krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 16,879
- 9,560
I don’t think anything this management does is unquestionable.
Also, that’s a pretty meaningless statement as it removes any context when evaluating Benning. Management is an ongoing activity, and discretely evaluating one particular decision, while simply accepting the circumstances, is pretty useless in my opinion.
i think they felt the team was not going further as it was built and looked for a way to change the mix. i think they wanted a team that pushed play from the defence. they concluded the team defence was dominated and defined by tanev's defensive style, and they concluded that stecher was going to earn minutes with a coach on effort that were better used on a more talented player with less effort.
they also concluded that resigning marky for 6 years was an enormous gamble with demko in the wings, and that given the age of the team they would be better off betting on demko.
those evaluations were correct to my mind excepting intangibles, which most people here tend to discount. management made the correct analytics driven call to change the mix if they could.
the implementation was also not bad. schmidt to replace tanev takes the team where they want to go. hamonic is an excellent stop gap leaving room for a prospect or a signing. holtby was an excellent goalie to bring along demko.
but when you change pieces, intangibles can bite you. based on the way markstrom and tanev played these last two games, you cannot discount the fact their loss is a factor in the results.