There are several things in here, which frighten me about Poti.
"Poti has been the subject of trade rumors this season. He struggles sometimes with his defensive role, and with the fact he is not a physical presence around his net. It's not for lack of trying, but Poti's wiry build doesn't let him come out on the winning side of most battles down low. At other times, he is caught out of position, plain and simple. He knows there is talk about his worth to the Rangers, but he tries to put it aside. "
Poti's wiry build? I was not aware that his 6'3", 210 lbs is considered "wiry". Using his size as an excuse as to why he looses most 1 on 1 battles is a joke. He is not only beaten by bigger opponents, but frequently the smaller ones as well.
But here is the creme-de la-creme of the whole article, IMO:
"Questions about his defensive shortcomings are particularly annoying to Poti.
"When you're an offensive guy, and you're not a big physical presence out there, you get criticized for that," he said. "But on the other end, they don't criticize the defensive guys for not scoring. It's a Catch-22, I guess. You just try to take the criticisms and work against them as best you can." "
How in God's green Earth does this clown think that just becuase he is an "offensive" player, he should be immune from criticism about his abhorent defensive play? Maybe the "defensive" guys are not criticezed becuase they do not set up the other team for more goals than their own. Now, granted, maybe I'm misreading some things here. However, I really don't think so.
This reminds me of Bure last year, when he said that you can either be a great goal scorer or be good defensively, but not both. So sorry, Tom that questions about your defensive shortcomings are annoying to you. Maybe you should concentrate a little bit on the DEFENSIVE part of being a DEFENSEman.
Blurry vision? Hardly. First of all, it's not like Poti is suffering from not being a BIG physical presence. He has no physical presence AT ALL. He could be the smallest 6-3, 210 lbs that has ever laced up the skates. Second of all, he is saying that it is unfair that the "defensive" players to not get criticizes about scoring goals while the "offensive" players get criticized for not playing defense well. Read the whole article so that you can see how he uses his terms.
The fact that Poti is liberally seperating defensemen by calling some offensive and defensive is alarming in itself. He is seeking to absolve blame for his defensive mishaps by saying that since he is an "offensive" player, that he should not be held to the same standard as the "defensive" players when it is time to play defense. That's friggin' scary. In Detroit, do you think that Chellios has a level of accountability that is any different from Lidstrom? You're a friggin' DEFENSEman, Tom. Everyone is held to the same standard when it comes to playing competent defense. It's not like Poti is even adequate when it comes to defense. He is outright abonominable.
Actually, I don't think TB is misreading anything. Poti's comments suggest that an attitude that "hey, I'm an offenseman, so defense isn't something I should to worry about or hear about". Nobody is asking him to be a physical presence. He's never going to be, and you don't have to be one to be an effective defender. He's simply being asked to lay a body on someone from time to time and not get caught out of position every other shift. Zubov isn't a heavy hitter or a crease-clearer, but he's competent enough on D that he isn't a liability, and thus whatever shortcomings he has on D are far outweighed by what he can do offensively. With Poti, that's too often not the case. For every play Poti makes that creates a scoring chance for the Rangers, he makes two glaring defensive gaffes that result in scoring chances against the Rangers. As long as that continues, he's going to hear about his play in his own end, and he should.