Player Discussion Cody Ceci Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,858
31,076
First it was the org's fault for rushing him, then it was Cowen's fault, then we blamed it on Weircoch. Now Phaneuf??? Funny how the finger NEVER gets pointed at Ceci.

Well, of the first two, one was bought out of the league he's so bad, and the second has been just as terrible with Colorado as he was with Ottawa, so bad that he worked his way out of their already terrible top 4 and onto the bottom pair by mid season. They were both very clearly not top 4 material, so yeah, they would have been at the very least a significant part of the problem. Anyone with eyes could see that though.

Wrt to Phaneuf, I don't think he's hard to play with myself, I just feel he's miscast as a shutdown pairing dman at this point in his career, he's struggled in that role back with Toronto as well before having his responsibilities in that regard cut back for his last year there.
 

Burrowsaurus

Registered User
Mar 20, 2013
42,447
16,067
Holy crap. Ceci is fine. Jeez

Well. Is he fine as our #2 for the next 5 years. I think probably not.

Will he be fine carving out a role on a legit second pair. Maybe as the "methot" type as others have pointed out to his partners puck mover. Maybe, likely, maybe not.
 

Mark Stones Spleen

Registered User
Jan 17, 2008
10,875
7,047
T.O.
Well. Is he fine as our #2 for the next 5 years. I think probably not.

Will he be fine carving out a role on a legit second pair. Maybe as the "methot" type as others have pointed out to his partners puck mover. Maybe, likely, maybe not.

Why do you keep calling him our #2 when he's clearly not? Methot is unquestionably Ottawa's #2.
 

Mark Stones Spleen

Registered User
Jan 17, 2008
10,875
7,047
T.O.
Ceci gets the tough matchups.

Usually plays the second most minutes.

Round and round you go.

Philips and Volchenkov played the tough minutes, neither were a #2 defenseman.

Not even Ceci fans call him a #2 dman, he's our #4, right where he should be.

Rewatch the majority of the shifts he played in Period 3 of Game 6, then ask yourself again if Ceci is fine...

Rewatch Karlsson giving up the puck playing at our blue line in game 5, or the games he struggled in his own zone when he was 23. He must be a big piece of **** right?
 

swiftwin

★SUMMER.OF.PIERRE★
Jul 26, 2005
23,597
12,980
Well. Is he fine as our #2 for the next 5 years. I think probably not.

Will he be fine carving out a role on a legit second pair. Maybe as the "methot" type as others have pointed out to his partners puck mover. Maybe, likely, maybe not.

First of all he's an RD, like Karlsson, so as long as Karlsson is here, Ceci will be on the 2nd pair.

And yes he will absolutely be fine, nay, a fantastic second pairing guy for us. He's shown flashes of being really solid despite being given some of the hardest tasks on the team. His biggest problem is consistency, which is to be expected for a ****ing 23yr old defenseman! Give him time, he's a real gem.
 

BatherSeason

Registered User
Jun 16, 2009
6,640
3,702
Gatineau
Round and round you go.

Philips and Volchenkov played the tough minutes, neither were a #2 defenseman.

Not even Ceci fans call him a #2 dman, he's our #4, right where he should be.



Rewatch Karlsson giving up the puck playing at our blue line in game 5, or the games he struggled in his own zone when he was 23. He must be a big piece of **** right?

Lol. Nope, Karlsson isn't a piece of ..... You were always able to see positives in EK's play from the moment he was brought to North America. Karlsson turned the puck over, so what, he makes up for it in many other ways that Cody Ceci can not. As fans you knew EK was going to be special, all the tools were there. You saw the future. In Ceci, there hasn't been much to see, what tools does he have? Even the pro-Ceci people only point out that he plays tough minutes and that he is 23. Positive technical aspects of his game have only been brought into the discussion a couple of times.

Not sure why we need to resort to cursing. We are in a Hockey Forum debating whether or not a player is any good, if everyone agreed, there would be no point of having a discussion board...

FYI, EK won a Norris before he was 23. Whats the argument now, he was developed properly and Ceci was rushed? These two players aren't even in the same dimension, no point comparing the two.
 

Burrowsaurus

Registered User
Mar 20, 2013
42,447
16,067
Ceci had a bad third. That much is certain. But it was his first truuuuuuuly atrocious whole period since like game 3 against Boston.

And regulation time of game 2 vs. the rangers
 

BatherSeason

Registered User
Jun 16, 2009
6,640
3,702
Gatineau
Ceci had a bad third. That much is certain. But it was his first truuuuuuuly atrocious whole period since like game 3 against Boston.

And regulation time of game 2 vs. the rangers

I will agree with this. Game 2 was pretty bad until OT. Point is, he needs to be better. That's all.
 

topshelf15

Registered User
May 5, 2009
27,993
6,005
Ceci had a bad third. That much is certain. But it was his first truuuuuuuly atrocious whole period since like game 3 against Boston.

And regulation time of game 2 vs. the rangers
Agreed ,him falling and bobbling the puck looked bad.I think they all know that crap wont fly against Pittsburgh,they all need to be 100 times better every game .Or we are gonna get blown out :nod:
 

Real Smart Sens Fan

Registered User
Jun 14, 2014
4,760
4
Bianco is pretty much right, Ceci is deployed as our #1, #2, or #3 pretty much every game. The majority of the time, he is deployed as our #2.

And agreed, he is in over his head. So is Phaneuf. So would be Methot if he added 3 minutes every game, as would be Wideman if he added 12 minutes every game.
 

Derivation

Registered User
Jan 4, 2010
2,050
1
I like Ceci's physical game and his puck battles. He seems to have put on weight from his rookie year and doesn't get pushed around too much. He seemed to have lost some of his speed and his puck handling also seems a little worse but for his age I think he still has room to improve and really define his game as he gets to 25.
 

Burrowsaurus

Registered User
Mar 20, 2013
42,447
16,067
I will agree with this. Game 2 was pretty bad until OT. Point is, he needs to be better. That's all.

Well he definitely needs to be better with the puck. I would prefer if he just high flipped it out when he got it.
 

robsenz

Registered User
Apr 15, 2007
3,560
2,423
If Ceci can be first on pucks and stronger on getting it out of the zone..I wouldn't have much issue with him, I can deal with the fact he brings zero offence to the team now.
 

Mark Stones Spleen

Registered User
Jan 17, 2008
10,875
7,047
T.O.
You have to think Boucher is practicing d zone exits with the lobs. We got hemmed in our zone too many times and the entire unit has to be better.
 

Cosmix

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 24, 2011
17,895
6,482
Ottawa
I like Ceci's physical game and his puck battles. He seems to have put on weight from his rookie year and doesn't get pushed around too much. He seemed to have lost some of his speed and his puck handling also seems a little worse but for his age I think he still has room to improve and really define his game as he gets to 25.

I also like his physical game and puck battling. I will add his first 3 step quickness as a major asset too. If he would only be smarter and quicker making passes to get the puck out of the D zone, I would be very happy with him. Given his age, I think he can definitely perform at the second pair level for many years and I expect him to improve his passing and clearing the puck in the future.
 

aragorn

Do The Right Thing
Aug 8, 2004
28,599
9,114
Well, of the first two, one was bought out of the league he's so bad, and the second has been just as terrible with Colorado as he was with Ottawa, so bad that he worked his way out of their already terrible top 4 and onto the bottom pair by mid season. They were both very clearly not top 4 material, so yeah, they would have been at the very least a significant part of the problem. Anyone with eyes could see that though.

Wrt to Phaneuf, I don't think he's hard to play with myself, I just feel he's miscast as a shutdown pairing dman at this point in his career, he's struggled in that role back with Toronto as well before having his responsibilities in that regard cut back for his last year there.

But if he isn't a shutdown defenceman now at this age what is he? He skates way too slowly to be a PMD & I guess you could call him a two way defencemen since he is able to do things at either end, it's just getting there that takes him a long time. He's a big guy, tough & can still clear out the front of the net so he can play the role of a shutdown D. Miscast maybe but what else can he do exactly?

Rewatch the majority of the shifts he played in Period 3 of Game 6, then ask yourself again if Ceci is fine...

Who else in this organization can play the same role for Ottawa & this coach? Did anything that Ceci do cause the team to lose the game or lose the round? NO, they still won the round & that is all that matters. No hockey player is perfect, Ceci makes mistakes just like all the rest of them, the only ones who don't make mistakes during games are the people watching. I've seen many times Ceci fighting two guy behind the net while Phaneuf stands at the side of the net watching & nobody coming to help him out because they play a zone defensive system & rarely anyone scores from behind the net. If Ceci was costing us games that would be a problem but since they are winning, it shouldn't be a problem until it is. They are in the conference finals when NOBODY predicted it & people are still complaining about players. Karlsson makes plenty of mistakes too, but because he is so dynamic offensively everybody forgives him instantly, no one wants to be heard criticizing the boy wonder.

Ceci had a bad third. That much is certain. But it was his first truuuuuuuly atrocious whole period since like game 3 against Boston.

And regulation time of game 2 vs. the rangers

Are you actually defending Ceci here? He has his challenges but his coach has also put him in those positions & should take some of the blame, should he not? GB obviously doesn't trust anyone else to play the same role or he would have them in there playing instead of Ceci would he not? Who else who can play the same role? The majority on here also hate Boro but GB has said that Boro would 100% be in there if he was healthy enough to play. Rather than crap on Ceci or Boro start complaining about the guy who puts them into those positions, the same guy who has led them to the Conference Final in his first yr as coach. How can we praise the coach for getting them into the Conference finals & how great he is & then turn around & crap on the players who actually play the game to get the team there in the first place when they all play a role in the team's success. ;)

Bianco is pretty much right, Ceci is deployed as our #1, #2, or #3 pretty much every game. The majority of the time, he is deployed as our #2.

And agreed, he is in over his head. So is Phaneuf. So would be Methot if he added 3 minutes every game, as would be Wideman if he added 12 minutes every game.

And yet they are in the Conference finals, one of only four teams left in this yr's playoffs so they must be doing something right, don't you think? You do the best you can with the players you have, people can ***** & complain about players all they want & who they should get but what can be done at this time of yr? At the end of the day, you have to do what you can with what you have right now & IMO GB has done a pretty good job getting his players to execute his system & play as well as they have so far in these playoffs & making it to the Conference finals. :nod:

I like Ceci's physical game and his puck battles. He seems to have put on weight from his rookie year and doesn't get pushed around too much. He seemed to have lost some of his speed and his puck handling also seems a little worse but for his age I think he still has room to improve and really define his game as he gets to 25.

This is a good point, it used to be said that it took defencemen until they were 26 or 27 yrs old before they learned to play the game properly. A number of defencemen are finding success in the NHL at a younger age but most people define success today as accumulating a lot of pts. Some people appreciate what a player like Methot can do on the backend without acquiring a lot of points but they also consider him expendable for someone who can put up more pts. I would be interested to see what a team with 6 PMD & weak defensively would look like & how successful they would be. This team has made it to the Conference finals with the players they have so IMO they must be doing something right. :handclap:
 
Last edited:

topshelf15

Registered User
May 5, 2009
27,993
6,005
I also like his physical game and puck battling. I will add his first 3 step quickness as a major asset too. If he would only be smarter and quicker making passes to get the puck out of the D zone, I would be very happy with him. Given his age, I think he can definitely perform at the second pair level for many years and I expect him to improve his passing and clearing the puck in the future.
Yep a number 3 is his bar,if he ends up a solid 4 thats not so bad either.He does need some work on being more patient with the puck.He just seems to be rushing things whether he is under pressure or not .Getting a few nice plays in a row may help with his confidense
 

Anidalife

Registered User
Nov 16, 2007
220
12
Who else in this organization can play the same role for Ottawa & this coach? Did anything that Ceci do cause the team to lose the game or lose the round? NO, they still won the round & that is all that matters. No hockey player is perfect, Ceci makes mistakes just like all the rest of them, the only ones who don't make mistakes during games are the people watching. I've seen many times Ceci fighting two guy behind the net while Phaneuf stands at the side of the net watching & nobody coming to help him out because they play a zone defensive system & rarely anyone scores from behind the net. If Ceci was costing us games that would be a problem but since they are winning, it shouldn't be a problem until it is. They are in the conference finals when NOBODY predicted it & people are still complaining about players. Karlsson makes plenty of mistakes too, but because he is so dynamic offensively everybody forgives him instantly, no one wants to be heard criticizing the boy wonder.

This is a ridiculous mindset. Sometimes teams win despite poor performances by some players. Sometimes teams lose despite great performances. It is perfectly acceptable, and in my opinion even encouraged, to criticize while winning. (and find positives while losing) It's much more constructive to find faults while we're winning so we're not piling on mistakes while losing. This is why I tend to ignore this thread when we lose because it's much harder to be objective.

Asking who to take his role is another problem entirely. It doesn't change the fact that Ceci is not doing well in his role. It only says we don't have someone that can step in his role. If we had 2 Karlssons, Ceci would be on the 3rd pairing probably, and nobody would be criticizing him because he most likely would excel in that role.

As for forgiving Karlsson giveaways, that's the point. When a player overwhelmingly makes more good plays than bad, the bad can be ignored. When that difference is not as big, we start to look at the bad more closely. You can argue how big the difference is for Ceci, and I'll respect that, but I'm pretty sure it's basically a fact now that Karlsson's positives outweigh the negative so much that there really isn't any point discussing his giveaways or backcheck or pivots. If he didn't have those he'd probably be the best player ever. That's just not realistic.
 

ottawah

Registered User
Jan 7, 2011
3,486
617
If Ceci can be first on pucks and stronger on getting it out of the zone..I wouldn't have much issue with him, I can deal with the fact he brings zero offence to the team now.

He brings the appropriate amount of offense for how he is deployed.

I think everyone agrees he is a top 4 D man. Does he produce top 4 numbers? Yes. Top 100 in D man scoring this year. With 120 top 4 D men in the league, he is about where you would expect.

And last year, when playing a different role, more sheltered on 5 on 5, he produced what can be descirbed as elite numbers for 5x5. He was 26th for D men in the league for points including 4th for goals, and 12th just for RHD.

Lasy year he showed there is very good offensive potential, and this year with very tough deployment he still produced numbers that are still indicative of his position.

Take out the 4 minutes of SHT time, give it to Karlsson, and take the 4 minutes of PP time from Karlsson and give it to Ceci, and the numbers would definitely look different. Karlssons would still be much better, agreed, but Ceci is no Karlsson, that we can all agree.
 

Jorge Garcia

Registered User
Dec 9, 2004
2,787
634
There's something incomplete about Ceci's game. He's always making PART of a good play. He runs a guy strongly into the boards, takes the puck and then gives it back. He picks off a pass and then hits his own guy in the back of the skate with the breakout pass. He wins a puck battle on the PK, then whiffs on the attempt to clear it down the ice. He comes into the attacking zone on a promising rush, and instead of pressing the attack, he slows down, turns sideways and backs toward the boards looking to make a pass that never opens up. It's frustrating because he has so much potential: big, strong, fast guy with a fairly hard shot. But he's still young and cast in a difficult role. He would be hard to replace.
 

BatherSeason

Registered User
Jun 16, 2009
6,640
3,702
Gatineau
This is a ridiculous mindset. Sometimes teams win despite poor performances by some players. Sometimes teams lose despite great performances. It is perfectly acceptable, and in my opinion even encouraged, to criticize while winning. (and find positives while losing) It's much more constructive to find faults while we're winning so we're not piling on mistakes while losing. This is why I tend to ignore this thread when we lose because it's much harder to be objective.

Asking who to take his role is another problem entirely. It doesn't change the fact that Ceci is not doing well in his role. It only says we don't have someone that can step in his role. If we had 2 Karlssons, Ceci would be on the 3rd pairing probably, and nobody would be criticizing him because he most likely would excel in that role.

As for forgiving Karlsson giveaways, that's the point. When a player overwhelmingly makes more good plays than bad, the bad can be ignored. When that difference is not as big, we start to look at the bad more closely. You can argue how big the difference is for Ceci, and I'll respect that, but I'm pretty sure it's basically a fact now that Karlsson's positives outweigh the negative so much that there really isn't any point discussing his giveaways or backcheck or pivots. If he didn't have those he'd probably be the best player ever. That's just not realistic.

Very well said! :handclap:

Not sure why anyone is bringing Karlsson into the Cody Ceci discussion
 

BatherSeason

Registered User
Jun 16, 2009
6,640
3,702
Gatineau
He brings the appropriate amount of offense for how he is deployed.

I think everyone agrees he is a top 4 D man. Does he produce top 4 numbers? Yes. Top 100 in D man scoring this year. With 120 top 4 D men in the league, he is about where you would expect.

And last year, when playing a different role, more sheltered on 5 on 5, he produced what can be descirbed as elite numbers for 5x5. He was 26th for D men in the league for points including 4th for goals, and 12th just for RHD.

Lasy year he showed there is very good offensive potential, and this year with very tough deployment he still produced numbers that are still indicative of his position.

Take out the 4 minutes of SHT time, give it to Karlsson, and take the 4 minutes of PP time from Karlsson and give it to Ceci, and the numbers would definitely look different. Karlssons would still be much better, agreed, but Ceci is no Karlsson, that we can all agree.

I don't think everyone agrees on this at all. We can agree that with GB deploys him as a top 4 defender on this team. Is it deserved?? That's the debate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad