not sold on Maurice myself...maybe though....i just feel if we dont promote Nelson by next season, someone else will scoop him away from us and then where will we be?
just my opinion, but i really, really like what he is doing in OKC (and not just this year, but even last year, taking a new franchise to the playoffs was impressive too). And like someone else said, the players really seem to like playing for him.
x2
Not about to watch another Claude Julien slip away from us for a 5th rd pick....... Who would have thought Julien would get his name on a cup before Kalle Olson
Like the Parise debacle wasn't enough reason to hate our 03 draft.
I'd say the Oilers will extend Renney for 2 more years. I agree though that Nelson would be the logical successor if Renney gets the boot. Just swap them around actually as Renney would better suit OKC.
I suspect winning would change your tune though. You would honestly rather be losing games 5-4 than winning them 2-1? Offense-first teams winning the Cup are few and far between. Chicago is about the only offensive mided team to win the Cup in recent memory, and they were still able to lock it down defensively when need be.
Winning would not change my tune and I would disagree that Chicago is the only offensive minded team to win the cup in recent memory. The Pens and Red Wings both have won the Cup playing this way and teams like the Flyers and Canucks have made it to the finals recently. There is a huge difference between locking it down defensively and playing like Phoenix presently does and teams like New Jersey in the past. None of those teams would grind a game to a halt after taking a 1-0 in the early going and that is what Phoenix does.
It's too bad we don't see a lot of poaching in the NHL. Maybe it's one of those unwritten rules? You see it a lot in the NCAA and to a lesser extent in MLB and the NBA where head coaches are poached by "richer" teams. IE, Oilers grabbing Tippett from Phoenix.
I would love to see Strudwick worked in as an assistant (maybe start with video coach or scout or something?).
Fraser brought this up on the morning show and I think it might make some sense or at least be worth discussing: Joel Quennville. If Chicago loses in the first round I wonder if he would be let go...took over a Hawks team in a similar position that the Oilers are in right now (obviously minus a VERY large piece in one of the best defensive pairs in the NHL at the time).
The smart move is to wait for the firings after the season and see who's available. I'd love to get Quenneville behind the bench if the Hawks have a forgettable end to the season/playoffs.
It's too bad we don't see a lot of poaching in the NHL. Maybe it's one of those unwritten rules? You see it a lot in the NCAA and to a lesser extent in MLB and the NBA where head coaches are poached by "richer" teams. IE, Oilers grabbing Tippett from Phoenix.
Probably because in the NHL the only way you can take a guy from another team is if you get permission or he has no contract. Most smart teams don't let good assets become free agents.
I would love to see Strudwick worked in as an assistant (maybe start with video coach or scout or something?).
Fraser brought this up on the morning show and I think it might make some sense or at least be worth discussing: Joel Quennville. If Chicago loses in the first round I wonder if he would be let go...took over a Hawks team in a similar position that the Oilers are in right now (obviously minus a VERY large piece in one of the best defensive pairs in the NHL at the time).
I don't know, but when I listen to his interviews he sounds just as smart as the good coaches.
Winning would not change my tune and I would disagree that Chicago is the only offensive minded team to win the cup in recent memory. The Pens and Red Wings both have won the Cup playing this way and teams like the Flyers and Canucks have made it to the finals recently. There is a huge difference between locking it down defensively and playing like Phoenix presently does and teams like New Jersey in the past. None of those teams would grind a game to a halt after taking a 1-0 in the early going and that is what Phoenix does.
I would have to disagree with your claims on the Pens and Red Wings. Both are defensive teams come playoff team. In fact, nearly every single team in the playoffs play a more conservative defensive style when the games matter. Saying that the Pens and Red Wings isn't as defensive as Phoenix is not a big distinction.
The Red Wings are known for their Left Wing lock style with two of the best two-way players in Zetterberg and Selke winner Datsyuk combined with a number of defensive stalwart forwards. The Pens are known for their offense, but it's their strong defensive system coached by Dan Bylsma that allows them to play consistently well with weaker forwards when Staal, Malkin and Crosby are injured.
Winning would not change my tune and I would disagree that Chicago is the only offensive minded team to win the cup in recent memory. The Pens and Red Wings both have won the Cup playing this way and teams like the Flyers and Canucks have made it to the finals recently. There is a huge difference between locking it down defensively and playing like Phoenix presently does and teams like New Jersey in the past. None of those teams would grind a game to a halt after taking a 1-0 in the early going and that is what Phoenix does.
I didn't say we need a total trap strategy like Phoenix (though I wouldn't complain), but a defense-first system is definitely needed over a run-and-gun style.
The Penguins and Wings, for all their offensive talent, are most definitely defensive-minded hockey teams. Scoring a lot of goals doesn't always mean you are playing firewagon hockey. A good defensive system will create offense off turnovers and taking advantage of the other team's mistakes. Look at the Bruins. Basically the highest scoring team in the league, and one of the most defensive. The Rangers and Predators are both comfortably in the top half of the league in goals for, despite their clear committment to defense-first hockey.
Vancouver is a textbook "lock it down when you have the lead" team. Once they have a lead they take care of their own zone first and let the other team's mistakes and turnovers create more goals for them, in addition to an often overwhelming powerplay.
I'll give you Philly. Perhaps the thinking there was that their terrible goaltending was going to cause significant goals against regardless of strong defensive play, so may as well try to outgun the other team with offensive weapons.
If you look at all the Cup winners and finalists since the 80's Oilers and 90's Penguins (basically the only two successful run-and-gun teams), almost all of them were defense-first teams. And those Oiler and Pens teams needed arguably the two best offensive players of all time to successfully implement offense-first systems.
I didn't say we need a total trap strategy like Phoenix (though I wouldn't complain), but a defense-first system is definitely needed over a run-and-gun style.
The Penguins and Wings, for all their offensive talent, are most definitely defensive-minded hockey teams. Scoring a lot of goals doesn't always mean you are playing firewagon hockey. A good defensive system will create offense off turnovers and taking advantage of the other team's mistakes. Look at the Bruins. Basically the highest scoring team in the league, and one of the most defensive. The Rangers and Predators are both comfortably in the top half of the league in goals for, despite their clear committment to defense-first hockey.
Vancouver is a textbook "lock it down when you have the lead" team. Once they have a lead they take care of their own zone first and let the other team's mistakes and turnovers create more goals for them, in addition to an often overwhelming powerplay.
I'll give you Philly. Perhaps the thinking there was that their terrible goaltending was going to cause significant goals against regardless of strong defensive play, so may as well try to outgun the other team with offensive weapons.
If you look at all the Cup winners and finalists since the 80's Oilers and 90's Penguins (basically the only two successful run-and-gun teams), almost all of them were defense-first teams. And those Oiler and Pens teams needed arguably the two best offensive players of all time to successfully implement offense-first systems.
We don't have the roster to play a "lock down defensive" game.
Tampa Bay also won the Cup recently playing offence first. So did Pittsburgh. So did Carolina. Red Wings lean more offensively too. So 4 of the last 8 ... which is hardly a case of "it never happens". It happens all the time.
If Crosby was healthy this year, they would beat everyone (sorry Boston and Vancouver, you guys are pretenders taking advantage of a league where the king is away from his throne).
Also IMO the NHL is going to have no chance but to cut down on obstruction penalties and play a style more favored towards offensive teams in the long run or their precious US TV ratings are going to go down the toilet.
I didn't say we need a total trap strategy like Phoenix (though I wouldn't complain), but a defense-first system is definitely needed over a run-and-gun style.
The Penguins and Wings, for all their offensive talent, are most definitely defensive-minded hockey teams. Scoring a lot of goals doesn't always mean you are playing firewagon hockey. A good defensive system will create offense off turnovers and taking advantage of the other team's mistakes. Look at the Bruins. Basically the highest scoring team in the league, and one of the most defensive. The Rangers and Predators are both comfortably in the top half of the league in goals for, despite their clear committment to defense-first hockey.
Vancouver is a textbook "lock it down when you have the lead" team. Once they have a lead they take care of their own zone first and let the other team's mistakes and turnovers create more goals for them, in addition to an often overwhelming powerplay.
I'll give you Philly. Perhaps the thinking there was that their terrible goaltending was going to cause significant goals against regardless of strong defensive play, so may as well try to outgun the other team with offensive weapons.
If you look at all the Cup winners and finalists since the 80's Oilers and 90's Penguins (basically the only two successful run-and-gun teams), almost all of them were defense-first teams. And those Oiler and Pens teams needed arguably the two best offensive players of all time to successfully implement offense-first systems.
We don't have the roster to play a "lock down defensive" game.
Tampa Bay also won the Cup recently playing offence first. So did Pittsburgh. So did Carolina. Red Wings lean more offensively too. So 4 of the last 8 ... which is hardly a case of "it never happens". It happens all the time.
If Crosby was healthy this year, they would beat everyone (sorry Boston and Vancouver, you guys are pretenders taking advantage of a league where the king is away from his throne).
We don't have the roster to play a "lock down defensive" game.
Any roster is capable of playing defensively. Zetterberg and Datsyuk seem to do it just fine.
Quote:
Tampa Bay also won the Cup recently playing offence first. So did Pittsburgh. So did Carolina. Red Wings lean more offensively too. So 4 of the last 8 ... which is hardly a case of "it never happens". It happens all the time.
Carolina was somewhat offensive minded. The new rules encouraging offense and a change in philosophy in 2006 made for a bit of an anamolous year. If I recall, the Hurricanes also did a lot of their offensive damage on the powerplay. It should also be noted that the Canes fell off the map and missed the playoffs the next two years after their Cup win. Relying on offensive players to repeat career years was unsustainable.
Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh, and Detroit were absolutely defense-first teams. Detroit started winning Cups when they bought into Bowman's defensive system; the offense-first early 90's teams were playoff flameouts. Babcock has continued the tradition that Bowman started and had great success with it.
Tampa Bay won the Cup by beating Hitchcock's Flyers and the trapping Flames at their own game. The 2004 final was one of the most defensive I can remember, and it wasn't just Calgary doing it. The shots in Game 7 of that series were 16-14 or something ridiculously low like that. The Lighting didn't have the offensive depth to try and outgun teams. Tortorella knew it, everyone bought in, and a Cup was the result.
Pittsburgh manages to remain competitive without Crosby (and Malkin last year) thanks to Bylsma's ability to roll his lines. Not much offensive depth, so naturally they need to be defensive minded in their approach. Therien was more offensive-minded, but after one successful year he was fired halfway through the next when his system stopped working.
Quote:
If Crosby was healthy this year, they would beat everyone (sorry Boston and Vancouver, you guys are pretenders taking advantage of a league where the king is away from his throne).
How did Pittsburgh do in 2010 when he was healthy? Talent is too spread out for any one team to dominate to a great degree, so just assuming the Penguins would have won last year with Crosby is a real stretch, not to mention entirely irrelevent to the discussion.
I would love to see Strudwick worked in as an assistant (maybe start with video coach or scout or something?).
Fraser brought this up on the morning show and I think it might make some sense or at least be worth discussing: Joel Quennville. If Chicago loses in the first round I wonder if he would be let go...took over a Hawks team in a similar position that the Oilers are in right now (obviously minus a VERY large piece in one of the best defensive pairs in the NHL at the time).
If Quennville ever became available, I would hope the Oilers would do everything they could to get him.
Any roster is capable of playing defensively. Zetterberg and Datsyuk seem to do it just fine.
Carolina was somewhat offensive minded. The new rules encouraging offense and a change in philosophy in 2006 made for a bit of an anamolous year. If I recall, the Hurricanes also did a lot of their offensive damage on the powerplay. It should also be noted that the Canes fell off the map and missed the playoffs the next two years after their Cup win. Relying on offensive players to repeat career years was unsustainable.
Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh, and Detroit were absolutely defense-first teams. Detroit started winning Cups when they bought into Bowman's defensive system; the offense-first early 90's teams were playoff flameouts. Babcock has continued the tradition that Bowman started and had great success with it.
Tampa Bay won the Cup by beating Hitchcock's Flyers and the trapping Flames at their own game. The 2004 final was one of the most defensive I can remember, and it wasn't just Calgary doing it. The shots in Game 7 of that series were 16-14 or something ridiculously low like that. The Lighting didn't have the offensive depth to try and outgun teams. Tortorella knew it, everyone bought in, and a Cup was the result.
Pittsburgh manages to remain competitive without Crosby (and Malkin last year) thanks to Bylsma's ability to roll his lines. Not much offensive depth, so naturally they need to be defensive minded in their approach. Therien was more offensive-minded, but after one successful year he was fired halfway through the next when his system stopped working.
How did Pittsburgh do in 2010 when he was healthy? Talent is too spread out for any one team to dominate to a great degree, so just assuming the Penguins would have won last year with Crosby is a real stretch, not to mention entirely irrelevent to the discussion.
If you define "run n' gun" as playing offence only with zero regard for D, then no, even the Oilers should in time develop into a reasonably responsible defensive team.
But I don't see us being the old New Jersey Devils, and nor should we be. We have a different personnel, we should favor a more offensive style. Nothing wrong with that.
Fact is too you're not going to take a squad of 18/19 year olds and make them into a defensive powerhouse no matter what. You need to give the kids their early years to establish their offensive identity first because that's where their confidence stems from. Trying to force players like RNH, Hall, etc. at this age to neuter their offensive game to play more defensively would be ill-advised for the long term development of the franchise.
If you define "run n' gun" as playing offence only with zero regard for D, then no, even the Oilers should in time develop into a reasonably responsible defensive team.
Even just being "reasonably responsible" requires you to have supreme offensive depth. Chicago got away with it because they basically had two first lines, and a third line that could score. The Hurricanes were similar. But almost all Cup winners are bordering on being top-five defensive teams in the league or better.
If we manage to bulk up offensively to the point that we're comparable to what the Blackhawks were, then sure. But that's pretty hard to do. We look a lot more like the Lightning (both pre-lockout and current), or the Ducks. A few elite level offensive players, but a steep dropoff after that, at least right now.
Quote:
But I don't see us being the old New Jersey Devils, and nor should we be. We have a different personnel, we should favor a more offensive style. Nothing wrong with that.
We don't have to be the Lemaire-era Devils. But the Robinson-era Devils would be fine. Very responsible defensive team that also led the league in goals. It seems unlikely we could accumulate that kind of depth on the blueline though.
Quote:
Fact is too you're not going to take a squad of 18/19 year olds and make them into a defensive powerhouse no matter what. You need to give the kids their early years to establish their offensive identity first because that's where their confidence stems from. Trying to force players like RNH, Hall, etc. at this age to neuter their offensive game to play more defensively would be ill-advised for the long term development of the franchise.
Yeah, I agree that getting Nugent and Hall to play defense at the expense of offense is probably ill-advised right now, but bringing in a coach to lay down the framework for a defensive style (not Renney's soft, passive crap) is necessary sooner rather than later. Getzlaf and Perry weren't much older on Carlyle's 2007 Ducks, nor did defensive responsibility neuter young Toews, who led his team in scoring while providing elite defensive play as well. St. Louis is by no means a veteran team, but they caught onto Hitchcock's system pretty quickly.
It's much easier to get guys thinking with a defensive conscience right now so that they may hopefully be in the Toews/Bergeron/Krejci mold in two or three years, rather than follow the Washington model and have to try to re-wire Ovechkin after years of him being told to go out and free-wheel.
Another coach who could potential be available this summer: Alain Vigneault. If Vancouver doesn't win the cup (and I pray they don't), Vigneault could very well be ousted. I hate everything Canucks, but I respect Vigneault and think he would be a great coach for this team going forward.
