robrob1974 Posted February 15, 2015 Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 He probably split them to make the other two stronger, but having them together down the stretch out weighs that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted February 15, 2015 Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 Are you afraid of change making the team even better ? I'm not sure what proof you are seeking other than observation and having coached myself. What I am suggesting is not inconceivable as you bring in quality people. Is Suter less talented because he moved to MIN and now plays with someone other than Weber ? I don't disagree any change doesn't have to be this year. It may never happen if they can match someone better than Russell with Wideman. We all keep mentioning how our D has to improve and be much better, well there are only so many ways to achieve this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted February 15, 2015 Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 Are you afraid of change making the team even better ? I'm not sure what proof you are seeking other than observation and having coached myself. What I am suggesting is not inconceivable as you bring in quality people. Is Suter less talented because he moved to MIN and now plays with someone other than Weber ? I don't disagree any change doesn't have to be this year. It may never happen if they can match someone better than Russell with Wideman. We all keep mentioning how our D has to improve and be much better, well there are only so many ways to achieve this. Sorry bud, but I just don't get your suggestions. How much better does splitting up the best pairing in the NHL get you? They are combined for the most points for a D pairing and Brodie is +23 and Gio is 44 points. Wdieman is sitting at 33 points, ties with Brodie. So, you move Brodie to the 2nd pair opposite Wideman; who plays opposite Gio? Russell moves down to 3rd pair and Smid sits, leaving Diaz or Wideman. Without getting a top 2D, there is no point in disrupting our top 4. Even if you bring in a #2, do you want to bump Gio or Brodie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
420since1974 Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 I like our top 4 just fine. Improvements on 5 - 7 are my wish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darth_henning Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 I don't disagree any change doesn't have to be this year. It may never happen if they can match someone better than Russell with Wideman. We all keep mentioning how our D has to improve and be much better, well there are only so many ways to achieve this. Could we maybe find a better D-man than Russel? Possibly. But he's the number 1 shot blocker in the NHL. That's a very hard stat to replace. Split up him and Wideman and you have less time for him on the ice, and our shot blocks will go down dramatically. That's a key factor that's helped us win games by limiting the pucks getting to the net. And we're still out-shot on a lot of nights. Decreasing Russel's ice time substantially by putting him on the bottom pairing is a horrible idea. Yes, the D does need to be improved. The best way to do that is to have a third pairing that you can actually trust on the ice, and not be worried about letting in an obscene number of goals when they're on the ice. I hear the broadcaster say Engellend and I'm 50% sure a goal will be going in. That means that the first and second pairings get played more because the third pairing has to be limited on ice time, tiring out the top 4 players. Best fix for that? Having a third pairing that can play 15+ minutes a night rather than 10 or less. Then your other 4 D-men can actually hover around 20 rather than all averaging close to 25 or more. That makes things better without messing with the pairings. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Ice time of our top 4 seems to be getting within a couple of minutes of each other each game. There is a marked drop off of ice time for our 3rd pairing. I don't think that you should break up this ice time for our top 4 that seems to be working quite well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darth_henning Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 23-25 minutes is a lot per game though. If we could get a bottom pair that could play about 15-19 minutes a night, can you imagine how well the others would play if better rested? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheersMan Posted February 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 23-25 minutes is a lot per game though. If we could get a bottom pair that could play about 15-19 minutes a night, can you imagine how well the others would play if better rested? I think your top pairing should be getting 25 min a night, that's why they're your top pairing. Compare our top pairing to other top pairings in the league. Would LA be as effective if the took some of Doughty's 30 min away? How about Weber? I wouldn't want our top pairing playing any less than the 25 min. The second pairing seems on track as well. The third pairing picks up the slack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Maybe you don't disrupt them but it depends on who you bring in. I think I did say you don't do it this year. I happen to believe a lot of Brodie's success can be attributed to his own maturity plus having the confidence to push his offense with Giordano as a partner. before they made the move to this pairing I thought Brodie's comfort zone was playing the LS and was effective there. I'm not disputing their success just that there may be a time coming to spread that talent for even better use. If there isn't then leave well enough alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 23-25 minutes is a lot per game though. If we could get a bottom pair that could play about 15-19 minutes a night, can you imagine how well the others would play if better rested? Agreed. In a perfect world, each pair gets 20-minutes-per. But at worst, the bottom pair should play 15-mins and the two other pairs share the load. If Diaz, Smid, and Engellend cannot handle 15-mins-per, then we need to upgrade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmac70 Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Agreed. In a perfect world, each pair gets 20-minutes-per. But at worst, the bottom pair should play 15-mins and the two other pairs share the load. If Diaz, Smid, and Engellend cannot handle 15-mins-per, then we need to upgrade. We need an upgrade....DE has get a trophy for worst signing of the year!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 If we are being fair to all our other defensemen attributing to our success, why are we all so disappointed in the results from Diaz and Engelland ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Agreed. In a perfect world, each pair gets 20-minutes-per. But at worst, the bottom pair should play 15-mins and the two other pairs share the load. If Diaz, Smid, and Engellend cannot handle 15-mins-per, then we need to upgrade. To equally give all 3 pairings 20 minutes each you would have to have your opponents running all 4 lines equally in time. You should not expect the Flames to be able to put their 3 D pairing against the other opponents best, even on the road where they do not get last change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khrox Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Lets say we brought Smid/Engelland/Diaz to 15 minutes a night. For this scenario it is going to be Diaz and Engelland (seeing as Smid is injured), that is a combined 5 minutes 40 seconds of extra icetime to them combined, and away from everyone else. That is still roughly 1:35 icetime less (each) for our top 4. If we could get a third pairing that could take those minutes, I want to say try and eat up some of the PK time for it. Russel is great for PK but Wideman is a guy I want to avoid that with, and he averages about 1:02/game of SH TOI, (Engelland averages 0:47 SH TOI, Diaz averages 0:00). Gio and Brodie both average over 2 minutes SH TOI/Game. If we can take even 10-15 seconds of that from those 3, that is 30-45 seconds that our best offensive D-men get a chance to not save energy and play cautiously. I would say the rest of the time would have to come from EV since the only one even viable to put on PP is Diaz (and that changes if he is gone to upgrade), but Russel, Brodie average over 2 minutes per game, Wideman/Gio average over 3 minutes while Diaz still get about 0:47 per game. The only person we could feasibly take some there from is Russel, but I would still take Russel over Diaz on it (combination of I feel he is a better skater, prevents shorthanded breakouts better and partially get some PP time as a reward for being one of the best shot-blockers in the league and putting it all out there for the team).As much as I want an upgrade on our 5-7 D, I can't see a feasible spot to take away the amount of icetime to get the third pairing to 15 minutes a night, it's not ideal because there isn't a lot of space for Gio or Brodie in EV or PP to go down in icetime, and at most you can take 30 seconds of SH time away from them. Our second pairing, EV is at a decent spot and you don't really want to decrease Russel's SH or Widemans PP, which again leaves you at most 20-30 seconds of time (Russels PP and Widemans SH) to give away. Which means the only spot for any real extra icetime for our 5-7 is special teams, and do you really want someone like Engelland out there for an extra 30 seconds or so SH icetime? The only way we can even really justify that is getting a legitimate top 4 D-man and putting him on the third pairing and taking all that extra SH/PP time and giving it to him as well as the normal third pairing ice-time (which would put 1 at about 15 minutes, the other staying between 10-12 minutes). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Lets say we brought Smid/Engelland/Diaz to 15 minutes a night. For this scenario it is going to be Diaz and Engelland (seeing as Smid is injured), that is a combined 5 minutes 40 seconds of extra icetime to them combined, and away from everyone else. That is still roughly 1:35 icetime less (each) for our top 4. If we could get a third pairing that could take those minutes, I want to say try and eat up some of the PK time for it. Russel is great for PK but Wideman is a guy I want to avoid that with, and he averages about 1:02/game of SH TOI, (Engelland averages 0:47 SH TOI, Diaz averages 0:00). Gio and Brodie both average over 2 minutes SH TOI/Game. If we can take even 10-15 seconds of that from those 3, that is 30-45 seconds that our best offensive D-men get a chance to not save energy and play cautiously. I would say the rest of the time would have to come from EV since the only one even viable to put on PP is Diaz (and that changes if he is gone to upgrade), but Russel, Brodie average over 2 minutes per game, Wideman/Gio average over 3 minutes while Diaz still get about 0:47 per game. The only person we could feasibly take some there from is Russel, but I would still take Russel over Diaz on it (combination of I feel he is a better skater, prevents shorthanded breakouts better and partially get some PP time as a reward for being one of the best shot-blockers in the league and putting it all out there for the team). As much as I want an upgrade on our 5-7 D, I can't see a feasible spot to take away the amount of icetime to get the third pairing to 15 minutes a night, it's not ideal because there isn't a lot of space for Gio or Brodie in EV or PP to go down in icetime, and at most you can take 30 seconds of SH time away from them. Our second pairing, EV is at a decent spot and you don't really want to decrease Russel's SH or Widemans PP, which again leaves you at most 20-30 seconds of time (Russels PP and Widemans SH) to give away. Which means the only spot for any real extra icetime for our 5-7 is special teams, and do you really want someone like Engelland out there for an extra 30 seconds or so SH icetime? The only way we can even really justify that is getting a legitimate top 4 D-man and putting him on the third pairing and taking all that extra SH/PP time and giving it to him as well as the normal third pairing ice-time (which would put 1 at about 15 minutes, the other staying between 10-12 minutes). Russell/Wideman play more than some teams 1st pairings. Most 2nd pairings average around 20 mins a night and most 3 pairings are around 17 mins. Not being able to roll 3 pairings effectively is going to hurt us down the stretch and into the playoffs, as the intensity ramps up. That's why we need upgrades badly. Ideally I would like to see the 1st pairing down to 23mins, 2nd pairing at 20 mins and 3rd pairing at 17mins. Baring that I would go with Giordano/Brodie at 25mins. Russell/Wideman at 20mins. And the third pairing at 15mins. I am just not sure I trust Engelland to play that many mins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darth_henning Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Pretty much exacty what Tech said. We don't need huge reductions for our top 4, but even a couple fewer minutes per game is going to be helpful down the stretch. The problem is we ccan't trust Engellend to play 3-4 more minutes per night without risking a lot more goals against. Diaz isn't outstanding, but he's pretty decent as a 4-6D and does well on the PP. If we could even find someone equal to him to play with, that's the one big upgrade this team needs and gives our D a more balanced ice time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 To equally give all 3 pairings 20 minutes each you would have to have your opponents running all 4 lines equally in time. You should not expect the Flames to be able to put their 3 D pairing against the other opponents best, even on the road where they do not get last change. I think the problem with a top pair that over plays is the same problem as a one line team. You can only go so far. We should expect a bottom pair to go up against another team's top line a couple times a game and be able to handle themselves. Right now, when other team's top line is on the ice and the Diaz-Engellend are trapped on the ice, we begin to cringe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheersMan Posted February 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Agreed. In a perfect world, each pair gets 20-minutes-per. But at worst, the bottom pair should play 15-mins and the two other pairs share the load. If Diaz, Smid, and Engellend cannot handle 15-mins-per, then we need to upgrade. I think the problem with a top pair that over plays is the same problem as a one line team. You can only go so far. We should expect a bottom pair to go up against another team's top line a couple times a game and be able to handle themselves. Right now, when other team's top line is on the ice and the Diaz-Engellend are trapped on the ice, we begin to cringe. That’s an interesting perspective with all D playing equal time. Should we give them equal PP and SH time too, equal zone starts, maybe start paying them all the same as well? ----------- How did this over playing our top D pairing come into play? Are Brodano complaining? Are they not getting the job done? Has their game receded? ----------- Here is a look at the past SC champions and the TOI for their top dman during the playoffs. 2014, LA, Doughty, 28:45 2013, CHI, Keith, 27:37 2012, LA, Doughty, 26:08 2011, BOS, Chara, 27:39 2010, CHI, Keith, 28:11 I still see Brodano joining the rush, creating offense, that's not a sign of tired dmen. They are handling the 25 min nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darth_henning Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 No one's specifically said they're tired, or that they can't handle it. Just that it would be good to have options that we can trust so that they don't HAVE to play that much. Right now they do not because they CAN, but because we NEED them to. That's the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheersMan Posted February 17, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 win vs BOS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Wideman showed cracks with that many minutes. Really shakey at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob1974 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 But Brodie didn't look great either, with that giveaway. It seemed like the ice could have been bad in that one zone tonight where Bouma kept falling all over the place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khrox Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 That game was not the best for us sadly. But again, definitely would love to see us have someone who could eat up some of Wideman's PK time (not named Russel, Gio or Brodie, who already eat up the majority of the time). The one I disagree with is the fact that Gio had less PP time than Russel (while Russel is solid on the PP, would rather have Gio/Wideman on the first and Russel/Brodie on the second). And Brodie only getting 17 seconds of PP time seems a little off, compared to how much of a threat he is normally on it. And Brodie normally leads the team in icetime, here he is 4th on our D, anyone know why? Hopefully he isn't hurting (which I could see him playing through and Hartley just scaling back the time a bit, would explain Wideman's icetime being almost 7 minutes more than usual) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Is anyone else sick of all these blind backhand passes to no one from our team ? The one by Brodie last night should tell them to quit doing this. Oh well, maddening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheersMan Posted February 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2015 Here is an interesting stat I came across today. I never realized Wideman has been so steady on the penalty kill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now