Wouldnt need to waive Jankowski to make way for forsberg or carrier. Both are still on active roster.
Interesting. And kind of weird that no news nore nothing on forsberg today...
its way best time to start the convo of trading Josi while he is at his peak
I mean.... you are going to have to send a 1st anyways to get rid of an 8M contract when the player has been a 40 point player 3 of the last 4 seasons (counting this one because unless Joey goes on one heck of a heater he will be in the 35-45 point range)
Tommy Novak is playing at a 57 pt pace- which is basically within 10% of Johansens best season with us and Hynes only plays him 12 min a night
Definitely a no to a buyout. We should've learned from the Turris buyout that it would be better to just ride out the rest of the contract or retain and dump him for nothing. More cap hurt for 2 years but not a cap hit for 6-8 years.
We haven't seen any reports that he's even been back at practice yet (and they were off today) , so don't count on seeing him playing any time soon.
Oh f*** sire. That is just wrong. Yall need him, hard. Lets see and follow life now
I disagree. The Preds do deploy an aggressive forecheck, but sometimes it feels like they deploy only for the sake of it. They like to finish all checks especially in the offensive zone but often that's not the smart play to do. You're getting left behind the play when it starts to move to the other end of the ice, and yes you're taking out one defender from their side as well but it's the team on the offense that benefits from having 4-on-4 rush rather than a 5-on-5.
I would have said the Turris buyout worked very nicely. Got rid of him as a distraction, opened up $4M of Cap space, and Poile usually sits on at least a $2M cushion anyway.
Considering both Jankowski and Tomasino were sent down, I suspect Jankowski is down to stay if he clears. I hope he does, Milwaukee has been doing alright, but giving up a lot of shots and maybe needs a little booster.
Can the coach get the players to buy in? I think it's how the plan is laid out and presented to the players and then the players responding to it.
That's where I was going with my comment. It's not the system, it's the execution. The reasons for the failure in execution are shared by everyone in that room and on the bench.
This is it exactly. The x's and o's of coaching are very simple and everybody at this level has absolute mastery of such things, and can pick and choose what to employ. Volunteer coaches in minor hockey know all the same stuff. But it's the choosing what ones to best fit the personnel, getting the buy-in, the carrots and the sticks employed along the way, the consistency, the adaptations and tweaks in game, all the rest of it that makes the difference. Hynes knows every x and o that was ever invented, I have no doubt of that. But he has lost the handle on knowing which ones to use for his team and how to get them to buy into it. And when that happens, you change coaches and try to find one who does.
This is a bit all over the place, full of hyperbole and conjecture, I'll try to narrow down my response.
I suspect... and this is just going to be all one big heap of speculation, all grains of salt necessary... that it will be tough to find a coach who really fits our team ideally.
From the outside looking in, or at least trying to look in, this seems accurate.I suspect... and this is just going to be all one big heap of speculation, all grains of salt necessary... that it will be tough to find a coach who really fits our team ideally.
It sure seems to me like we still have our leadership core of highly-paid stars who want to have the freedom to play their own game, like maybe how they imagine it works on other teams. Just... aside from Josi, they aren't really THAT good like those other big stars around the league? But along comes Hynes with his "Identity" and wants everybody to buy in and take pride in that team approach, and really, for several months to start last season it almost seemed to be working. The Herd Line was more important many nights than our Big Guns lines. Kids were stepping up from Milwaukee and fitting in. Everything was rolling. But after the break in February last year, the Big Guns took over again, and their personal stats went up. The team went down.
So how has Hynes handled that split this year? Well, he took a bunch of loyal footsoldier AHL tweeners into the lineup, guys who should heed his every word just because they are happy to be in the NHL. And allowed the stars to have no accountability. And held back some of the young players who might have been getting a little uppity and threatening the veterans' roles. So it became a mish-mash of both schools. A compromise that has so far worked out as the worst of both worlds.
I don't really know who is going to come in and fix it all as a coach. Poile has to step up and take some authoritative action IMO. He has to tell his coach that we're retooling here, we're willing to live with some mistakes from young players, you WILL play the young players. He has to make sure the veteran players understand that there won't be any two-tiered accountability anymore. Any veteran can be sat and crying to the GM about it won't be tolerated. He can trade/buyout a few more guys... he's still going to have Josi and Forsberg forever, though, so there's only so far he can take that part of things. But he does still have to bring in a new coach, because once a guy has lost the handle like Hynes has, there isn't really any going back. The next guy may or may not do any better. But that change has to be part of it. And maybe that's part of why they are waiting until the off-season, maybe it's just easier to do all that with a fresh season reset, as opposed to in mid-season.
I strongly disagree with his idea of packaging sweeteners to move the big contracts too. Very strongly disagree. Luke Evangelista as a sweetener to move Ryan Johansen? Hells no!!!I actually like Alex’s take in this article. The only thing I strongly disagree with is his opinion on the coach.
Step 2 and 3 kindof contradict a little with respect to granlund. Praises hynes for turning granlund back into a 60 point playmaking forward then immediately suggest we package him with incentives to get rid of his contract. If he was a 60 point playmaking forward at 5M caphit, he wouldnt need incentives packaged with him in a trade. Little bit of a nitpick but overall dont really disagree with the article (other than giving too much credit to hynes in some spots). Hynes didnt develop Carrier. The Milwaukee admirals coaching staff did.I actually like Alex’s take in this article. The only thing I strongly disagree with is his opinion on the coach.
