You are remembering this very wrong. Under Hartley the word "defence" did not exist. The hockey was fun to watch because it was complete pond hockey and the season we made the playoffs we had insane puck luck.
I'll take a more boring hockey style if it means we play actual ****ing defence.
Well I'd prefer a mix of both. But the offense was high-flying and fun. We were the comeback kids.
I remember endless frustrating low-scoring boring hockey after 2004 SCF run. Only players I really miss from the late 2000s era was Langkow, early years Phaneuf, Conroy and Iginla.
It was fun having a formidable, big defense. But by the time Regehr was traded to LA his legs were pretty much done. Surprised he won a cup, and glad for him because he was great for us for quite a stretch. We found a way to make Bowmeester average who ended up being known, mainly, for logging a lot of ice-time. The last 3 years in Calgary Iggy was pretty much just plugging in 30 goal seasons but otherwise had lost his forceful ways.
I couldn't handle any more Sutter hockey of 2-1 and 1-0 and 0-1 and the odd 3-2. After a decade and a half just couldn't do it anymore, though I'd dumbly watch in boredom.
But hey, after all that, if he would let us use our offense I'd consider Darryl back or maybe Brent. If it would straighten this group out. I'd honestly bear it again to win. I'm just not sure it would make that big of a difference for dreadful dump and chase, grind it out Sutter hockey though.