2Pair
Registered User
- Oct 8, 2017
- 12,633
- 5,103
Yeah, that makes senseI wouldn't give him the heavy defensive matchups then. That's a controllable thing.
Yeah, that makes senseI wouldn't give him the heavy defensive matchups then. That's a controllable thing.
Yeah, that makes sense
He got chances up in the lineup and didn't take advantage of them. He got a chance every game, and every practice to show he deserved it.I don't know, maybe actually being given an opportunity to?
He got chances up in the lineup and didn't take advantage of them. He got a chance every game, and every practice to show he deserved it.
It's the fact if life in the NHL, if your going to be a one dimensional scorer. That dimension needs to be really really good.
Almost every coach in the league is going to make the same decision as BB did and Evason continued.
He was given games in the top 6, he was given spot duty... he never took advantage of them. He looked weaker on the puck in the top 6 than he did the bottom 6 because he looked weaker vs better players.He got almost no chances.
He was given games in the top 6, he was given spot duty... he never took advantage of them. He looked weaker on the puck in the top 6 than he did the bottom 6 because he looked weaker vs better players.
He spent more than 1/3 of his minutes up the lineup. Had 110 with Koivu and Hartman, 90 with Rask and Hartman, and 120 minutes in various line combos with Staal, Fiala, Parise, Zuccarallo and JEE.He got almost no chances.
He was given games in the top 6, he was given spot duty... he never took advantage of them. He looked weaker on the puck in the top 6 than he did the bottom 6 because he looked weaker vs better players.
Enough to get a coaches attention if he played better than those he was replacing at the time. I found myself usually griping about his being knocked off the puck in those occasions. Reminded me of Granlund his rookie year all the time.Exactly. Spot duty.
10 minutes a game for someone like him is more than enough to show what he can do. Bouchard at his peak was only getting 15mins/gm because he couldn't be played on the pk. Are you really saying 4-5mins really held him back that much?His ATOI was under 10 minutes a game, with very minimal PP time. Putting up 14 goals in that stretch is pretty impressive for a guy who spent 50% of his TOI with Hartman.
Even if he performed well against worse competition, that sounds like a guy you'd want to keep around on a scoring 3rd line. I don't know, getting a 3rd for him just seems really weak.
Enough to get a coaches attention if he played better than those he was replacing at the time. I found myself usually griping about his being knocked off the puck in those occasions. Reminded me of Granlund his rookie year all the time.
Some players just end up as tweeners who don't really fit. That's the impression I got when I watched him play. Until he gains strength, he's just not going to take off as a player.
10 minutes a game for someone like him is more than enough to show what he can do. Bouchard at his peak was only getting 15mins/gm because he couldn't be played on the pk. Are you really saying 4-5mins really held him back that much?
Enough to get a coaches attention if he played better than those he was replacing at the time. I found myself usually griping about his being knocked off the puck in those occasions.
Some players just end up as tweeners who don't really fit. That's the impression I got when I watched him play. Until he gains strength, he's just not going to take off as a player.
10 minutes a game for someone like him is more than enough to show what he can do. Bouchard at his peak was only getting 15mins/gm because he couldn't be played on the pk. Are you really saying 4-5mins really held him back that much?
Against mostly lesser competition. Key distinction. Not all 5v5 situations are the same.He scored the same amount of even-strength goals as Fiala, Staal, and Kunin while playing 5 minutes less a game.
Against mostly lesser competition. Key distinction. Not all 5v5 situations are the same.
As I said, whenever he got his chances with the better linemates against better competition, he looked weak and unable to compete.But he did that while playing with worse linemates too. There's a trade off there. If he performed really well against lesser competition, then the team would benefit more keeping him around and playing him against those matchups than letting him go for a 3rd in 2021. The return was not worth giving him up IMO.
As I said, whenever he got his chances with the better linemates against better competition, he looked weak and unable to compete.
He's a tweener who's skills are better suited to the top 6 due to lack of defense and slow speed, but his weakness on his skates doesn't allow him to stay there.
He's like a worse defensively and slower Justin Fontaine at this point. I wish him luck and hope he's able to put on some muscle, but I'm fine with that attempt being made elsewhere as well.
It was pretty clear he was physically over matched to me. You don't need a large sample size to see that.I don't think the sample size was there to form a definitive opinion on that though. He played great the previous season with 16 points in 22 GP and then he got maybe 10-12 games in a Top 6 role this season. If Sharks put him in a 2nd line role with some PP time, I see him putting up 20 goals next season pretty easily.
Enough to get a coaches attention if he played better than those he was replacing at the time. I found myself usually griping about his being knocked off the puck in those occasions. Reminded me of Granlund his rookie year all the time.
Doesn't mean he's going to do that in the top 6. He played well in a bottom 6 role. That said, bottom 6 players are a dime a dozen.No offense, but the 14 pucks in the net means a little bit more than your gripes to yourself while watching TV.
Doesn't mean he's going to do that in the top 6. He played well in a bottom 6 role. That said, bottom 6 players are a dime a dozen.
Failed to differentiate himself enough to show he belonged there vs who else we had there. That is a numbers game. If he clearly got the coaches attention that he was a better player for the role, that would have been the situational success you're talking about. He didn't, so that's why he failed to overcome the numbers game he fell victim to.Donato played 14 games in 2019-20 where he played > 12 minutes in a game. In those games he has a 4+5 line (23+29 per 82). Combine that with his 2018-19 and it's 36 games and an 8+16 line (18+36 per 82). But I guess if he looks weak...
If the argument is that it's a numbers game or a contract game, then fine, because that's probably what it is, but the notion that Donato has failed all of these chances that he's been given is nonsense.
Failed to differentiate himself enough to show he belonged there vs who else we had there. That is a numbers game. If he clearly got the coaches attention that he was a better player for the role, that would have been the situational success you're talking about. He didn't, so that's why he failed to overcome the numbers game he fell victim to.
Jaques Lemaire was known for putting some questionable players on top lines too... one of the best coaches of all time. There's reason they're coaches and we're not for the most part.You're talking about coaches that took forever to put Fiala out 3v3 and put Foligno on the top line in a playoff elimination game. I'd cite difference "evidence".