well with developing offensive talent and a GM who is patient to a fault with trading prospects and making moves. A slow GM can be murder when the on-ice system sucks the trade value out of the prospects (or vice versa) before the GM can capitalize on the assets to fill the system’s needs.

If they are hell bent on going with Trotz long-term, it might not be a bad idea to consider trading Radulov for a guy that will help us win in this system while his value is at its highest before he’s confused and hesitant, too. Hopefully, he’s such a higher level talent than Legwand/Hartbell/Erat that he can excel regardless of the situation.

vopatsrash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2006, 11:55 AM
  #5
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cookeville TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,827
vCash: 500
I couldn't have said it better myself Smokey. I think the evidence is clear concerning our offensive development, and defensive development. We develop defensemen well. We suck at developing forwards. This has held true pretty much since the beginning of this organization.

And I can not imagine what Legwand would have accomplished on a team like the Avalanche, or Hartnell....They would have been the Chris Drury/Adam Deadmarsh combination....here, they are mid-tier forwards with Legwand vastly underappreciated by the fans.

__________________
- Enoch -
Enoch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2006, 09:10 PM
  #6
dulzhok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,528
vCash: 500
First off, I think the 50 point marker is pretty irrelevant. Would you really be happier if Erat scored 1 more point, or Hartnell scored 2 more points?

What you are really wanting is a 70+ point young player.

There are several reasons why we don’t have a 70+ point player:
1) Draft position: we’ve never had the opportunities to pick a Nash, Kovalchuk, or Gaborik.
2) When we have drafted in the first round, we’ve always taken the “safe, team player” and not the high risk offensive dynamos (Radulov being the only exception). Legwand is the only player who was expected to put up big points, and has failed. And honestly, I don’t think it’s Trotz’ fault… the man just doesn’t have the point generating skills we hoped.
3) Since we haven’t drafted the offensive superstar, we’ve had to use other alternatives for our first line roles (Ronning, Kariya, Sullivan, etc). While guys like Erat or Hartnell could easily put up 60+ points in a first line role, they are only getting secondary ice time at this point, because we have better options for the first line.

In terms of point drops, there are so many factors that are being disregarded. Legwand’s point total dropped in his sophomore year, but he also played in 20 less games. Also, his 41 points on the first line just didn’t cut it for us, so his role was reduced in his sophomore season. Erat’s production curve is fine. He was sent to the AHL in his sophomore season, which has proven to be a wise move on Trotz’s part. He’ll be a scoringline fixture for the rest of his career. We’ve struggled to find an appropriate role for Hartnell (because of depth), but 25 goals on the second/third line aint bad. I’m sure he’d put up more in a first line role, but at this point, you can’t justify kicking Kariya or Sullivan out

As bad as we want an Ovechkin or Nash or Kovalchuk, we just don’t have that kind of young talent on our team (nor have we ever).

dulzhok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2006, 10:10 PM
  #7
Gnashville
Playoff losers
 
Gnashville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 5,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dulzhok
As bad as we want an Ovechkin or Nash or Kovalchuk, we just don’t have that kind of young talent on our team (nor have we ever).
Agreed If Radulov flops then Trotz could be the blame but we really have not had those types of players before. Hartnell was rushed Upshall, Legwand have had injury issues, and the other 1st round picks were Defensemen except Radulov and Finley (where is the puke icon when you need it). One could argue the Erat has been our best offensive player we have ever drafted. Injuries and poor draft position are not the coaches fault. I suppose you could argue poor draft position is his fault since Trotz's teams Overachieved in the 1st 4 seasons, but building a winning attitude was and still is more important than high picks every year. Look at Atlanta; great young players but they don't play together and have a losing mentallity.

Gnashville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-01-2006, 07:27 AM
  #8
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by dulzhok
First off, I think the 50 point marker is pretty irrelevant. Would you really be happier if Erat scored 1 more point, or Hartnell scored 2 more points?

What you are really wanting is a 70+ point young player.
But how can you have a 70 point player when you can't even get a 50 point player? Sure, there is a season or two of the 15 or 20 combined seasons from the players where injuries really stunted their chance. But that was the case for dozens of players in this league. Who knows, my numbers might have been a lot higher if I'd have allowed for prorated numbers.

Explain why the 50 point marker is irrelevant while the 70 point market is? 50 points is generally considered the mark of a second line player. It's every bit as relevant as as 70 points, especially when you have to get 50 points to get to 70.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dulzhok
There are several reasons why we don’t have a 70+ point player:
1) Draft position: we’ve never had the opportunities to pick a Nash, Kovalchuk, or Gaborik.
That's why I included players beyond our picks. There were 27 players drafted after our first forward taken that have scored 50 points. If it's a talent issue, then this is Poile's fault.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dulzhok
2) When we have drafted in the first round, we’ve always taken the “safe, team player” and not the high risk offensive dynamos (Radulov being the only exception). Legwand is the only player who was expected to put up big points, and has failed. And honestly, I don’t think it’s Trotz’ fault… the man just doesn’t have the point generating skills we hoped.
We've taken two safe forwards, so this argument has limited legs. If always is two, then you are right. In our existence, we've taken two superskilled forwards and two rugged, two-way forwards. Yet again, this appears to be a call out to Poile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dulzhok
3) Since we haven’t drafted the offensive superstar, we’ve had to use other alternatives for our first line roles (Ronning, Kariya, Sullivan, etc). While guys like Erat or Hartnell could easily put up 60+ points in a first line role, they are only getting secondary ice time at this point, because we have better options for the first line.
But in recent years, Poile has given young guys more ice time and they haven't broken that 50 point barrier. Ice time is a factor, but neither Hartnell nor Erat grabbed the bull by the horns and took over the 2nd line winger spot. And Legwand has almost no legitimate competition. Once again, this seems to be blaming Poile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dulzhok
In terms of point drops, there are so many factors that are being disregarded. Legwand’s point total dropped in his sophomore year, but he also played in 20 less games. Also, his 41 points on the first line just didn’t cut it for us, so his role was reduced in his sophomore season. Erat’s production curve is fine. He was sent to the AHL in his sophomore season, which has proven to be a wise move on Trotz’s part. He’ll be a scoringline fixture for the rest of his career. We’ve struggled to find an appropriate role for Hartnell (because of depth), but 25 goals on the second/third line aint bad. I’m sure he’d put up more in a first line role, but at this point, you can’t justify kicking Kariya or Sullivan out.
Erat and Hartnell's production isn't bad, but that's the point. Where is this offensive outburst from our top young players? This was a breakout year for dozens of player but not for our players. And no, Erat isn't right on course. This season was a CLEAR step down statistically. Last season, Erat's 49 points were good for 83rd overall. This year, they were good for 129th overall. How's that fine?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dulzhok
As bad as we want an Ovechkin or Nash or Kovalchuk, we just don’t have that kind of young talent on our team (nor have we ever).
Did you even read my post? I'm not asking for an Ovechkin, Nash, or Kovalchuk, I'm asking for a 50 point player! I'm asking for a Steven Reinprecht!

Your entire posts reads like a who's who of excuses bandied about on these boards for lack of production and in defense of Trotz. They are nice and all, but they don't fully explain why almost every other franchise, even those drafting well after us, have been able to land 50+ point players. And many have drafted your coveted 70+ point player. There's a clear theme against Poile, which I won't necessarily argue with. But what part of this, if any, is on Trotz?

SmokeyClause is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-01-2006, 12:58 PM
  #9
dulzhok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,528
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
Explain why the 50 point marker is irrelevant while the 70 point market is? 50 points is generally considered the mark of a second line player. It's every bit as relevant as as 70 points, especially when you have to get 50 points to get to 70.
So if Erat scored one more point and Hartnell scored 2 more points, you would be content??? I don't really care about a point here and there.... we pretty much have two fifty pointers playing in 2nd/3rd line roles (Erat/Hartnell).

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
We've taken two safe forwards, so this argument has limited legs. If always is two, then you are right. In our existence, we've taken two superskilled forwards and two rugged, two-way forwards. Yet again, this appears to be a call out to Poile.
Radulov has not seen the NHL, so you can't put him on Trotz. Legwand, ya, hasn't not lived up to expectations of "the next Mike Modano". And yes, I feel that's a talent issue, which is how I've felt since his rookie year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
Did you even read my post? I'm not asking for an Ovechkin, Nash, or Kovalchuk, I'm asking for a 50 point player! I'm asking for a Steven Reinprecht!
Do you honestly feel that way? Reinprect had 52 points playing on the 1st line/1st powerplay unit for a good portion of year (especially w/ Phoneix). Erat had 49 points getting 14 minutes of ice time a game. And you feel that a Reinprect type player is everything we're missing and the model of what Trotz can't develop?

dulzhok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2006, 02:54 AM
  #10
Stars-Preds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 477
vCash: 500
This is a very valid and interesting discussion. Why haven't the Preds produced a single home-grown 50-point scorer? Why hasn't Legwand progressed in his career and turned into the 70+ point per season player we all thought we had?

I think Trotz should be at the center of this discussion. It's obvious from watching the Preds play that Trotz does not necessarily put his players in the best position to succeed offensively. And he does tend to "bury" his rookies on the fourth line when the reach the NHL.

Obviously all the blame can't be put on Trotz, but it is disappointing that we haven't produced a true offensive threat in our existence. Hopefully Legwand or Hartnell or Radulov changes that trend.

Stars-Preds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2006, 12:30 AM
  #11
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,447
vCash: 500
Seamus carried this thread over to the other board, and I wanted to repost the lengthy thoughts I had on the subject, since I have little faith I'll be met with anything outside the usual blind, don't-dare-ye-question attitude that's characteristic of the less-knowledgeable fans that frequent that board. Anyway, I trust I'll get more insight over here, so...


I'll say this..there are those that are way too hard on Trotz...and there are those, several in this thread alone, that give him way too much credit for where we are.

Yes, we had our best statistical season ever...

...but we also went nearly 2 months with beating a team over 500 only 5 times.

Great season, yes...but were we helped out by playing three of the worst teams IN THE LEAGUE a total of 24 times? Absolutely.

Something that I saw throughout the season...and notably in the playoffs...that troubled me...was the lack of adaptation. Now, I know that special teams are a lot to do with the assistant coaches(Horachek in particular,) but for how long did we go into PP droughts...in which we switched nothing? Sullivan at the point? The most predictable "cross crease" pass, ever? It was as if there was a thinking, "Well, it worked once, if we keep trying, it will work again." Enoch made a great point...Trotz seemingly liked to dictate the game based on who we were playing, as well. When we played a bigger\slower team, rather than stuff our speed down their throats, we attempted to play their game...and usually it meant we lost. In hockey, your most success comes when you play your game...rather than attempt to play your opponents. That's not to say that you don't make adjustments as necessary, but completely altering your game to something that you're not capable isn't the way to go.

Another troubling thing that I noticed was our lack of intensity in big games. Throughout the season, it seemed like if there was a game that really mattered...unless it was against the Wings...it was approached as "just another game." While that's mildly forgiveable in the regular season...to come out as cold and uninterested as we did in the playoffs...is unacceptable. Watching the Oilers and Hurricanes throughout their respective series, I was taken by how INSANELY intense both teams were. There was no skating backwards with your stick swinging, waiting for the play to come to you. There was no set, "go long, I'll hit you with the homerun pass, and if it doesn't work, we'll just try it again. Over and over." The Oilers and Canes were IN THE FACES of their opponents. Hitting, forechecking, backchecking like their lives depended on it. If an opponent had the puck, there was someone in their face in an instant. They played to win, rather than playing not to lose, as it appeared we did. How many of those SJ games did we go through the motions for 2 periods, only to "wake up" in the third period and mount a comeback that fell just short? How much hope for the next game did we build up, only to be disappointed by a similar lacking effort the next game?

Are all of these things the fault of the coach? No, I think some of that rests on team leadership, and there's certainly been a question as to whether or not Johnson was capable of motivating his teammates...but it IS absolutely the responsiblity of the coach, if he notices that his team is floundering, to step in and do what it takes to get his team to CARE about a PLAYOFF game. It irritates me when people shrug all of this off and say, "You think Trotz is an ineffective coach? WELL CHECK OUR RECORD, BABY!"

We have one of the best goaltenders in the league, two of the best offensive d-men in the league, a plethora of skilled forwards that can score goals...what in the world do you expect?! You're SUPPOSED to make the playoffs with a lineup like the one we had this year. Losing Vokoun was huge, and I realize there were nagging injuries to key guys...but there is no excuse for the way we shat the bed this year in the playoffs.

Trig mentioned that 03-04 Preds...and even 02-03 Preds...weren't as high on talent, but man, you loved to watch them. I couldn't agree more. Those lunchpail guys won games they had no business winning because they OUTWORKED the opponent. In 05-06, perhaps due to the "NEW NHL" mantra that was ingrained in us all, some of that ethic went by the wayside, and was replaced with a "lightning fast, SKILL TO BURN!!!!" approach...and many times, it got shut down by blue collar efforts evocative of past teams. There were several times throughout the season that I commented either here or on HF that while we were winning more games than ever, I found that I was missing something that I had never missed before, something that had always been present, even when we were a league joke. I felt that we were winning a lot more games based on getting lucky, I felt that there were more games than ever that we might have won, but you felt like the better team didn't win. I thought back to games in the past where we outworked the Blues but came a goal short...or outhit, outhustled the Stars only to lose by a flukey goal, and they'd claim it was "the better team winning." I felt that the roles shifted this year. There were many games where the Coyotes or the Blackhawks or whomever would outhit, outskate, outTRY us for 60 minutes, and we'd win the game because we got a bizarre hop and a shorthanded breakaway. Maybe some people like to win that way, but I don't. I know that I"ve digressed into a not-so-Trotz-related rant here, but it is just a testament to the fact that maybe Trotz gets a little too much credit for what happened this season.

Lastly, my BIGGEST gripe when it comes to Trotz is in line with the main idea of this thread. I think that he absolutely STINKS when it comes to the way that he handles our young players. You can say, "Well, Legwand was hurt a lot," or "He wasn't that good to begin with" or that Hartnell has exceeded expectations or "deserves to be in the doghouse." This year, Suter got his first taste of Trotzian justice, as well...leading to some disgruntled comments and even rumors that he's not so happy in Nashville. Do some of these players deserve some of what they got from Trotz? Absolutely. But I draw the line at ripping apart a 21 year old kid to the media. I've seen it defended, "Well, maybe it's the only thing that will get through to them." No. I've coached for nearly 10 years, and I would never say some of the things Trotz has said to the PUBLIC MEDIA...even in front of their teammates. That's just something you don't do to a young player. It's devastating to their confidence, and only serves to detriment their growth or any hope of truly getting better. What's worse is that many of the fans jump on the bandwagon. "Yeah, that Hartnell scored a lot of game winning goals this year, but we should TRADE HIM NOW, BECAUSE TROTZ EVEN SAYS THAT HE TAKES DUMB PENALTIES AND WANTS TO BENCH HIM!" It's irresponsible. What's worse is the double standard that exists. I remember one of Legwand's first games back after his knee injury. We were all aware that he was skating on a knee that would barely let him walk, that wouldn't let him STAND to shower...and most of us commented about how impressed we were with his effort that night. Meanwhile, Sullivan missed two breakaways, and Kariya was largely invisible. The next day, what do we see? Trotz quotes in the fishwrapper, blasting Legwand while praising Sullivan and Kariya. Trotz vents his frustrations on the players he feels comfortable bashing, but lacks the gall to actually call out a veteran who may need calling out. How long did Cap'n Johnny go this year as, for all intents and purposes, a waste of a roster spot? No word from Trotz. How many horrible penalties did Timonen or Zidlicky take, how many times did Sully or Eaton lose their man on the PK and see the puck behind a glaring Vokoun? Plenty. The difference was that Trotz never breathed a word of it to the paper. Did they get talked to behind the scenes? Maybe, I'd even say probably. But if you're going to try the "vinegar over honey" approach, you need to be consistent. What happens when it comes time for Hartnell or Legwand to re-sign as impending UFAs? Do you think they'll feel any loyalty to the guy that embarassed them to their fans, friends and family? I'd lose respect for them if they did. When it comes time for guys like that to sign, when they have a choice about where to play, a big factor in their decision to stay with the team that brought them where they are is, "Was I happy there?" And then if they're not, we the fans turn around to bash them, once again. "Oh, he's just a MALCONTENT that thought he was TOO GOOD for Nashville! GOOD RIDDANCE!" Well, that's kind of sad, because you're ignoring why they might have been unhappy to begin with...a coach that caters to veterans while making talented youngsters his honorary whipping boys. And what happens when Radulov comes up? We've written off the questions around Hartnell, Legwand and Upshall...but this is BY FAR the most talented forward we've ever had...a guy with an upside to eclipse Sullivan AND Kariya...what happens when the team lays an egg and Trotz needs to lay the blame somewhere? Do you think young A-Rad will be immune, and if do you think that if he gets slagged to the media, it won't rub him the wrong way? Oh, think again. I worry about another young guy having his development hampered, especially one like Radulov.

I don't mean this to sound like I'm ingrateful or oblivious to all the things that Trotz has done for the team. I do think that he took teams that were low on talent but big on heart way further than they ever should have gone, and I always admired that. That said...I think there comes a time when you have to consider what you have, what your expectations are, and where the blame falls when those expectations aren't met. I'd be disappointed in Poile if we didn't start considering other options if we meet another first round exit, this year. This is, to me, Trotz's year to sit on the hotseat.

__________________
www.thepredatorial.com

barrytrotzsneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2006, 09:47 AM
  #12
handtrick
Registered User
 
handtrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Posts: 3,161
vCash: 500
Good post Nomore.

handtrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2006, 11:02 AM
  #13
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by dulzhok View Post
So if Erat scored one more point and Hartnell scored 2 more points, you would be content??? I don't really care about a point here and there.... we pretty much have two fifty pointers playing in 2nd/3rd line roles (Erat/Hartnell).
Yeah, I know the numbers are arbitrary. That's the point with numbers though. Almost every limitation you place on them is artificial. 50 goals, 100 points, sub 2.00 GAA, it's all arbitrary. But my point is that we've yet to have a person cross what appears to be a pretty common threshhold. Would you be happier if the number was 60? That bad news is that while there's a dropoff in total number of 60 point seasons, it's still significant. And we don't have any draft pick near 60. Even Legwand's magical, injury-shortened, 48-point season was barely on pace to crest that mark.

And yes, we've had several players right under that mark. But if you allow for players to be close to 50 or missed it because of injuries, the floodgates open and you have several dozens more. While we would only have three, there would be teams who've drafted 5 or 6 players that are at or near 50. And many have faced similar restrictions in ice time that have been put upon Hartnell and Erat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dulzhok View Post
Radulov has not seen the NHL, so you can't put him on Trotz. Legwand, ya, hasn't not lived up to expectations of "the next Mike Modano". And yes, I feel that's a talent issue, which is how I've felt since his rookie year.
I wasn't putting that on Trotz. You said that we always drafted safe with our first pick. My point was that it appears to be split pretty evenly. Legwand was every bit the risk that Radulov was. This was a kid who'd never even played in the OHL before who stepped in and dominated during his draft year. Little was known about him before that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by dulzhok View Post
Do you honestly feel that way? Reinprect had 52 points playing on the 1st line/1st powerplay unit for a good portion of year (especially w/ Phoneix). Erat had 49 points getting 14 minutes of ice time a game. And you feel that a Reinprect type player is everything we're missing and the model of what Trotz can't develop?
My point wasn't that Reinprecht is everything we were missing. That example was more or less an exaggeration to counter your ridiculous response that I seemed to be asking for all-world talent when all I want is to see good production from our drafted players instead of early peaks and recessions.

And to the Reinprecht comparison with Erat, was the ice time really all that different? They both received very similar total power play time and very similar even strength time. I thought Reinprecht was the second power play center for both of his teams. Much like Erat was a second power play winger for Nashville. And if you were to compare the value of the ice time and extropolate point totals from 12 minutes of ES ice time, 4 minutes of PP time, and 2 minutes of SH time, Reinprecht actually outscores Erat by two points.

Now, I'm not saying Reinprecht is better, but one of your key strategies on these boards is devaluing Erat's ice time in comparison to others when that isn't always the case. Reinprecht, in similar ice time to Erat's, scored more points. I'm not asking for the world, but when guys like Reinprecht can put up more points in an equally unenviable position, your claims that Erat had a great year, ice time considered, just don't pan out.

SmokeyClause is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:41 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.