Poll of the Day: Why Do We Suck?

What are the major reasons this season has gone off the rails?


  • Total voters
    112

BUX7PHX

Registered User
Jul 7, 2011
5,581
1,350
The fan base here jump off and on the wagon on a daily basis. There are many positives, and many negatives. This team should have been sniffing for a playoff spot but the injuries have hurt, and that is Chayka's fault for not bringing in the right players or mix of players. AB made a big mistake by not hiring an experienced hockey man to help Chayka. All is not lost though. We have the best talent we have had in the last number of years and you add in DVO, Hayton and a couple of guys from Tucson who look promising. It's very frustrating to say the least.

How did Chayka not put in the right mix of players? We re-signed Richardson and picked up Grabner. That alone has brought us some major PK help on a team that had no PK the past few years.

There was a story in the Athletic about Strome being impatient with what was going on here. Again, you talk about patience with young players all the time. Sounds like he had a higher opinion of himself but wouldn't then take it upon himself to do some of the smaller things in limited ice time that could earn him more ice time. So we traded him for someone who fit better and we trust.

We are still so far in the weeds on overall talent though, and we are kind of in a no win situation, as the youth tends to sour on things when they dont get their way here, but everyone bemoaned about the veterans on stop-gap deals that were a part of the DM and Tippett legacy. Somewhere in there is a happy medium, as some of the youth are finally feeling comfortable with staying, as evidenced by Dvorak and Chychrun longer term deals. I thought this was the year, and I still think that like last year, we are better than our record, but injuries to key players have hurt us to a large extreme. Our top RHD, #2/3 C, and #1 goalie are out for the year. Very hard to survive that.
 

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,982
9,040
How did Chayka not put in the right mix of players? We re-signed Richardson and picked up Grabner. That alone has brought us some major PK help on a team that had no PK the past few years.

There was a story in the Athletic about Strome being impatient with what was going on here. Again, you talk about patience with young players all the time. Sounds like he had a higher opinion of himself but wouldn't then take it upon himself to do some of the smaller things in limited ice time that could earn him more ice time. So we traded him for someone who fit better and we trust.

We are still so far in the weeds on overall talent though, and we are kind of in a no win situation, as the youth tends to sour on things when they dont get their way here, but everyone bemoaned about the veterans on stop-gap deals that were a part of the DM and Tippett legacy. Somewhere in there is a happy medium, as some of the youth are finally feeling comfortable with staying, as evidenced by Dvorak and Chychrun longer term deals. I thought this was the year, and I still think that like last year, we are better than our record, but injuries to key players have hurt us to a large extreme. Our top RHD, #2/3 C, and #1 goalie are out for the year. Very hard to survive that.
Richardson fell into our laps. We had Kruger signed as we thought Richardson was gonzo. Grabner was a good pick up. I don't want to get into the Strome thing again, but who is running the show here. If all you have to do is pout or play poorly and gunslinger Chayka will trade ya, we are in bigger trouble than I thought. The reason DVO and Chychrun signed here was because of the money, and no other reason. Not one team in the NHL would have traded for those two players because of injuries. I agree that injuries have hurt us, but smart teams try to prepare for that. While Kuemper and Hill don't have the numbers Raanta had last year, they both have better numbers this year than Raanta. There is no more hiding, no more excuses for this team and management. We have more talent now than in the last ten years. I want results damn it.
 

BUX7PHX

Registered User
Jul 7, 2011
5,581
1,350
Richardson fell into our laps. We had Kruger signed as we thought Richardson was gonzo. Grabner was a good pick up. I don't want to get into the Strome thing again, but who is running the show here. If all you have to do is pout or play poorly and gunslinger Chayka will trade ya, we are in bigger trouble than I thought. The reason DVO and Chychrun signed here was because of the money, and no other reason. Not one team in the NHL would have traded for those two players because of injuries. I agree that injuries have hurt us, but smart teams try to prepare for that. While Kuemper and Hill don't have the numbers Raanta had last year, they both have better numbers this year than Raanta. There is no more hiding, no more excuses for this team and management. We have more talent now than in the last ten years. I want results damn it.

When Dvorak signed, he wasn't injured. Remember that there were rumors floating around that Minnesota was interested in the offseason. Injuries have hurt, but please tell me who else we could have signed to take that place? That was kind of how Richardson did wind up in our laps again, but he has also been one of our best Cs. You only have 50 contracts to give out, so I question what you are saying regarding the idea of smart teams preparing for that. Were we supposed to sign JVR and others, and then follow that up with other high profile signings so that a guy making $2.5 M per year can be our 13th F? Get outta here - we are a budget team and no team can field a bunch of All-Stars as 13th F for injury purposes. All teams are under the same restrictions - our injuries happened to players who were integral parts to the lineup. The deal with Kruger was moreso to pick up a player like Hino as Chicago dumped salary in the form of Hossa on us. Again, we are actually being very smart about this and trying to integrate young players into the fold without giving them too much on their plate that they can't adapt to.

Which brings us to Strome...

You're trying to make the Strome trade seem like it was something where Strome had done everything in his power to be the best he could be, and there was no reason to trade him. I don't think that we did him favors, but that is a two-way street and he didn't help himself out either. It has been brought up by posters like Jamieh; Marner started out on the 4th line with Toronto until he earned the trust of his coaches that he would perform the right way. Happened with Matthews, McDavid, Hanifin - you name it. It happened slower with Strome, but we also needed to see something from him to ensure that he would do the things that were asked so that he wouldn't be a liability on a higher line. It's a chain of command, and if he was consistently putting up points, staying in the system, providing some physicality, crashing the net, etc. then we would have no reason to bury him on a 3rd or 4th line, correct? In the AHL, he was a PPG player, and isn't a top line AHLer basically the equivalent of a 3rd or 4th line NHL player? Wouldn't someone's stats and play on the 3rd or 4th line of an NHL team at least start to approach what he had done in the AHL? When it doesn't happen, you have to question whether or not the player is giving it his all. Sorry for being that blunt about it, but if you don't like being on the 3rd or 4th line, give your coaches a reason to not be on that line. Until you do, what reason do the coaches have to give you that benefit of the doubt and HOPE you can turn it around? Hope is not a strategy. Now Chayka and Tocchet may not have had Strome as one of their favorites, but I also find it very hard to believe that someone who was consistently improving and doing things night in and night out to prove that they deserved more minutes would be unceremoniously pushed to the 3rd and 4th lines all the time. Sounds to me like Strome was impatient (the article in the Athletic even stated as such) and that impatience may be perceived as a bad attitude towards staff during his time here. It is then very easy to put someone into that category b/c he wants more than what he is giving at that point. The trade wasn't a "now" thing. If it was a "now" thing, we would have traded for a 30 year old with 1 or 2 years left on his deal. Schmaltz is an RFA, so we were trading one long-term player for another. We add in Perlini (whom I am shocked that he hasn't done at least a little more than what he has), and that is where we are at.

We want results like Strome wanted better minutes, but you have to put in the work to get there. The injuries are unforeseen, but have hurt us. Talent without being properly honed in is just that - talent. Teams can win on talent alone every now and again, but like hope, talent alone is not a long-term strategy. We are almost there, and people forget where we were at prior to the injuries that rocked us. We were a .500 team when Demers went down, and are 5-10 since. That includes Raanta going out on the 28th of NOV and Grabner a few days later. The injuries have taken their toll, but we were just on the cusp of being that team that no one really wanted to play against when the successive injuries happened. Now, we are a much less scary team as a result, and it has shown in the time since. Chayka has re-worked our entire roster in the AHL and NHL, top-to-bottom and we are finally at a point where we have some decent depth. A little more would be helpful, but the foundation has been laid. We might need another player or two to be that keystone, but the injuries did dent that foundation pretty hard. The keystones are coming as Keller, Chychrun, Dvorak, and others continue developing. Hayton and POJ have their chances, but as long as they don't buy into their own hype, as I think Strome may have, I think we will be fine.
 

Dr VinnyBoombatz

formerly ctwin22
Mar 21, 2008
10,912
6,447
Chandler, AZ
There is no doubt Strome didn't put in the necessary work to get stronger. His upper body development is awful, he still looks as weak as a kitten with zero definition. Someone who is committed would have been hitting the weights hard to improve strength (while maintaining flexibility) and we would have seen at least some definition, much like we've seen with Adin Hill, his transformation has been noteworthy.
 

Neighborhood Coyote

Registered User
Sep 14, 2017
3,124
2,711
When Dvorak signed, he wasn't injured. Remember that there were rumors floating around that Minnesota was interested in the offseason. Injuries have hurt, but please tell me who else we could have signed to take that place? That was kind of how Richardson did wind up in our laps again, but he has also been one of our best Cs. You only have 50 contracts to give out, so I question what you are saying regarding the idea of smart teams preparing for that. Were we supposed to sign JVR and others, and then follow that up with other high profile signings so that a guy making $2.5 M per year can be our 13th F? Get outta here - we are a budget team and no team can field a bunch of All-Stars as 13th F for injury purposes. All teams are under the same restrictions - our injuries happened to players who were integral parts to the lineup. The deal with Kruger was moreso to pick up a player like Hino as Chicago dumped salary in the form of Hossa on us. Again, we are actually being very smart about this and trying to integrate young players into the fold without giving them too much on their plate that they can't adapt to.

Which brings us to Strome...

You're trying to make the Strome trade seem like it was something where Strome had done everything in his power to be the best he could be, and there was no reason to trade him. I don't think that we did him favors, but that is a two-way street and he didn't help himself out either. It has been brought up by posters like Jamieh; Marner started out on the 4th line with Toronto until he earned the trust of his coaches that he would perform the right way. Happened with Matthews, McDavid, Hanifin - you name it. It happened slower with Strome, but we also needed to see something from him to ensure that he would do the things that were asked so that he wouldn't be a liability on a higher line. It's a chain of command, and if he was consistently putting up points, staying in the system, providing some physicality, crashing the net, etc. then we would have no reason to bury him on a 3rd or 4th line, correct? In the AHL, he was a PPG player, and isn't a top line AHLer basically the equivalent of a 3rd or 4th line NHL player? Wouldn't someone's stats and play on the 3rd or 4th line of an NHL team at least start to approach what he had done in the AHL? When it doesn't happen, you have to question whether or not the player is giving it his all. Sorry for being that blunt about it, but if you don't like being on the 3rd or 4th line, give your coaches a reason to not be on that line. Until you do, what reason do the coaches have to give you that benefit of the doubt and HOPE you can turn it around? Hope is not a strategy. Now Chayka and Tocchet may not have had Strome as one of their favorites, but I also find it very hard to believe that someone who was consistently improving and doing things night in and night out to prove that they deserved more minutes would be unceremoniously pushed to the 3rd and 4th lines all the time. Sounds to me like Strome was impatient (the article in the Athletic even stated as such) and that impatience may be perceived as a bad attitude towards staff during his time here. It is then very easy to put someone into that category b/c he wants more than what he is giving at that point. The trade wasn't a "now" thing. If it was a "now" thing, we would have traded for a 30 year old with 1 or 2 years left on his deal. Schmaltz is an RFA, so we were trading one long-term player for another. We add in Perlini (whom I am shocked that he hasn't done at least a little more than what he has), and that is where we are at.

We want results like Strome wanted better minutes, but you have to put in the work to get there. The injuries are unforeseen, but have hurt us. Talent without being properly honed in is just that - talent. Teams can win on talent alone every now and again, but like hope, talent alone is not a long-term strategy. We are almost there, and people forget where we were at prior to the injuries that rocked us. We were a .500 team when Demers went down, and are 5-10 since. That includes Raanta going out on the 28th of NOV and Grabner a few days later. The injuries have taken their toll, but we were just on the cusp of being that team that no one really wanted to play against when the successive injuries happened. Now, we are a much less scary team as a result, and it has shown in the time since. Chayka has re-worked our entire roster in the AHL and NHL, top-to-bottom and we are finally at a point where we have some decent depth. A little more would be helpful, but the foundation has been laid. We might need another player or two to be that keystone, but the injuries did dent that foundation pretty hard. The keystones are coming as Keller, Chychrun, Dvorak, and others continue developing. Hayton and POJ have their chances, but as long as they don't buy into their own hype, as I think Strome may have, I think we will be fine.


To counter that second paragraph... Garland played on the first line with Schmaltz and Keller the other night if I am not mistaken. Didn't seem like he had to really show all the things you speak of to get the opportunity. Schmaltz was immediately given that role when he got here, as well. Looks like there are different rule sets for different players in this organization to me. Any one of us in Strome's position would probably feel the same way. It's not just coincidence, I think, that some younger players have been wanting out last couple of seasons. You want players to give their all? Make it an environment where they want to. Right now, there aren't many players giving their all, imo. At least not based on what we get to watch on the ice. Lots of mistakes and poor play lately...even from the most talented on the team.
 

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,982
9,040
When Dvorak signed, he wasn't injured. Remember that there were rumors floating around that Minnesota was interested in the offseason. Injuries have hurt, but please tell me who else we could have signed to take that place? That was kind of how Richardson did wind up in our laps again, but he has also been one of our best Cs. You only have 50 contracts to give out, so I question what you are saying regarding the idea of smart teams preparing for that. Were we supposed to sign JVR and others, and then follow that up with other high profile signings so that a guy making $2.5 M per year can be our 13th F? Get outta here - we are a budget team and no team can field a bunch of All-Stars as 13th F for injury purposes. All teams are under the same restrictions - our injuries happened to players who were integral parts to the lineup. The deal with Kruger was moreso to pick up a player like Hino as Chicago dumped salary in the form of Hossa on us. Again, we are actually being very smart about this and trying to integrate young players into the fold without giving them too much on their plate that they can't adapt to.

Which brings us to Strome...

You're trying to make the Strome trade seem like it was something where Strome had done everything in his power to be the best he could be, and there was no reason to trade him. I don't think that we did him favors, but that is a two-way street and he didn't help himself out either. It has been brought up by posters like Jamieh; Marner started out on the 4th line with Toronto until he earned the trust of his coaches that he would perform the right way. Happened with Matthews, McDavid, Hanifin - you name it. It happened slower with Strome, but we also needed to see something from him to ensure that he would do the things that were asked so that he wouldn't be a liability on a higher line. It's a chain of command, and if he was consistently putting up points, staying in the system, providing some physicality, crashing the net, etc. then we would have no reason to bury him on a 3rd or 4th line, correct? In the AHL, he was a PPG player, and isn't a top line AHLer basically the equivalent of a 3rd or 4th line NHL player? Wouldn't someone's stats and play on the 3rd or 4th line of an NHL team at least start to approach what he had done in the AHL? When it doesn't happen, you have to question whether or not the player is giving it his all. Sorry for being that blunt about it, but if you don't like being on the 3rd or 4th line, give your coaches a reason to not be on that line. Until you do, what reason do the coaches have to give you that benefit of the doubt and HOPE you can turn it around? Hope is not a strategy. Now Chayka and Tocchet may not have had Strome as one of their favorites, but I also find it very hard to believe that someone who was consistently improving and doing things night in and night out to prove that they deserved more minutes would be unceremoniously pushed to the 3rd and 4th lines all the time. Sounds to me like Strome was impatient (the article in the Athletic even stated as such) and that impatience may be perceived as a bad attitude towards staff during his time here. It is then very easy to put someone into that category b/c he wants more than what he is giving at that point. The trade wasn't a "now" thing. If it was a "now" thing, we would have traded for a 30 year old with 1 or 2 years left on his deal. Schmaltz is an RFA, so we were trading one long-term player for another. We add in Perlini (whom I am shocked that he hasn't done at least a little more than what he has), and that is where we are at.

We want results like Strome wanted better minutes, but you have to put in the work to get there. The injuries are unforeseen, but have hurt us. Talent without being properly honed in is just that - talent. Teams can win on talent alone every now and again, but like hope, talent alone is not a long-term strategy. We are almost there, and people forget where we were at prior to the injuries that rocked us. We were a .500 team when Demers went down, and are 5-10 since. That includes Raanta going out on the 28th of NOV and Grabner a few days later. The injuries have taken their toll, but we were just on the cusp of being that team that no one really wanted to play against when the successive injuries happened. Now, we are a much less scary team as a result, and it has shown in the time since. Chayka has re-worked our entire roster in the AHL and NHL, top-to-bottom and we are finally at a point where we have some decent depth. A little more would be helpful, but the foundation has been laid. We might need another player or two to be that keystone, but the injuries did dent that foundation pretty hard. The keystones are coming as Keller, Chychrun, Dvorak, and others continue developing. Hayton and POJ have their chances, but as long as they don't buy into their own hype, as I think Strome may have, I think we will be fine.
Dvorak's last game was March 29th /2018 and he has not played since. He signed his contract August 9th /2018. Richardson did fall onto our laps, and thank god he did or we would have Kruger. It was "rumored", we "supposed to". Shoulda, woulda, coulda. Blahblahblah. Not going to start another debate about Strome. You don't like him, and I did. Time will tell who is right. Last year I believe we were third last in goals for, and this year we are second to last. Raanta and Demers injuries doesn't move the needle as far as goal scoring goes. Why wasn't that addressed in the off season? We have suppose to have added goal scoring, at least according to Chayka, but it doesn't look like that to me. Why haven't the kids improved? Why are most of the vets play declining? We were asking the same questions last year, and we will get the same answers this year with gunslinger Chayka making a boatload of trades. Hell even I started to say injuries were the problem. I guess if you hear it enough you start to believe it.:) It just shows that talk is cheap and Chayka is good at it, as he has most of us believing that most of his trades were good. BS baffles brains.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neighborhood Coyote

cobra427

Registered User
May 6, 2012
9,327
3,347
Dvorak's last game was March 29th /2018 and he has not played since. He signed his contract August 9th /2018. Richardson did fall onto our laps, and thank god he did or we would have Kruger. It was "rumored", we "supposed to". Shoulda, woulda, coulda. Blahblahblah. Not going to start another debate about Strome. You don't like him, and I did. Time will tell who is right. Last year I believe we were third last in goals for, and this year we are second to last. Raanta and Demers injuries doesn't move the needle as far as goal scoring goes. Why wasn't that addressed in the off season? We have suppose to have added goal scoring, at least according to Chayka, but it doesn't look like that to me. Why haven't the kids improved? Why are most of the vets play declining? We were asking the same questions last year, and we will get the same answers this year with gunslinger Chayka making a boatload of trades. Hell even I started to say injuries were the problem. I guess if you hear it enough you start to believe it.:) It just shows that talk is cheap and Chayka is good at it, as he has most of us believing that most of his trades were good. BS baffles brains.
Most of Chaykas trades look good except for the Domi trade, he can't and won't win them all. I think the Chychrun and DVO contracts are a gamble in dollars and term. They could turn into Richardson and Schlemko, not Stepan and OEL light. I am glad he didn't over pay for Raanta, he is unproven and now we are seeing it confirmed.

The problem could be Tocc, but it is hard to say. Injuries are a problem but Tocc has many under performing players just like last year. Barroway/Chayka gambled on an unproven coach but likely all they could afford too. It doesn't look like we are going to catch lightning in a bottle this year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MIG

Jakey53

Registered User
Aug 27, 2011
29,982
9,040
Most of Chaykas trades look good except for the Domi trade, he can't and won't win them all. I think the Chychrun and DVO contracts are a gamble in dollars and term. They could turn into Richardson and Schlemko, not Stepan and OEL light. I am glad he didn't over pay for Raanta, he is unproven and now we are seeing it confirmed.

The problem could be Tocc, but it is hard to say. Injuries are a problem but Tocc has many under performing players just like last year. Barroway/Chayka gambled on an unproven coach but likely all they could afford too. It doesn't look like we are going to catch lightning in a bottle this year.
That's what everyone is saying, "trade looks good". Well, the results don't prove that. I thought they were good also. but you, I or the rest on hf boards are not experts, or like I said, we have heard it so many times we are starting to believe it. The organization had excuses coming out of the yin yang last year and I guess most of us believed what they were saying. Sorry, but talk is cheap and frankly I'm tired of it, as most are. I want results, and even on a budget team there is no reason why we can't contend for a playoff spot. Year four of the rebuild and we are 3 points from being in last spot.
 

BUX7PHX

Registered User
Jul 7, 2011
5,581
1,350
Dvorak's last game was March 29th /2018 and he has not played since. He signed his contract August 9th /2018. Richardson did fall onto our laps, and thank god he did or we would have Kruger. It was "rumored", we "supposed to". Shoulda, woulda, coulda. Blahblahblah. Not going to start another debate about Strome. You don't like him, and I did. Time will tell who is right. Last year I believe we were third last in goals for, and this year we are second to last. Raanta and Demers injuries doesn't move the needle as far as goal scoring goes. Why wasn't that addressed in the off season? We have suppose to have added goal scoring, at least according to Chayka, but it doesn't look like that to me. Why haven't the kids improved? Why are most of the vets play declining? We were asking the same questions last year, and we will get the same answers this year with gunslinger Chayka making a boatload of trades. Hell even I started to say injuries were the problem. I guess if you hear it enough you start to believe it.:) It just shows that talk is cheap and Chayka is good at it, as he has most of us believing that most of his trades were good. BS baffles brains.

For Dvorak, we are talking two separate things - his back was why he was shut down last year, and then he tore his pectoral muscle. Your argument would have some merit if it was his back in 2018, and then his back progressively got worse heading into this season.

You still didn't even answer the question of "what other pieces were we supposed to surround ourselves with to be able to have something to help out with injuries?" Obviously, injuries happen, but every team is hamstrung by 50 contracts, and I highly doubt that any player of significant quality was going to sign here if we told them the spiel of "We like you as a player, but we mainly need you to be our 13th forward in case injuries happen." We prepared ourselves as best as possible, in that regard, because as you said, we added more talent to total the 12 forwards that are out there, but kept Archibald and Cousins (presumably) as our 13th and 14th forwards. Same on defense - we added Lyubushkin as an 8th D and Connauton remained our 7th D. So, in what way did we not prepare ourselves for injury, Jake? The only exception that could be said is that we didn't add talented 13th and 14th forwards, but that comes with a cost, being a budget team and all.

Regarding Strome, you don't care to argue, b/c like many others, you want to turn this into a situation where the coaches and management are the only ones to blame and none falls on the player. Why is it so hard to understand that if a player doesn't commit himself fully, then the coaching staff has every right to sit him or put him on a lower line until he gets his act together? Read this article - granted it was from a fired coach of the Leafs but there are key excerpts in there, such as:

His major gripe, he said, was Kadri didn’t backcheck when he was asked to.

“If we had drawn a hard line with him and sent him down to the minors and made an example of him early on in his career, he might not be doing these things now,” Wilson said. “He might have been reformed.”

Wilson admitted that Kadri’s fitness has improved, but “he’s still making the mistakes he made as a rookie.”

Former Maple Leafs coach Ron Wilson calls Nazem Kadri 'difficult' - TheHockeyNews

Or this:

Taylor Hall says he didn't want a "dialogue" with his coaches with Edmonton Oilers

Taylor Hall on how much he listens to New Jersey coach John Hynes as opposed to how much he listened to his Oilers coaches: “He’s probably given me the most accountability that any coach I had in Edmonton. I really think that’s been good for me personally. Just in Edmonton, I really didn’t want to talk to coaches. I didn’t really want to have dialogue with coaches. I just wanted to play. And a lot of guys are like that.”

Hall basically outright said that he didn't care to listen to his coaches.

To outright assume that everything falls on the coaches shoulders is a 100% incorrect narrative. Players with all the skill and talent in the world didn't always listen to what was said. Part of that is growing up and maturing as a player and as an adult. Is it any surprise that once traded, there was probably an internal judgment on Hall's part to say that maybe he needed to hold himself accountable for his actions, which may be exactly what shook out with Strome's trade to Chicago?

So ask yourself, if you were the coach, and these quotes from other stories applied to the relationship between Strome and management - what do you do? I have to believe that every single one of us would suggest TRADING THAT PLAYER. And that is exactly what happened. I still think that Strome can play, maybe not as a true #1 C, but that is dependent on how he matures as a player and person. But I also think that it was not an absolute black and white scenario where our coaches did everything wrong and Dylan did everything right. Rather, there was a combination of factors that led to us not seeing Strome as part of the long-term plan, and I am certain that Dylan didn't see himself as a part of the Arizona team long-term either.
 
Last edited:

cobra427

Registered User
May 6, 2012
9,327
3,347
That's what everyone is saying, "trade looks good". Well, the results don't prove that. I thought they were good also. but you, I or the rest on hf boards are not experts, or like I said, we have heard it so many times we are starting to believe it. The organization had excuses coming out of the yin yang last year and I guess most of us believed what they were saying. Sorry, but talk is cheap and frankly I'm tired of it, as most are. I want results, and even on a budget team there is no reason why we can't contend for a playoff spot. Year four of the rebuild and we are 3 points from being in last spot.
I want results to, don't care who plays who we trade or if we have to win 1-0. The question is why are we this bad (again)? This won't be a popular commentary. I think we have more talent than we have had since our WCF run but we are getting less out of it. Tip got more out of what we had and Tocc gets less out of what we have. The Islanders are fine without Taveras partly because Trotz is a great coach. Our team would have more points if Tip was still the coach, he did more with less. Look at all the players that had career years under Tip. How many are having career years under Tocc?

Verdict is still out, but the coaching change might have been the biggest mistake of all. Flame away:)
 

Jamieh

Registered User
Apr 25, 2012
11,234
6,261
For Dvorak, we are talking two separate things - his back was why he was shut down last year, and then he tore his pectoral muscle. Your argument would have some merit if it was his back in 2018, and then his back progressively got worse heading into this season.

You still didn't even answer the question of "what other pieces were we supposed to surround ourselves with to be able to have something to help out with injuries?" Obviously, injuries happen, but every team is hamstrung by 50 contracts, and I highly doubt that any player of significant quality was going to sign here if we told them the spiel of "We like you as a player, but we mainly need you to be our 13th forward in case injuries happen." We prepared ourselves as best as possible, in that regard, because as you said, we added more talent to total the 12 forwards that are out there, but kept Archibald and Cousins (presumably) as our 13th and 14th forwards. Same on defense - we added Lyubushkin as an 8th D and Connauton remained our 7th D. So, in what way did we not prepare ourselves for injury, Jake? The only exception that could be said is that we didn't add talented 13th and 14th forwards, but that comes with a cost, being a budget team and all.

Regarding Strome, you don't care to argue, b/c like many others, you want to turn this into a situation where the coaches and management are the only ones to blame and none falls on the player. Why is it so hard to understand that if a player doesn't commit himself fully, then the coaching staff has every right to sit him or put him on a lower line until he gets his act together? Read this article - granted it was from a fired coach of the Leafs but there are key excerpts in there, such as:

His major gripe, he said, was Kadri didn’t backcheck when he was asked to.

“If we had drawn a hard line with him and sent him down to the minors and made an example of him early on in his career, he might not be doing these things now,” Wilson said. “He might have been reformed.”

Wilson admitted that Kadri’s fitness has improved, but “he’s still making the mistakes he made as a rookie.”

Former Maple Leafs coach Ron Wilson calls Nazem Kadri 'difficult' - TheHockeyNews

Or this:

Taylor Hall says he didn't want a "dialogue" with his coaches with Edmonton Oilers

Taylor Hall on how much he listens to New Jersey coach John Hynes as opposed to how much he listened to his Oilers coaches: “He’s probably given me the most accountability that any coach I had in Edmonton. I really think that’s been good for me personally. Just in Edmonton, I really didn’t want to talk to coaches. I didn’t really want to have dialogue with coaches. I just wanted to play. And a lot of guys are like that.”

Hall basically outright said that he didn't care to listen to his coaches.

To outright assume that everything falls on the coaches shoulders is a 100% incorrect narrative. Players with all the skill and talent in the world didn't always listen to what was said. Part of that is growing up and maturing as a player and as an adult. Is it any surprise that once traded, there was probably an internal judgment on Hall's part to say that maybe he needed to hold himself accountable for his actions, which may be exactly what shook out with Strome's trade to Chicago?

So ask yourself, if you were the coach, and these quotes from other stories applied to the relationship between Strome and management - what do you do? I have to believe that every single one of us would suggest TRADING THAT PLAYER. And that is exactly what happened. I still think that Strome can play, maybe not as a true #1 C, but that is dependent on how he matures as a player and person. But I also think that it was not an absolute black and white scenario where our coaches did everything wrong and Dylan did everything right. Rather, there was a combination of factors that led to us not seeing Strome as part of the long-term plan, and I am certain that Dylan didn't see himself as a part of the Arizona team long-term either.
Not really sure I understand Wilson on Kadri??? He spent over half of his first two pro seasons in the minors and one third of season 3. I think the Leaf's developed him well and it really bears fruit now.
 

Dr VinnyBoombatz

formerly ctwin22
Mar 21, 2008
10,912
6,447
Chandler, AZ
Verdict is still out, but the coaching change might have been the biggest mistake of all. Flame away:)

Right decision, wrong choice

Tippett wasn't the answer and Tocchett isn't either. Time to get a coach that: 1 - has proven to be a winning coach 2 - coaches an uptempo style 3 - proven to develop youth. Unless they check all those 3 boxes - we don't want them. Neither Tippett nor Tocchett check all 3 boxes...I'd argue that both of them only check 1 box.
 

BUX7PHX

Registered User
Jul 7, 2011
5,581
1,350
Not really sure I understand Wilson on Kadri??? He spent over half of his first two pro seasons in the minors and one third of season 3. I think the Leaf's developed him well and it really bears fruit now.

To your point, this may be one of those things where Wilson felt that he needed to be with the Marlies from Day 1 in the 11-12 season. Maybe there was an influence on the management side to keep him up when the coach wanted him down because of his reluctance to listen. That could be a coach/management problem and could be a coach/player problem. For the sake of the Leafs, they didn't trade Kadri and Wilson was let go. Remember that they also hit rock-bottom as a result, but that brought Matthews aboard. It could be that Strome follows the same path of being ineffective in his first few years in the league, only to become a better player down the line. Maybe Wilson's message did get across, as Kadri became a better player in the 12-13 season. Maybe it was a different set of eyes looking at Kadri and giving other opportunities or Kadri himself committing to better things in the offseason.

As far as development goes, it could also be that Kadri has benefited more from not being the #1 C, as Matthews being on board has actually made Kadri a more effective player. He reduced his ATOI from the 15-16 season by 1.5 mins/game and his scoring clip has gone up.

Hard to say, but the overall point was that players and coaches aren't always 100% eye-to-eye. There could even be a perception that Kadri wasn't at a high enough standard for Wilson, but Wilson's standards were too high (which could also very well be the case for Arizona's management with Strome). There are many times when players and coaches aren't always on the same page, but was this a Wilson problem, a Kadri problem, or was it a bit of both? I think in the end, there is usually a mix of blame to go around, and it gets frustrating to hear people assume that this is all on coaching or management, when the player has a role in it as well.
 

cobra427

Registered User
May 6, 2012
9,327
3,347
Right decision, wrong choice

Tippett wasn't the answer and Tocchett isn't either. Time to get a coach that: 1 - has proven to be a winning coach 2 - coaches an uptempo style 3 - proven to develop youth. Unless they check all those 3 boxes - we don't want them. Neither Tippett nor Tocchett check all 3 boxes...I'd argue that both of them only check 1 box.
How do you know Tip wasn't the answer? I never thought Tip was the problem and I was never convinced Tocc was the solution. I was hoping he was, I like him, but he might not be the solution, and he might be the problem. Duke/Domi/Reider/Duclair/OEL had good years under Tip, none did well under Tocc. All were young when they started, keep that in mind as far as "the can't develop youth" argument.
 

Name Nameless

Don't go more than 10 seconds back on challenges
Apr 12, 2017
6,548
3,004
Voted for everything. Surprised to see I was the only one.

But honestly, I think it is the low $, combined with key injuries- this team is in a way a gamble: if it has less key players injured than the other teams, the lack of dollars can be hidden. With a high number of injuries, it looks very much more exposed.

Don't really think the GM and coaching are so bad. Except some unlucky trades, and 5 on 5. Minor things.:naughty:
 
Last edited:

Dr VinnyBoombatz

formerly ctwin22
Mar 21, 2008
10,912
6,447
Chandler, AZ
How do you know Tip wasn't the answer? I never thought Tip was the problem and I was never convinced Tocc was the solution. I was hoping he was, I like him, but he might not be the solution, and he might be the problem. Duke/Domi/Reider/Duclair/OEL had good years under Tip, none did well under Tocc. All were young when they started, keep that in mind as far as "the can't develop youth" argument.

Duke/Domi/Reider also "regressed" under Tippett. Also, Tippett didn't exactly play an uptempo style of hockey that was entertaining. Please name 1 Forward whether it was in Dallas or with the Coyotes where you could say that Tippett developed him?

he stuck Turris on bottom lines, Duke played great 1st year and then went into the tank, as a matter of fact, both Duke & Domi were great early and then faded. Maybe because Tippett took the creativity out of their games, controlling them into what he wanted.

Rieder's injury robbed him of the only thing that made him useful, so no one to blame on that one.

Again, Tippett wasn't the answer and neither is Tocchett. Neither coach is what we need.
 

Tom Polakis

Eternal Optimist
Nov 24, 2008
4,495
3,736
Tempe, AZ
This was the first season since 1996 in which I finally acknowledged that this will never be better than a bubble team. I cast votes for coaching an injuries, but far and away the problem is budget, and it's not only player salaries. Everything is bare bones, and I don't see it changing.

Anyway, I know which choice this guy did not vote for.

yig9oYj.jpg
 

ParisSaintGermain

Registered User
Jan 19, 2004
5,408
1,682
Arizona Coyotes shuffle line combos, preach on missed shots - Arizona Sports

“We had Richie [Brad Richardson] and Grabs [Michael Grabner] together there and then Grabs goes down, we’re looking to see Kells [Clayton Keller] and Schmaltzy [Nick Schmaltz] together and hopefully they can get some magic in their game,” MacLean said. “Step’s [Derek Stepan] been pretty good with Fisch [Christian Fischer], it’s been older guy, younger guy together."

You would think this quote comes from a random guy in your local bar who perhaps had too many pints but hey this is John MacLean, ladies and gentlemen.

We have the deadly cocktail of a country club tonic sprinkled with analytics going down at the moment. Let's not be too surprised if this sort of style does not really speak to the younger players.
 

BUX7PHX

Registered User
Jul 7, 2011
5,581
1,350
Duke/Domi/Reider also "regressed" under Tippett. Also, Tippett didn't exactly play an uptempo style of hockey that was entertaining. Please name 1 Forward whether it was in Dallas or with the Coyotes where you could say that Tippett developed him?

he stuck Turris on bottom lines, Duke played great 1st year and then went into the tank, as a matter of fact, both Duke & Domi were great early and then faded. Maybe because Tippett took the creativity out of their games, controlling them into what he wanted.

Rieder's injury robbed him of the only thing that made him useful, so no one to blame on that one.

Again, Tippett wasn't the answer and neither is Tocchett. Neither coach is what we need.

Obviously, Tippett had the mindset that the NHL is not a place for development. And I think it can be agreed upon. That's why there is minors in baseball, an NBA developmental league, and college/junior options for hockey. In the NFL, there is a mandate of 3 years in college before you can declare for the draft, so these are the areas where development comes into play. Obviously, there is still some development, but most of that is the individual gaining strength and getting "bigger, stronger, faster" as opposed to working on their development of hockey sense or things like that. I think that many confuse the idea of development as being how to understand a system, which most players are exposed to in juniors or higher levels of hockey prior to reaching the NHL, so there isn't quite as much development to demand at the NHL level.

To answer the question though, there isn't a single player that he has developed, but ask yourself this - has Babcock "developed" Matthews or Marner all that much, or are they just immensely talented players who did their work in the offseason to fix aspects of their game? Compare that to someone like a Schlemko or Stone, who needed additional time in juniors, as well as some seasoning in the AHL before being ready for consistent NHL duty. Their development happened in San Antonio and not necessarily the NHL. That's why people tend to confuse this idea that the NHL is supposed to be for developing. There can be small amounts of development, but 90-100% of their development should be done already. If a player is in the NHL and is only 50% developed, he isn't going to make it and there should be little expectation that the remaining 50% of his development should happen at the NHL level. That should for overage years in juniors or college, followed by some potential additional time as a professional in the AHL, ECHL, or overseas.
 

cobra427

Registered User
May 6, 2012
9,327
3,347
Duke/Domi/Reider also "regressed" under Tippett. Also, Tippett didn't exactly play an uptempo style of hockey that was entertaining. Please name 1 Forward whether it was in Dallas or with the Coyotes where you could say that Tippett developed him?

he stuck Turris on bottom lines, Duke played great 1st year and then went into the tank, as a matter of fact, both Duke & Domi were great early and then faded. Maybe because Tippett took the creativity out of their games, controlling them into what he wanted.

Rieder's injury robbed him of the only thing that made him useful, so no one to blame on that one.

Again, Tippett wasn't the answer and neither is Tocchett. Neither coach is what we need.
Duke/Domi/Reider regressed way more under Tocc. Look at Domi this year, and I forgot Martinook. Style of hockey doesn't matter to me, or who plays, only wins. The NHL isn't a development league. Yandle also thrived under Tip but not so much elsewhere. Turris didn't want to be here, can't blame Tip for that.

My point is, generally Tip got more out of his teams, and his players, many had career years in AZ, then went elsewhere and didn't do as well. Tocc might have the opposite effect, under performing team and players that get moved play better elsewhere. Tip never had this kind of talent, he did it with mirrors mostly.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->