GDT: GDT #5 Colorado Avalanche vs New York Islanders | October 24th | 8 PM | F/7-4 L

[MJF]

Creating a full-fledged offensive system at the NHL is a full time job and takes planning and and an understanding of the roster you have in front of you. This is beyond your and mine pay grade. What I offered you are indeed scenarios that are elements of an offensive minded system a system that appears totally foreign to Lambert but other teams have done it with success through the years. We need a new coach with the experience to implement such a system

As for those 5 goals against Colorado. As I said that is the result of team that has figured out Lambert's predictable system of sitting back and trying to box out the high scoring areas but allowing the opposing team to get a ton of shots on net. Don't tell me that this is not an element of Trotz/Lambert's system. We all know the Islanders have had some the highest shots against in the league the past 5 years. Eventually teams will catch on and know that the team poses no offensive threat especially when they are focused on holding to a one goal lead and the game becomes a shooting gallery. Against a high scoring team like Colorado or the Devils you are just asking for trouble if you let them get that many shots on net. This is what I mean when I say the Islanders currently play a game not to lose rather than one that plays to win by building bigger leads. The best teams in the league play "to win". This is the primary reason we lost all those series against Tampa Bay and more recently against Carolina. The Isles are taught to hang on for dear life with a one goal lead rather than building on the lead. The best defense is a good offense. Spend more time with MORE players deeper in the offensive zone and keep the shots goal to a minimum and keep the opposing team hemmed into their own D zone.

BTW Sorokin is most effective when he can see the puck. All the teams are catching on to the idea that to beat Sorokin you have to have the shots screened. Having all those players collapsing in front of the net is just creates a bigger screen in front of Sorokin. He needs to see the puck in order to stop it. A more traditional offensive minded system will lessen the crowding in front of the net.

In regards to how we ended up to where this team is today. Think about this. The Islanders ended up with a conservative, trap based, low scoring system because Lou brought in Trotz the moment he became GM. He didn't build a roster that was necessarily optimized for this system of play he just took the team he had in front of him and basically told the team, "hey guys we're going to totally change the way you guys play the game no questions asked". It's not like this team was built from the ground up to play the current system of play they were essentially forced to because this is the only system that Trotz deploys and everyone knew that. So it didn't matter that you were Matthew Barzal, Pulock, Nelson, Dobson etc... You play the game the way we want you to play it. The problem with that approach is that it could amount to nothing more than trying to fit a square peg into a round hole and in regards to some of our more gifted skaters that's pretty much what is going on here. The players are treated like pawns on a chessboard rather than allowing them to utilize their athleticism and talent drive the play. So players like Dobson, Wahlstrom, Barzal, (and before them Bailey) are playing the game in a way that goes against their natural instincts. I don't think this is the proper way to manage a team.

You can win with a defense-first system. When Trotz came in the same guys here were 5 years younger and a lot better at what they did. Lou could have augmented the roster with younger guys who were better on their skates that could play “Trotz Hockey”, instead Lou fired Trotz, re-committed to most of the guys he had in 2021, and the roster is now dying on the vine.

 

[Mr Misunderstood]

BTW Sorokin is most effective when he can see the puck.

Shit, are you Piero Greco? Please bless us with more goaltending wizardry knowledge.

 

[steveat]

i know people are blaming Lou, but this team is the way it is because of the owners. I guess we can't have our cake and eat it too...We needed a new building...now we have to suffer through barely being a bubble team just so the owners can sell the team at a solid price.

 

[PK Cronin]

Creating a full-fledged offensive system at the NHL is a full time job and takes planning and and an understanding of the roster you have in front of you. This is beyond your and mine pay grade. What I offered you are indeed scenarios that are elements of an offensive minded system a system that appears totally foreign to Lambert but other teams have done it with success through the years. We need a new coach with the experience to implement such a system.

Your suggestions so far include:

Different strategies for different lines.
More dump and chase for the bottom 6.
More cycling for the bottom 6.
Aggressively forecheck for the fourth line.
Cheating for offense from our top 6.
Create odd man rushes the other way.
More defensemen joining the rush.
More drop passes from the top 6.
More skating opportunities from the best skaters.
Create more chances with speed.

I don't have a problem with the criticism, as I previously mentioned, but you're not offering much meat here. Again, that's fine, but you're continually posting like you have all the solutions while simultaneously acknowledging your lack of expertise in the area and being incredibly generic in the solutions you think should be implemented. Saying they need to score more goals and win more games isn't anything insightful (and yes, that's an oversimplification).

How do these things happen? What does that look like?

I'm going to be as clear as I can, I do not have all the answers and I do believe there is more than one way to have success in the NHL. I'm interested in learning more and that's why I'm pushing the conversation a bit. My favorite part of the GDTs or these discussions is when I'm learning something new or seeing the same little things as other posters.

As for those 5 goals against Colorado. As I said that is the result of team that has figured out Lambert's predictable system of sitting back and trying to box out the high scoring areas but allowing the opposing team to get a ton of shots on net. Don't tell me that this is not an element of Trotz/Lambert's system. We all know the Islanders have had some the highest shots against in the league the past 5 years. Eventually teams will catch on and know that the team poses no offensive threat especially when they are focused on holding to a one goal lead and the game becomes a shooting gallery. Against a high scoring team like Colorado or the Devils you are just asking for trouble if you let them get that many shots on net. This is what I mean when I say the Islanders currently play a game not to lose rather than one that plays to win by building bigger leads. The best teams in the league play "to win". This is the primary reason we lost all those series against Tampa Bay and more recently against Carolina. The Isles are taught to hang on for dear life with a one goal lead rather than building on the lead. The best defense is a good offense. Spend more time with MORE players deeper in the offensive zone and keep the shots goal to a minimum and keep the opposing team hemmed into their own D zone.

The Islanders gave up two PP goals because they were trying to be too cute when they were on the PK. That had nothing to do with the sitting back and protecting the prime scoring areas of the ice. Makar's goal was because of a bad line change and bad gap control after the puck was cleared from the zone. Byram's goal was because of a miscommunication about who was supposed to challenge the point. You could make the claim that this is a byproduct of being defensive minded but it's really just a blown coverage. MacKinnon's goal was because Clutterbuck couldn't handle the puck cleanly on the wall and actually kicked it right to MacKinnon in one of the prime shooting locations. Rantanen's game winner came after Pelech had a shot/pass blocked at the offensive blue line and the Avalanche transitioned the other way quickly.

Out of the five goals that occurred before the goalie was pulled maybe one of them could be argued was a systems issue. This isn't an example of teams figuring out the system and dismantling it. This is poor execution of simple things. Making these mistakes in any system will cost you the game against a team like Colorado.

BTW Sorokin is most effective when he can see the puck. All the teams are catching on to the idea that to beat Sorokin you have to have the shots screened. Having all those players collapsing in front of the net is just creates a bigger screen in front of Sorokin. He needs to see the puck in order to stop it. A more traditional offensive minded system will lessen the crowding in front of the net.

Screening goalies isn't knew and isn't unique to Sorokin. I'm a little confused by what you mean when you say "lessen the crowding" because that would seem to imply you're leaving guys open in front of the net or slot and that would be very bad. When cheating for offense usually you're asking your players to initiate a specific route once your team gains possession. If you don't gain possession you can't cheat. That usually doesn't equate to less crowding in front though.

There are several approaches to handling traffic in front of the net. Some coaches want players to try and block everything, clogging shooting lanes. Others prefer their players to not do that so that the goaltenders can see the puck easier when it's coming in. Some coaches want their defensemen to tie guys up, while others want them to be a bit more aggressive and try to remove those players from the front of the net. Which side of the player you're on is also a factor (inside position vs outside position). Lastly, switches in the defensive end are also hugely important and I think the Islanders struggle knowing when to do that at times.

In regards to how we ended up to where this team is today. Think about this. The Islanders ended up with a conservative, trap based, low scoring system because Lou brought in Trotz the moment he became GM. He didn't build a roster that was necessarily optimized for this system of play he just took the team he had in front of him and basically told the team, "hey guys we're going to totally change the way you guys play the game no questions asked". It's not like this team was built from the ground up to play the current system of play they were essentially forced to because this is the only system that Trotz deploys and everyone knew that. So it didn't matter that you were Matthew Barzal, Pulock, Nelson, Dobson etc... You play the game the way we want you to play it. The problem with that approach is that it could amount to nothing more than trying to fit a square peg into a round hole and in regards to some of our more gifted skaters that's pretty much what is going on here. The players are treated like pawns on a chessboard rather than allowing them to utilize their athleticism and talent drive the play. So players like Dobson, Wahlstrom, Barzal, (and before them Bailey) are playing the game in a way that goes against their natural instincts. I don't think this is the proper way to manage a team.

Lamoriello is a net out guy when building his teams so he brought in a coach who fit that mold. I don't believe Lamoriello told Trotz what to run at all and I think Trotz was able to evaluate the roster and implement the system he thought would work best for these players. He's a defense first guy but always tinkers depending on the roster he has (we didn't run the same thing Washington ran). These coaches have access to hundreds of hours of film, I think it would be wrong to assume they didn't tailor the system to the players they had on the roster.

There's no way for me to convince you that playing a system and ensuring everyone buys into that system is important. You want players to freewheel and do what they want, I don't and think it's detrimental to the team having success. There are obviously degrees of each thing and every player is likely handled a little differently. Someone like Barzal was still new and definitely had to learn to play a more responsible game. Again, if you don't believe that then there's nothing I can say to change your mind.

 

[Rehabguy]

Your suggestions so far include:

Different strategies for different lines.
More dump and chase for the bottom 6.
More cycling for the bottom 6.
Aggressively forecheck for the fourth line.
Cheating for offense from our top 6.
Create odd man rushes the other way.
More defensemen joining the rush.
More drop passes from the top 6.
More skating opportunities from the best skaters.
Create more chances with speed.

I don't have a problem with the criticism, as I previously mentioned, but you're not offering much meat here. Again, that's fine, but you're continually posting like you have all the solutions while simultaneously acknowledging your lack of expertise in the area and being incredibly generic in the solutions you think should be implemented. Saying they need to score more goals and win more games isn't anything insightful (and yes, that's an oversimplification).

How do these things happen? What does that look like?

I'm going to be as clear as I can, I do not have all the answers and I do believe there is more than one way to have success in the NHL. I'm interested in learning more and that's why I'm pushing the conversation a bit. My favorite part of the GDTs or these discussions is when I'm learning something new or seeing the same little things as other posters.



The Islanders gave up two PP goals because they were trying to be too cute when they were on the PK. That had nothing to do with the sitting back and protecting the prime scoring areas of the ice. Makar's goal was because of a bad line change and bad gap control after the puck was cleared from the zone. Byram's goal was because of a miscommunication about who was supposed to challenge the point. You could make the claim that this is a byproduct of being defensive minded but it's really just a blown coverage. MacKinnon's goal was because Clutterbuck couldn't handle the puck cleanly on the wall and actually kicked it right to MacKinnon in one of the prime shooting locations. Rantanen's game winner came after Pelech had a shot/pass blocked at the offensive blue line and the Avalanche transitioned the other way quickly.

Out of the five goals that occurred before the goalie was pulled maybe one of them could be argued was a systems issue. This isn't an example of teams figuring out the system and dismantling it. This is poor execution of simple things. Making these mistakes in any system will cost you the game against a team like Colorado.



Screening goalies isn't knew and isn't unique to Sorokin. I'm a little confused by what you mean when you say "lessen the crowding" because that would seem to imply you're leaving guys open in front of the net or slot and that would be very bad. When cheating for offense usually you're asking your players to initiate a specific route once your team gains possession. If you don't gain possession you can't cheat. That usually doesn't equate to less crowding in front though.

There are several approaches to handling traffic in front of the net. Some coaches want players to try and block everything, clogging shooting lanes. Others prefer their players to not do that so that the goaltenders can see the puck easier when it's coming in. Some coaches want their defensemen to tie guys up, while others want them to be a bit more aggressive and try to remove those players from the front of the net. Which side of the player you're on is also a factor (inside position vs outside position). Lastly, switches in the defensive end are also hugely important and I think the Islanders struggle knowing when to do that at times.



Lamoriello is a net out guy when building his teams so he brought in a coach who fit that mold. I don't believe Lamoriello told Trotz what to run at all and I think Trotz was able to evaluate the roster and implement the system he thought would work best for these players. He's a defense first guy but always tinkers depending on the roster he has (we didn't run the same thing Washington ran). These coaches have access to hundreds of hours of film, I think it would be wrong to assume they didn't tailor the system to the players they had on the roster.

There's no way for me to convince you that playing a system and ensuring everyone buys into that system is important. You want players to freewheel and do what they want, I don't and think it's detrimental to the team having success. There are obviously degrees of each thing and every player is likely handled a little differently. Someone like Barzal was still new and definitely had to learn to play a more responsible game. Again, if you don't believe that then there's nothing I can say to change your mind.

As I said, it is not my intention to reinvent the Islander's system of play on an internet forum which appears to be what you want. That's just plain silly and a really big ask. I'm simply asking that there be a change which takes advantage of what each individual player has to offer. Currently this is not happening. In none of my posts did I suggest that the Isles convert to some kind pond hockey-like freewheeling style of play. I made some specific suggestions of what I would like to see more of just like you asked, but again it's really silly to ask someone to revamp the Islander's entire system of play from the top down while posting on an internet forum.

Nothing you have posted is anything new or offer insight to solve the Islander's woes either and I am not writing as if I have all the solutions as much as you would like to conveniently interpret it that way, but it doesn't take a degree in rocket science to understand that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. By your posts you appear to be fine with the status quo. I'm not fine with it.

What the Islanders are currently doing, at least to me and apparently a few other posters here as well, is not working. They're not winning with the current system. In fact the team is performing progressively worse with each passing year. If you don't believe that then there's nothing I can say to change your mind.

 

[PK Cronin]

As I said, it is not my intention to reinvent the Islander's system of play on an internet forum which appears to be what you want. That's just plain silly and a really big ask. I'm simply asking that there be a change which takes advantage of what each individual player has to offer. Currently this is not happening. I made some specific suggestions of what I would like to see more of just like you asked, but again it's really silly to ask someone to revamp the Islander's entire system of play from the top down while posting on an internet forum.

I don't see how it's any more or less silly than posting the same generic sentiment repeatedly on an internet forum.

Nothing you have posted is anything new or offer insight to solve the Islander's woes either and I am not writing as if I have all the solutions as much as you would like to conveniently interpret it that way, but it doesn't take a degree in rocket science to understand that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. By your posts you appear to be fine with the status quo. I'm not fine with it.

We got here because you made claims and then didn't really want to back them up. You don't have to if you don't want but if you're going to make those types of posts you should expect some pushback. It seems like your unwilling to have the conversation.

You are conveniently interpreting my position as being okay with the status quo. I've even given you examples of things I'd change, in greater detail than anything you've provided too, so I'm not sure where I lost you. Being upset with the status quo is fine, offering generic solutions to the perceived problems and then refusing to elaborate isn't something I care for.

What the Islanders are currently doing, at least to me and apparently a few other posters here as well, is not working. They're not winning with the current system. In fact the team is performing progressively worse with each passing year. If you don't believe that then there's nothing I can say to change your mind.

They went from a second round exit with Trotz in year one, then back to back ECF appearances, followed with a playoff miss, followed by a first round appearance. How is that getting progressively worse with each passing year? It isn't.

 

[Rehabguy]

Maybe to add, or counter I dunno, I think most of the players are too deliberate. Thinking too much about where to pass and shoot. The power play is very well thought out and deliberate and the safest play. Executed poorly, but well thought out. Example- how often is a pass one-timed? More than likely the pass receiver accepts the puck, settles it down, then shoots or passes again. Takes too long. Need to be quicker and more instinctual instead of overthinking every little thing.

This is another example of exactly what I'm talking about. The team is too wound up about implementing their system of play that it has affected their power play as well. They can't just play loose. They need to relax. Everything is too deliberate and calculated because Lambert et al. have all 4 lines playing a too restrictive calculated system. It's drilled into them. Barzal's a shell of his former self. They play like they are wearing straight jackets worried about making mistakes, missing assignments, coughing up the puck. They can't loosen up and can't just follow their instincts the primary thing you need to run a successful power play. It was hilarious watching the Avs playing like the harlem globetrotters while the Isles marched around the ice like wooden soldiers.

For all the talk about Trotz hallowed system, Laviolette led his team to multiple Stanley Cup finals and won the Cup simply with "jam"

JAM folks, simply J A M!

This isn't chess folks its a god damned sport!

 

[Rehabguy]

I don't see how it's any more or less silly than posting the same generic sentiment repeatedly on an internet forum.



We got here because you made claims and then didn't really want to back them up. You don't have to if you don't want but if you're going to make those types of posts you should expect some pushback. It seems like your unwilling to have the conversation.

You are conveniently interpreting my position as being okay with the status quo. I've even given you examples of things I'd change, in greater detail than anything you've provided too, so I'm not sure where I lost you. Being upset with the status quo is fine, offering generic solutions to the perceived problems and then refusing to elaborate isn't something I care for.



They went from a second round exit with Trotz in year one, then back to back ECF appearances, followed with a playoff miss, followed by a first round appearance. How is that getting progressively worse with each passing year? It isn't.

Unwilling to have a conversation? Really? You know a conversation usually goes two ways. Same with opinions. (and it doesn't involve subtly attacking the posters or dissecting their posts ad nauseam).

I'm always willing to have a conversation with anyone willing to listen. I'm not here to start an argument just to offer an opinion. I think a lot posters here have good opinions, good ideas. Some I agree with, some I don't, but I don't defend my opinions with silly asks. I'm here to offer an opinion. You appear like you are trying to "win" with your opinion.

Again, I can't help you if you don't believe this team is getting progressively worse with each passing year. From a playoff miss; to just making it by watching another team inexplicably choke; to that shit show we saw the last couple of games; sorry bud but I don't consider that progress.

 

[PK Cronin]

Unwilling to have a conversation? Really? You know a conversation usually goes two ways. Same with opinions. (and it doesn't involve subtly attacking the posters or dissecting their posts ad nauseam)
I'm always willing to have a conversation with anyone willing to listen. I'm not here to start an argument just to offer an opinion. I think a lot posters here have good opinions, good ideas. Some I agree with, some I don't, but I don't defend my opinions with silly asks.

Sounds like you want to have surface level conversation where nobody actually challenges your positions. You made a bunch of assertions, were called out on them, and now are categorizing it as an attack or a dissection of your posts. What part of my asks were silly? Are you going to conveniently ignore all of the posts contradicting your assertions, such as the Colorado scoring all of those goals because they solved the Islanders defensive system? Explaining that is probably above your paygrade too, but you'll write 1,000 more words about how it's such a silly ask.

Again, I can't help you if you don't believe this team is getting progressively worse with each passing year. From a playoff miss; to just making it by watching another team inexplicably choke; to that shit show we saw the last couple of games; sorry bud, but I don't consider that progress.

You're using subjective criteria to make this assertion. Every NHL team plays the same number of games and has the same criteria for making the playoffs. The Islanders made it after missing the previous year, that's an objective fact. Sorry that doesn't align with the narrative you'd like to portray here.

I'll see myself out. I thought we were going to pivot to something fun but that didn't happen. My bad for whatever my part was in that.

 

[Rehabguy]

Sounds like you want to have surface level conversation where nobody actually challenges your positions. You made a bunch of assertions, were called out on them, and now are categorizing it as an attack or a dissection of your posts. What part of my asks were silly? Are you going to conveniently ignore all of the posts contradicting your assertions, such as the Colorado scoring all of those goals because they solved the Islanders defensive system? Explaining that is probably above your paygrade too, but you'll write 1,000 more words about how it's such a silly ask.



You're using subjective criteria to make this assertion. Every NHL team plays the same number of games and has the same criteria for making the playoffs. The Islanders made it after missing the previous year, that's an objective fact. Sorry that doesn't align with the narrative you'd like to portray here.

I'll see myself out. I thought we were going to pivot to something fun but that didn't happen. My bad for whatever my part was in that.

You appear to live in a world where conversations must become "challenges" and opinions are interpreted as "assertions". Neither of which I find particularly appetiting. I offer the opinion that maybe the Islanders should be playing a less conservative system and open up their game a bit and let the players play their game. You consider that opinion err "assertion" invalid unless I construct a professional level game plan for the Islanders deploy on an internet forum. I consider that a silly ask.

You are claiming that following up two Eastern Conference Final appearances with a failure to make the playoffs, then nearly missing the playoffs if not for another Metro division team inexplicably imploding as an objective sign of progress that does not align with my opinion, nay assertion (!), that the Isles are not improving. Again whether you consider this subjective or not, I can't help you here if this is how you interpret the Islander's current situation.

Hey, but at least this post is well below a 1000 words . Does that compute? Is that checkmate? Need we take out a word checker? Does my ad lib prose offend your love for proper syntax? Did I play chess well? Are we having fun yet? Am I jamming too much?

 

[JohnTonelliRises]

Unwilling to have a conversation? Really? You know a conversation usually goes two ways. Same with opinions. (and it doesn't involve subtly attacking the posters or dissecting their posts ad nauseam).

I'm always willing to have a conversation with anyone willing to listen. I'm not here to start an argument just to offer an opinion. I think a lot posters here have good opinions, good ideas. Some I agree with, some I don't, but I don't defend my opinions with silly asks. I'm here to offer an opinion. You appear like you are trying to "win" with your opinion.

Again, I can't help you if you don't believe this team is getting progressively worse with each passing year. From a playoff miss; to just making it by watching another team inexplicably choke; to that shit show we saw the last couple of games; sorry bud but I don't consider that progress.

I'm not reading the rest of the posts here, so don't take that as an endorsement (nor am I partaking in any ongoing conversations), but I agree with you on the last paragraph.

Lou basically kicked Trotz out over him needing to ice an AHL team for an entire month until the league decided to pause our season. I'm sorry, but unless you're a god, it's not feasible to expect to win against seasoned pros with a bunch of minor leaguers. I have been ripped on for saying that Trotz was basically given a terrible hand, expected to play said hand differently (which again, errs on the more bizarre side of expectations), and fired over the team tanking due to COVID.

We made the ECF back to back, twice. Which apparently wasn't good enough. Now we are paying for thinking it wasn't good enough.

 

[YearlyLottery]

I'm not reading the rest of the posts here, so don't take that as an endorsement (nor am I partaking in any ongoing conversations), but I agree with you on the last paragraph.

Lou basically kicked Trotz out over him needing to ice an AHL team for an entire month until the league decided to pause our season. I'm sorry, but unless you're a god, it's not feasible to expect to win against seasoned pros with a bunch of minor leaguers. I have been ripped on for saying that Trotz was basically given a terrible hand, expected to play said hand differently (which again, errs on the more bizarre side of expectations), and fired over the team tanking due to COVID.

We made the ECF back to back, twice. Which apparently wasn't good enough. Now we are paying for thinking it wasn't good enough.

Huh. I thought the whole Trotz getting an upper management job and not wanting to coach was more likely than Lou firing him.

 

[Rehabguy]

Huh. I thought the whole Trotz getting an upper management job and not wanting to coach was more likely than Lou firing him.

Lol. You really believe that shit? I’m glad he got an upper management job but his inexplicable firing was just Lou being Lou. (Objectively speaking- look at the evidence, look at the history). THAT oftentimes assertion is simply conspiracy theory presented as fact. We don’t have to create a narrative. He simply fired him.

 

[MJF]

Huh. I thought the whole Trotz getting an upper management job and not wanting to coach was more likely than Lou firing him.

Really? And I thought Trotz said on video that he was ready to return to our bench with a chip on his shoulder. Are we disregarding that again?

 

[MJF]

Really? And I thought Trotz said on video that he was ready to return to our bench with a chip on his shoulder. Are we disregarding that again?

Link:

https://x.com/rtaub_/status/1543678170955644928?s=46&t=3jn8qHjbCZPRmQFtjNWB8w

 

[Big L]

Link:

https://x.com/rtaub_/status/1543678170955644928?s=46&t=3jn8qHjbCZPRmQFtjNWB8w

And trotz was just on with gross on island ice last week and said he had too much personal stuff go8ng on to coach.

go figure.

Island Ice

www.newsday.com

 

[LeapOnOver]

I don't think they're mutually exclusive.



I think you're creating scenarios in your head that you'd like to see play out but these things aren't actually systems. Nothing wrong with that but it's not something that is concrete/implementable.



They just let up 5 goals against Colorado playing in the style you don't like because it's too conservative, what do you think happens when Colorado is getting more chances? Sorokin played incredibly well that game too.



I don't think so because I acknowledge we don't have the same information about these players as management does and I'd have been willing to part with most of them at the time (I think). There's an element of it for sure. It's also similar to the fans who say "we're not good enough to win the cup" and use that as a cudgel in debates/conversations. The odds are that 31 teams aren't good enough to win the cup so it's not exactly a hard prediction to make. Most prospects don't live up to the potential fans assign to them so I'm more okay with moving them and draft picks for established players.

You need to find diamonds here and there to supplement the roster but the reluctance to trade certain pieces because of what they might become when there's a need now is frustrating for me.

Completely made up example where the timeline might not work out but demonstrates the point I'm making (I think): The team needed a winger during their ECF trips and Wahlstrom was supposed to be that guy because of his shot. Promising young winger with some value and upside with fans proposing he'll easily be a 30 goal guy. Instead of trading Wahlstrom for a known commodity that would help in the short term he was held onto because of what he might become in the future. Same thing with Dobson. We needed a power play QB and high offensive defenseman but we couldn't trade the promising Dobson for an established veteran because of Dobson's upside. The first window closed and now we're sitting here hoping that these players will progress enough to even get us back to that point, let alone get us over the hump.

I'm not upset when a Verhaeghe pops off 8 years after the Islanders had him but some people want to keep all of the prospects because they're afraid of that happening.

But what about the times it would backfire. We acknowledged more times than not prospects don't hit, but i was all for trading Mat Barzal for Duchene back in the day. So we have to recognize, and trust that management just knows better than us who to keep and dish. I'm also guessing that the entire league can sense when a prospect isn't getting it, and knows to stay away. The Reinhart trades are few and far between. So you have to trade them before they even play an NHL game and roll the dice, or be patient and hope they pan out
The window of keepimg value and getting a looksee is super tight these days.

 

[PK Cronin]

But what about the times it would backfire. We acknowledged more times than not prospects don't hit, but i was all for trading Mat Barzal for Duchene back in the day. So we have to recognize, and trust that management just knows better than us who to keep and dish. I'm also guessing that the entire league can sense when a prospect isn't getting it, and knows to stay away. The Reinhart trades are few and far between. So you have to trade them before they even play an NHL game and roll the dice, or be patient and hope they pan out
The window of keepimg value and getting a looksee is super tight these days.

No argument here, I'm just not usually opposed to trading prospects because they bust more often than not. It can absolutely backfire though. We've seen that sort of thing happen over the years and it's always a bad look. For me it's about what is needed now in comparison to the timeline of that player having an impact for the team later on. If you're trying to win a cup you should be more lax with those trades. If you're trying to re-tool or re-build then you probably want to be a bit more conservative.

 

[YearlyLottery]

Lol. You really believe that shit? I’m glad he got an upper management job but his inexplicable firing was just Lou being Lou. (Objectively speaking- look at the evidence, look at the history). THAT oftentimes assertion is simply conspiracy theory presented as fact. We don’t have to create a narrative. He simply fired him.

Really? And I thought Trotz said on video that he was ready to return to our bench with a chip on his shoulder. Are we disregarding that again?

Barry Trotz wanted to coach so bad it was only going to be for the NY Islanders I guess is the thought process here?

 

[CupHolders]

And trotz was just on with gross on island ice last week and said he had too much personal stuff go8ng on to coach.

go figure.

Island Ice

www.newsday.com

Every interview Trotz has given since being fired has shifted the understanding behind it further towards the original rumors at the time.

He was burnt-out due to emotional personal issues and the overall grind. Looking to move out of coaching.

With this most recent interview the most telling. Even if you ignore what actually has transpired (leaving coaching for GMing) and Trotz own comments about burnout…

The fact that Trotz also stated that he and Lou remained in almost weekly conversation since the firing, pretty much indicates that it wasn’t a typical firing from Lou’s perspective either.

 

[leeroggy]

Every interview Trotz has given since being fired has shifted the understanding behind it further towards the original rumors at the time.

He was burnt-out due to emotional personal issues and the overall grind. Looking to move out of coaching.

With this most recent interview the most telling. Even if you ignore what actually has transpired (leaving coaching for GMing) and Trotz own comments about burnout…

The fact that Trotz also stated that he and Lou remained in almost weekly conversation since the firing, pretty much indicates that it wasn’t a typical firing from Lou’s perspective either.

And this leads back to the point I made months ago. Lou took the bullet for Barry on this. By firing him, he made sure Barry would get the 4th year of his contract as a thanks for all BT did. If Barry had resigned, he likely doesn't get paid. In many ways, Lou is the old school gentleman who knows when to quietly help out the employee and since the playoff revenue/profit easily covered the 4th year. I'm sure the owners agreed with this 'pay-off' to Barry.

Anyone who saw Barry's body language the last year could see how worn out he was.

 

[CupHolders]

And this leads back to the point I made months ago. Lou took the bullet for Barry on this. By firing him, he made sure Barry would get the 4th year of his contract as a thanks for all BT did. If Barry had resigned, he likely doesn't get paid. In many ways, Lou is the old school gentleman who knows when to quietly help out the employee and since the playoff revenue/profit easily covered the 4th year. I'm sure the owners agreed with this 'pay-off' to Barry.

Anyone who saw Barry's body language the last year could see how worn out he was.

Agree. I too interpreted it exactly as you just wrote. As much as there is a reputation of Lou being quick to fire coaches, there is also the reputation that he takes care of his boys.

 

[Rehabguy]

And this leads back to the point I made months ago. Lou took the bullet for Barry on this. By firing him, he made sure Barry would get the 4th year of his contract as a thanks for all BT did. If Barry had resigned, he likely doesn't get paid. In many ways, Lou is the old school gentleman who knows when to quietly help out the employee and since the playoff revenue/profit easily covered the 4th year. I'm sure the owners agreed with this 'pay-off' to Barry.

Anyone who saw Barry's body language the last year could see how worn out he was.

And this leads back to a point I made a few months before. Clearly Lou has adopted Barry as his son and if we search hard enough I'm sure we'll find his signature on a piece of paper somewhere. Listening carefully to some of the videos you could just make out that he whispered the word "daddy" when he spoke fondly of Lou. It all just makes perfect sense now.

 

[Doshell Propivo]

You can win with a defense-first system. When Trotz came in the same guys here were 5 years younger and a lot better at what they did. Lou could have augmented the roster with younger guys who were better on their skates that could play “Trotz Hockey”, instead Lou fired Trotz, re-committed to most of the guys he had in 2021, and the roster is now dying on the vine.

Horvat, Engval, Dobson, Romanov.

 

[Doshell Propivo]

Every interview Trotz has given since being fired has shifted the understanding behind it further towards the original rumors at the time.

He was burnt-out due to emotional personal issues and the overall grind. Looking to move out of coaching.

With this most recent interview the most telling. Even if you ignore what actually has transpired (leaving coaching for GMing) and Trotz own comments about burnout…

The fact that Trotz also stated that he and Lou remained in almost weekly conversation since the firing, pretty much indicates that it wasn’t a typical firing from Lou’s perspective either.

No way was this a typical firing. Obviously Trotz had personal things going on. Would he have honored the last year of his contract and coached with a chip on his shoulder? I'm sure he would. But there was a lot going on behind the scenes and it appears that a gentlemen's agreement was reached between Lou, Trotz and ownership.