Getting back to Schmaltz and his flaws as a Centre....the only reason he bus plus 1 so far is because Kane is +3 ....all this means is that they have both been on in evens more than they have given up in evens..Bit nobody who is sane would say an eye test would describe either of these 2 players as good or solid defensively ...the goals they are on for against often are the result of poor coverage and not checking very hard due to lazy mess or disinterest ...
It isbinterstesting that Saad gets demoted to 4th line in a Q message of displeadure with his game...not I think so much becausebifblacknof production. .but I think because Q at least expect Saad to be the defensive saviour of the Schmaltz-Kane duo who are "adventures in the d-zone" ...the thing is Q dare not demote Kane for lazy defensive play cause he is a $10.5:star .. and Schmaltz would probably lose confidence if he demoted him for poor defensive play. ..Not that Fort in is Bob Gainey and the saviour of the Schmaltz -Kane duo in the d-zone..But perhaps he is hoping Fortune adds more speed to thenlinecandctgat this will lead to more transition goals for them ..such that more offense mitigates the defensive flaws of the line to a greater extent that Saad was doing with AL oat no production at all..Had Saad helped prevent more goals from the Scjmaltz-Lane d-zone fiasco them such mitigation might have kept him up on line 2..But Saad has failed Noth offensively and defensively ..Q expectedvtge line could be great if Saad provided defensive coverage for the less than great d-zone work of the other two..but Sad did not do that job well ...production or not..Saad losing coverage or being late on checking in the d-zone is unforgivable when you have 2 d-zone liabilities like Kane and Schmaltz...again I doubt Fortin solves that but the hope is he somehow mitigates this by helping the line score more.
An example of poor defensive responsibility by Kane and Schmaltz...was on the shorty goal we have up when they both were on the pp when that was scored last game when we blew the game letting Minnesota tie it to get to OT ...
The only hope for Kane and Schmaltz to cover up for poor defending habits is that they mitigate their flaws with even greater offensive production.
Let us consider the +/- Stat. .It only covers Even situations...So as long as Kane and S hmaltz are on in evens for more goals for than against they put up positive numbers in this Stat. .but by no means do positive +/- stats imply good defending . Rather if they score enough they merely cover up for their obvious defensive flaws...
So if they were just Even in this Stat ..it means they give up as much as they score at evens. THAT would be a net zero ..Hardly greatness ...Rather we seek high positives in plus minus for greatness and $$$ spent ...
Thus they must score a LOT MORE than they give up at Evens to mitigate enough to be real difference-makers because Evens or barely over is really No NET Difference -making at all...just treading water.
So let us say S&K are on for against per game at evens but also are on for 2 goals for a game at evens on average ...means they have to combine for 164 combined points over 82 games just to be treading water.
Any shorties given up by them on the pp would tip the scale to negative on +/-..
We know neither will get pk duty ...so that cannot tip it either way.
So the only net net great differenxe-making for them would be if they scored more in this example an
20 more points when on together...In that case they would both then be +20 ...not making them great defensively but at least you could say they added some real difference-making on a net net basis.
Point is...given their defensive flaws ..they must make up for it with a lot more scoring to make any real net difference .
It isbinterstesting that Saad gets demoted to 4th line in a Q message of displeadure with his game...not I think so much becausebifblacknof production. .but I think because Q at least expect Saad to be the defensive saviour of the Schmaltz-Kane duo who are "adventures in the d-zone" ...the thing is Q dare not demote Kane for lazy defensive play cause he is a $10.5:star .. and Schmaltz would probably lose confidence if he demoted him for poor defensive play. ..Not that Fort in is Bob Gainey and the saviour of the Schmaltz -Kane duo in the d-zone..But perhaps he is hoping Fortune adds more speed to thenlinecandctgat this will lead to more transition goals for them ..such that more offense mitigates the defensive flaws of the line to a greater extent that Saad was doing with AL oat no production at all..Had Saad helped prevent more goals from the Scjmaltz-Lane d-zone fiasco them such mitigation might have kept him up on line 2..But Saad has failed Noth offensively and defensively ..Q expectedvtge line could be great if Saad provided defensive coverage for the less than great d-zone work of the other two..but Sad did not do that job well ...production or not..Saad losing coverage or being late on checking in the d-zone is unforgivable when you have 2 d-zone liabilities like Kane and Schmaltz...again I doubt Fortin solves that but the hope is he somehow mitigates this by helping the line score more.
An example of poor defensive responsibility by Kane and Schmaltz...was on the shorty goal we have up when they both were on the pp when that was scored last game when we blew the game letting Minnesota tie it to get to OT ...
The only hope for Kane and Schmaltz to cover up for poor defending habits is that they mitigate their flaws with even greater offensive production.
Let us consider the +/- Stat. .It only covers Even situations...So as long as Kane and S hmaltz are on in evens for more goals for than against they put up positive numbers in this Stat. .but by no means do positive +/- stats imply good defending . Rather if they score enough they merely cover up for their obvious defensive flaws...
So if they were just Even in this Stat ..it means they give up as much as they score at evens. THAT would be a net zero ..Hardly greatness ...Rather we seek high positives in plus minus for greatness and $$$ spent ...
Thus they must score a LOT MORE than they give up at Evens to mitigate enough to be real difference-makers because Evens or barely over is really No NET Difference -making at all...just treading water.
So let us say S&K are on for against per game at evens but also are on for 2 goals for a game at evens on average ...means they have to combine for 164 combined points over 82 games just to be treading water.
Any shorties given up by them on the pp would tip the scale to negative on +/-..
We know neither will get pk duty ...so that cannot tip it either way.
So the only net net great differenxe-making for them would be if they scored more in this example an
20 more points when on together...In that case they would both then be +20 ...not making them great defensively but at least you could say they added some real difference-making on a net net basis.
Point is...given their defensive flaws ..they must make up for it with a lot more scoring to make any real net difference .
