Line Combos: 2020/2021 Roster Discussion

[Dreakmur]

Or, you play the players to their strengths instead of making them play a way that clearly isn't how the GM wants.

The best coach in the world needs players to kill penalties. The best coach in the world needs players to defend leads. The best coach in the world needs players to win puck battles.

If you don't have players who are good in some of the required roles, you pretty much have to get out the old shoe-horn.

It's not like we don't have "grinders" and good defensive players all over the lineup.

It is like that though, especially at the top end.

We have a couple of good grinders in Hyman, Mikheyev, and Moore.

We don't really have any good defensive forwards. Hyman is decent. Tavares and Marner are decent. Mikheyev and Moore are not bad.

A good coach is flexible and adaptable based on the team they have in front of them: Babs is neither one of those.

There's no one definition of "a good coach". Those may be the traits you like in a coach, and I would actually agree with you there, but there are lots of good coaches who don't possess those traits.

 

[Morgs]

The best coach in the world needs players to kill penalties. The best coach in the world needs players to defend leads. The best coach in the world needs players to win puck battles.

If you don't have players who are good in some of the required roles, you pretty much have to get out the old shoe-horn.



It is like that though, especially at the top end.

We have a couple of good grinders in Hyman, Mikheyev, and Moore.

We don't really have any good defensive forwards. Hyman is decent. Tavares and Marner are decent. Mikheyev and Moore are not bad.



There's no one definition of "a good coach". Those may be the traits you like in a coach, and I would actually agree with you there, but there are lots of good coaches who don't possess those traits.

We do have good penalty killing players. We do have good power play players. We do have good offensive and defensive 5v5 players. We do have a good goalie.

Attempting to slow down the offense, run point shots 24/7, stop the defense from pinching, and play a similar style to "trap hockey" to improve defense has turned this team from an offensive juggernaut with below average defense to the team with the second worst xGF% in the entire league- and it's not all because of how bad the defense has been in spite of the conscious changes to "fix it".

If you want a coach the loves to put a square into a circle then by all means you shouldn't complain. Personally I'd like to see a coach that sees we are a speedy, all offense team with five great puck-moving defenseman that should easily be top-5 in xGF.

 

[Dreakmur]

We do have good penalty killing players.

Oh yeah? Who are those players?

Our top 4 used PKers are Marner, Kapanen, Mikheyev, and Moore. If we have good PKers, why are we using those guys?

We do have good offensive and defensive 5v5 players.

I think you and I have very different ideas of what a good defensive player is.

 

[A1LeafNation]

He seems good right now, not sure why you bringing it up now. Lol.

 

[Morgs]

Oh yeah? Who are those players?

Our top 4 used PKers are Marner, Kapanen, Mikheyev, and Moore. If we have good PKers, why are we using those guys?



I think you and I have very different ideas of what a good defensive player is.

Here are the players that have positive defensive value based on relTM.xGA/60 so far this season (essentially it's the players shots against adjusted for quality relative to his teammates):

Spezza, Petan, Matthews, Nylander.

Spezza/Petan have been legit great defensively (probably because Babs doesn't trust them in their own end), but both Matthews and Nylander have been great defensively so far. The rest of their team is slightly below average with Tavares/Timashov/Hyman being well below average to outright "bad".

So yeah, we have different definitions of what a good defensive player is. Mine is based on numbers, yours is based on the eye test.

 

[Dreakmur]

Here are the players that have positive defensive value based on relTM.xGA/60 so far this season (essentially it's the players shots against adjusted for quality relative to his teammates):

Spezza, Petan, Matthews, Nylander.

Spezza/Petan have been legit great defensively (probably because Babs doesn't trust them in their own end), but both Matthews and Nylander have been great defensively so far. The rest of their team is slightly below average with Tavares/Timashov/Hyman being well below average to outright "bad".

So yeah, we have different definitions of what a good defensive player is. Mine is based on numbers, yours is based on the eye test.

As I said, we have very different ideas of what a good defensive player is.

 

[Martin Skoula]

As I said, we have very different ideas of what a good defensive player is.

Personally I like the guys who get scored on less.

 

[Dreakmur]

Personally I like the guys who get scored on less.

I like the guys who are good defensively. Those are not necessarily the guys who simply get scored on less.

The best defensive players tend to get very difficult match-ups. As a result, they tend to get scored on more. The worst defensive players tend to get sheltered minutes. As a result, they tend to get scored on less.

 

[Hustlr]

Kreider - Matthews - Nylander
Hyman - Tavares - Marner
Mikheyev - Grigorenko/Granlund - Kapanen
Korshkov - Engvall/Goat - Bracco

Rielly - Pietrangelo
Muzzin - Sandin
Dermott - Liljegren
Holl

Andersen
Halak/Smith/Greiss

Ya, I know..

 

[Nithoniniel]

I like the guys who are good defensively. Those are not necessarily the guys who simply get scored on less.

The best defensive players tend to get very difficult match-ups. As a result, they tend to get scored on more. The worst defensive players tend to get sheltered minutes. As a result, they tend to get scored on less.

And that can be adjusted for.

But I'm going to side slightly with you here. I think there's a disconnect in the discussion. You're talking about the actual defensive capability, while the others are referencing defensive results. Even when accounting for context, those are not the same. For example, defensive results are heavily skewed by ability to transition the puck. But is being good at moving the puck actually the same as being good defensively? I'd argue not.

If there's one criticism I have on your part, and those that share your view, is that defense is way too heavily weighed towards defending against an established cycle. In my opinion, defense starts as soon as the opposition gains control of the puck regardless of zone, and ends when your team gets control back.

If you look at Nylander there, he's a sneaky forechecker and he's exemplary in the neutral zone. His back pressure and rush defense can be spotty, but like many great skaters he's probably better than he gets credit for. And he's not good at all against the cycle.

So I'd say that his defensive ability is probably better than you give him credit for, and along with being an exceptional transition player you end up with pretty good defensive results.

 

[Dreakmur]

And that can be adjusted for.

But I'm going to side slightly with you here. I think there's a disconnect in the discussion. You're talking about the actual defensive capability, while the others are referencing defensive results. Even when accounting for context, those are not the same. For example, defensive results are heavily skewed by ability to transition the puck. But is being good at moving the puck actually the same as being good defensively? I'd argue not.

If there's one criticism I have on your part, and those that share your view, is that defense is way too heavily weighed towards defending against an established cycle. In my opinion, defense starts as soon as the opposition gains control of the puck regardless of zone, and ends when your team gets control back.

If you look at Nylander there, he's a sneaky forechecker and he's exemplary in the neutral zone. His back pressure and rush defense can be spotty, but like many great skaters he's probably better than he gets credit for. And he's not good at all against the cycle.

So I'd say that his defensive ability is probably better than you give him credit for, and along with being an exceptional transition player you end up with pretty good defensive results.

1-0 lead. 30 second left in the game. Faceoff in the defensive end. Who do you put on the ice?

Anyone really think it’s a good idea to send out Matthews, Nylander and Petan?

 

[Nithoniniel]

1-0 lead. 30 second left in the game. Faceoff in the defensive end. Who do you put on the ice?

Anyone really think it’s a good idea to send out Matthews, Nylander and Petan?

But here you illustrate my point. In this scenario, defending an eventual cycle is the major factor in this particular scenario. But being good defensively overall is more than just being able to effectively weather the storm in the dying seconds of a game.

This is exactly why I said that people weigh cycle defense too heavily when talking about defensive ability. You're supposed to play well defensively through 60 minutes, not just the last 30 seconds of the game. You need to be able to impact the game through forecheck and neutral zone defense, rush defense as well as cycle defense.

It's the sum of your ability in all those areas that determine if you are good defensively.

 

[MyBudJT]

Hyman-Matthews-Marner
Lafreniere-Tavares-Kapanen
Mikheyev-Kerfoot-Moore
Grigorenko-RHC-Korshkov

Rielly-Pietrangelo
Sandin-Ekblad
PKing Dman-Liljegren

Andersen
Good Back-up

 

[LeafsOHLRangers98]

1-0 lead. 30 second left in the game. Faceoff in the defensive end. Who do you put on the ice?

Anyone really think it’s a good idea to send out Matthews, Nylander and Petan?

If we trade Johnsson maybe. Petans possession numbers are ridiculous this year and is a pass first guy. Could mesh well with the styles of the other 2.

Johnsson-Matthews-Nylander had 12 shots last night though so hard to break it up right now.

 

[Dreakmur]

But here you illustrate my point. In this scenario, defending an eventual cycle is the major factor in this particular scenario. But being good defensively overall is more than just being able to effectively weather the storm in the dying seconds of a game.

This is exactly why I said that people weigh cycle defense too heavily when talking about defensive ability. You're supposed to play well defensively through 60 minutes, not just the last 30 seconds of the game. You need to be able to impact the game through forecheck and neutral zone defense, rush defense as well as cycle defense.

It's the sum of your ability in all those areas that determine if you are good defensively.

Here I illustrated my point that you need different players for different roles.