GDT: Game 30: Avs @ Capitals | Tuesday, December 12th, 5pm MT | No Sleep

[Pokecheque]

It's not like Roy had such an amazing roster.

It was actually a much better roster than you're giving it credit for. Stastny did a ton of the heavy lifting, easing the burden on Duchene, MacKinnon, AND O'Reilly, giving Roy a ton of options. Losing Stastny and signing an aging Jarome Iginla to replace him was Roy/Sakic's first major blunder, one of many, many mistakes they made that offseason. It was only downhill from there.

Roy used those same slow perimeter players that Bednar did in the 48 point season. Besides, the more important factor than player ability is how quickly everyone quit on him. That's why we got 48 points, not because of talent.

No he didn't--he didn't have Colborne, he didn't have Tyutin, and he didn't have Wiercioch. I'd also add that Roy got okay results from Iginla and Beauchemin before Father Time absolutely destroyed both the following season. That's two more slow and soft players who utterly killed the Avs last season.

And the only reason we are even .500 right now is because of MacK and our ability to score this year. We are still getting scored on just as much as last year. The offense is great, but 3.3 goals against is unacceptable. A decent coach would have better results regardless of personnel. Offense fluctuates a lot more than defense. We will quickly fall further behind when the offense dries up for a couple weeks.

I've said before I don't like the defensive scheme and rather pensive forecheck Bednar and Pratt employ so I'm with you there to an extent. But I don't buy this notion that virtually any other coach would have the league's 2nd-youngest roster that has been beset by injury and shoddy goaltending doing markedly better.

 

[dahrougem2]

Did Roy really have THAT much better of a team than Sacco, though?

Roy had five 40+ point players:
Duchene (70); Landeskog (65); O'Reilly (64); MacKinnon (63); Stastny (60)

Sacco, too, had five 40+ point players:
Stastny (79); Stewart (64); Duchene (55); Wolski (47); Hejduk (44)

Sacco's defensemen were Foote, Liles, Hannan, Quincey, Wilson, Cumiskey, Clark
Roy's defensemen were Johnson, Barrie, Hejda, Benoit, Holden, Guenin, Sarich

Sacco's team scored 237 goals and gave up 218
Roy's team scored scored 245 goals and gave up 209

I'm not saying that Sacco's team was a team of all stars, but I don't believe that Roy's roster was way better than Sacco's. I'd even argue that Sacco had the better defensemen overall. Yeah, Johnson is the best of the bunch but overall Sacco had a better defence corps to work with as sad as that is to say.

 

[StayAtHomeAv]

It was actually a much better roster than you're giving it credit for. Stastny did a ton of the heavy lifting, easing the burden on Duchene, MacKinnon, AND O'Reilly, giving Roy a ton of options. Losing Stastny and signing an aging Jarome Iginla to replace him was Roy/Sakic's first major blunder, one of many, many mistakes they made that offseason. It was only downhill from there.



No he didn't--he didn't have Colborne, he didn't have Tyutin, and he didn't have Wiercioch. I'd also add that Roy got okay results from Iginla and Beauchemin before Father Time absolutely destroyed both the following season. That's two more slow and soft players who utterly killed the Avs last season.



I've said before I don't like the defensive scheme and rather pensive forecheck Bednar and Pratt employ so I'm with you there to an extent. But I don't buy this notion that virtually any other coach would have the league's 2nd-youngest roster that has been beset by injury and shoddy goaltending doing markedly better.

Like I said, don't count that first year if you like. The team performed way above their heads. Just compare the other years.

Colborne, Tyutin, and Wiercoich were not the only slow players. Gelinas, Grigo, Mitchell, Martinsen and McLeod played under both. Roy also had guys like Guinen, Gormley, Holden, Stuart, Cliche, Caron, Bordy and Talbot that were gone before Bednar.

Iginla and Beauch were slow as crap under Roy as well. Roy just knew how to use players like and get the best out of them. Beauch seems to be doing ok with the ducks this year as well.

Where in the world did I say virtually any other coach would be better?

 

[Bubba Thudd]

Like I said, don't count that first year if you like. The team performed way above their heads. Just compare the other years.

Colborne, Tyutin, and Wiercoich were not the only slow players. Gelinas, Grigo, Mitchell, Martinsen and McLeod played under both. Roy also had guys like Guinen, Gormley, Holden, Stuart, Cliche, Caron, Bordy and Talbot that were gone before Bednar.

Iginla and Beauch were slow as crap under Roy as well. Roy just knew how to use players like and get the best out of them. Beauch seems to be doing ok with the ducks this year as well.

Where in the world did I say virtually any other coach would be better

 

[StayAtHomeAv]

Que?

 

[Bubba Thudd]

Expand my quote. You'll see what you said.

 

[StayAtHomeAv]

I didn't say that though. I was asking where I said that.

I have no clue what your getting at.

 

[Pokecheque]

My mistake, you said a "decent" coach. But I still think most coaches would still be struggling to get this team to play consistent hockey with the issues a very young, injury-riddled squad with below-average goaltending.

That's not to say I think Bednar is getting the best out of this roster. I'm on the record saying I think he's actually making some bad, bordering on terrible, decisions. And I'm still very disappointed in Nolan Pratt, if indeed this is his defensive system they're implementing.

 

[StayAtHomeAv]

A lack of consistency isn't the problem. The problem is that we are consistently getting scored on. 73% of the time we have given up 3 or more goals, and we are 7-15 in those games. I figure it's about a 50/50 chance of winning when giving up 3 goals since the league average right now is basically right at 3. Though right now we are 6-3 when giving up 3 goals, but I don't think that's sustainable. And though obviously not consistent, we have given up 4+ goals 43% of the time. Those are games we will rarely win.

3 goals against: 6-3
4+ goals against: 1-12
2- goals against: 7-1

 

[expatriatedtexan]

So you're saying it's harder to win the more goals you give up? Who'dve thunk it.