If We Sign Schultz Does That Mean We Go All Small Defence?
Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.
Gunnarson and Schenn are the same height but Schenn just weighted about 30 more pounds.
And Rielly is 6 feet as an 18 year old so he still has time to grow.
Gunnarson and Schenn are the same height but Schenn just weighted about 30 more pounds.
And Rielly is 6 feet as an 18 year old so he still has time to grow.
If he grows an inch or two it definitely would be great for us.
Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.
You no longer need to be 6'5" to win the Norris.
IMO the mix between big defensive stay at home guys and smaller, mobile offensive guys is changing. You no longer require 3-4 big bruisers complimented with 1-2 puck movers - you can successfully run 3-4 puck movers offset with a couple beasts who don the defensive responsibilities, clearing the net, blocking shots, etc.
It's a good system that other teams will have issues with provided we have sizeable forwards who provide support.
Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.
U don't think Phaneuf(6"3) and Gunnarsson(6"2) are big enough? And I wouldn't call Gardiner and Schultz who are an inch above 6" ft small either.
I think your definition of small is a little too unrealistic, perhaps even bizzare.
Their musculature has an even better chance of growing than their height does. People can get bigger with time, and if these guys choose to (obviously not if it sacrifices speed), then they will.
Rielly's a gym-rat, my guess is that he could very well put on some pounds in his mid-20s and keep his dynamic skating. Mobility's the name of the game now. These days, everyone on the ice needs to be able to play hockey. I love it.
With the If Schultz included and not knowing who might be out if he's added, this is the top 8 by size (obviously these are just what posted on TML.com, so buyer beware):
The concern is really that there aren't any enough massive hitter types, known as "stay at home" guys, not so much just size isn't it? I ask because that looks plenty large to me. To me it's really a question of smaller offensive guys who need compensators types to balance out a pairing. I'd argue Gardiner has enough positional awareness and size he doesn't really need a heavy beside him. Liles is the only one who can be said to need a true stay at home monster next to him IMO and Komisarek certainly fits that for now. There's also Phaneuf and Franson who are pretty darn huge, although Phaneuf is too reckless for that pairing and Franson doesn't use his size explosively, but I do think he uses it effectively for the most part. Liles/Franson (if Komi were gone or just in the press box) wouldn't work last year, but I like Franson and think he may be on his way to being capable that way (and it's a pretty nice PP combo too).
If Schultz is added (and I can't say what Schultz would need in the NHL) then the defense would be a little light on the rough and tumble types (aside, can we put away the word truculence for a while?), but I'll take a bit of a loss there if we're above average at getting out of the zone quick and having dmen that can keep up with forwards both ways. Sure, I don't want to end up getting cycled against indefinitely because there isn't enough physicality to take the puck away on the boards, but the pure size is there no question, it'll be up to Carlyle to teach them how to use it.
Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.
Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.
Detroit Red Wings weren't exactly big with Lidstrom, Rafalski, etc. leading the charge a few years ago.
IMO the mix between big defensive stay at home guys and smaller, mobile offensive guys is changing. You no longer require 3-4 big bruisers complimented with 1-2 puck movers - you can successfully run 3-4 puck movers offset with a couple beasts who don the defensive responsibilities, clearing the net, blocking shots, etc.
It's a good system that other teams will have issues with provided we have sizeable forwards who provide support.
I would make the argument that bruisers haven't been necessary for years, but the Leafs have been caught in a bit of a time warp about that. We still have Komisarek and we'll have Holzer in the system too. Honestly, we lost the slowest, least reliable dman in the group, it's not a huge loss.
Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.
The league is going towards puck movement and transition, also having D able to be the 4th attacker is a must.
Finn was described to me as a Adam Foote clone, very smart, doesn't make mistakes, makes the right play, is not Flashy with one more important trait, he is very competitive.
We have some young guys who have yet to physically mature, but over 6' is not vertically challenged.
We still have Dion who is the best open ice hitter in the NHL, I may not like it, but we also still have Komi who is a big hitter as well. With the speed Reilly, Gardiner and Schultz all have, if they ever get angry they can throw some momentum based hits, LOL.
Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.
Its a valid question, & one I have asked myself as to this very question.
In the course of the past 5 months Leafs have shipped out Schenn and Aulie in trade for wingers. They were unquestionable the organizations best 2 best young defensive Dmen with size and grit.
For a team that has consistently finished at the bottom of the league in goals against, you would think that building around these kinds of defensive defenders would make sense if goal prevention was a factor, as well as strength, size and physicality including hits and shot blocking.
A defense that consists of JM Liles, Jake Gardiner, Morgan Rielly and perhaps Justin Schultz (if lucky) would be building an all small(er), non physical, puck moving Defense..
As we saw with the Kings and Bruins recent Cup winners size and strength among their forwards too much for some teams defenses to handle. Leafs by dealing Schenn and Aulie and going with a smaller defense core is going to struggle even more to compete in their own end and prevent other teams forwards from going hard to the net.
__________________
Signature: There is no greater demonstration of Fan patience then to suggest to "Play the Kids " and be willing to accept the consequences of those actions..
Its a valid question, & one I have asked myself as to this very question.
In the course of the past 5 months Leafs have shipped out Schenn and Aulie in trade for wingers. They were unquestionable the organizations best 2 best young defensive Dmen with size and grit.
For a team that has consistently finished at the bottom of the league in goals against, you would think that building around these kinds of defensive defenders would make sense if goal prevention was a factor, as well as strength, size and physicality including hits and shot blocking.
A defense that consists of JM Liles, Jake Gardiner, Morgan Rielly and perhaps Justin Schultz (if lucky) would be building an all small(er), non physical, puck moving Defense..
As we saw with the Kings and Bruins recent Cup winners size and strength among their forwards too much for some teams defenses to handle. Leafs by dealing Schenn and Aulie and going with a smaller defense core is going to struggle even more to compete in their own end and prevent other teams forwards from going hard to the net.
IMO, it is a thankless chore to develop young defensive defensemen, because all their lessons learned end up in the back of your own net. When you look at guys like Matt Greene, Rob Scuderi, Hal Gill, Willie Mitchell, Luke Richardson, Sylvain Lefebvre, Bob Rouse, etc. they're affordable guys you can get on the UFA market that you can sprinkle into a contending organization without having to develop them yourself.
I'd never ever target a defensive defenseman in the first round.
