Britishbulldog
Active member
Potvin29 said:Gotta put Clarkson out after the goal of course.
Exactly. I am a pretty laid back guy but that was frustrating coaching. Absolutely idiotic use of assets. As usual.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Potvin29 said:Gotta put Clarkson out after the goal of course.
Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:Good. We deserved to lose.
bustaheims said:As for the Kessel line . . . outside of not being able to put the puck in the net, they've been pretty good most of the night and have created almost all of the Leafs scoring chances. I have no issues with them. They can't do it all, though, and they're all too frequently being relied on to do just that.
bustaheims said:Well, at least Reimer was pretty good.
L K said:It's hard to argue with that. The only thing I can counter with is a lack of accountability? I mean, if the team is continually not working hard, eventually that just becomes an acceptable part of the team culture. If Phaneuf isn't going to stand up in the dressing room and do something about it, then the coach should.
bustaheims said:RedLeaf said:You've just isolated their number one problem here. The core of this teams defense is either too inexperienced, or too offensive minded.
Defence is, and always has been, a team thing, not a defenceman thing. The biggest defensive issue with the team is the system they play, not the guys on the blue line who are part of it. Adding a defensive defenceman or a more experienced player or two isn't going to have a material impact on that. They're not going to suddenly start playing a different system than the one their coach has been deploying them in all season.
Nik the Trik said:L K said:It's hard to argue with that. The only thing I can counter with is a lack of accountability? I mean, if the team is continually not working hard, eventually that just becomes an acceptable part of the team culture. If Phaneuf isn't going to stand up in the dressing room and do something about it, then the coach should.
Short of being a convenient go-to buzzword, I'm not sure what "accountability" ultimately means. Yelling at them? I'm sure Carlyle has done that ad nauseum. Benching them? Who? I don't know what you do really.
Nik the Trik said:bustaheims said:Well, at least Reimer was pretty good.
It's a shame that this lousy effort by the team might mask that, really, Reimer should be getting more of a look down the stretch.
RedLeaf said:Completely agree with the bolded part. But, team defence comes mostly from the players who can play that way, not what the coach shows them. Team Canada could have had a monkey coaching at the Olympics and they still would have won the gold, based almost entirely on their defensive play. That was the players, not the coaching.
Nik the Trik said:RedLeaf said:Completely agree with the bolded part. But, team defence comes mostly from the players who can play that way, not what the coach shows them. Team Canada could have had a monkey coaching at the Olympics and they still would have won the gold, based almost entirely on their defensive play. That was the players, not the coaching.
Torino doesn't really help that argument. It's a combination.
RedLeaf said:That's why I said 'mostly'. But I also think the Torino team was defensively weaker as a unit. I mean, Bryan McCabe made that team....
Nik the Trik said:RedLeaf said:That's why I said 'mostly'. But I also think the Torino team was defensively weaker as a unit. I mean, Bryan McCabe made that team....
Who I'd take defensively over PK Subban. It was a really good defensive unit.
Anyways, I think the point remains that it's a combination and I think it's fair to say that Carlyle is doing some things defensively that aren't helping the team. I absolutely agree that he doesn't have much to work with but he's still a part of the problem.
RedLeaf said:Completely agree with the bolded part. But, team defence comes mostly from the players who can play that way, not what the coach shows them. Team Canada could have had a monkey coaching at the Olympics and they still would have won the gold, based almost entirely on their defensive play. That was the players, not the coaching.
Edit: show me a team full of good two way players and I'll show you a good coach. That seldom works the other way around.
bustaheims said:RedLeaf said:Completely agree with the bolded part. But, team defence comes mostly from the players who can play that way, not what the coach shows them. Team Canada could have had a monkey coaching at the Olympics and they still would have won the gold, based almost entirely on their defensive play. That was the players, not the coaching.
Edit: show me a team full of good two way players and I'll show you a good coach. That seldom works the other way around.
Yes. The Leafs aren't Team Canada. We all know that. But, at the same time, if you don't believe that coaching had influence on the outcome of the Olympics, then I don't know what to say to you.
A good coach can make a team look much better defensively than the talent on the roster would imply that they would be. While the Leafs may not be brimming with defensive superstars, they are, as a group, talented enough as players to be a reasonable defensive group if they're deployed probably and taught a system that maximizes their strength. Right now, neither of those things are happening.
RedLeaf said:Unless you're talking about playing a trap game, I don't agree. This team has too many offense-first players. We've been through this, you and me, many times. You know where I stand on this. I'd trade 3-4 offense-first players on this team for two-way guys (add a few defensive D-men), and we get that much closer to the team you think we should be seeing now. That's the only way it happens.
bustaheims said:RedLeaf said:Unless you're talking about playing a trap game, I don't agree. This team has too many offense-first players. We've been through this, you and me, many times. You know where I stand on this. I'd trade 3-4 offense-first players on this team for two-way guys (add a few defensive D-men), and we get that much closer to the team you think we should be seeing now. That's the only way it happens.
All trading offensive players for defensive players is going to do to this team is turn them from a team that gets inconsistent secondary scoring to a team that gets no secondary scoring. Without changing the way they play defence, they're not going to improve defensively. The type of talent on the roster isn't going to matter until that happens.