Stalberg

[Phototropic]

I'm mixed on Stalberg. He clearly can't finish. I've seen at least 4 breakaways go unconverted as well as the penalty shot where he looked completely uncomfortable. At the same time, it is unfortunate that he can't play with Smith, Wilson, Bourque, or Cullen as his speed alone would generate some opportunities. The 4th line can't even keep up with his transition game.

 

[Dave is a killer]

I'm mixed on Stalberg. He clearly can't finish. I've seen at least 4 breakaways go unconverted as well as the penalty shot where he looked completely uncomfortable. At the same time, it is unfortunate that he can't play with Smith, Wilson, Bourque, or Cullen as his speed alone would generate some opportunities. The 4th line can't even keep up with his transition game.

We need a guy who's smart enough to not get caught in the wrong position on his shots, because his chances/shots create even better chances afterwards

 

[PFL615]

Funny thing is other players don't finish a lot on breakaways and great scoring chances. So why do they get a pass on the negativity?

 

[Phototropic]

Funny thing is other players don't finish a lot on breakaways and great scoring chances. So why do they get a pass on the negativity?

I don't see that much negativity. Just an honest assessment by most of how he has played this year. I still like watching the guy and would also like to see him on a better line where I think he could succeed.

 

[NoNecksCurse]

i say we trade him at the deadline for a prospect/pick

 

[glenngineer]

i say we trade him at the deadline for a prospect/pick

I'd settle for a bag

 

[thecloser]

You also can't play a team sport and expect to be placed into your ideal perfect situation for any length of time. Lines and linemates are constantly shuffled, and production is expected regardless of who you are paired with. Guys like Spaling, Nystrom, and Goose have been putting up goals regardless of their situation, while the more-talented Stalberg, Wilson, Bourque, and Cullen have all failed to. Sure, you can dismiss their production as ugly, grinding, garbage goals, yet they have had enough success with it to make you wonder why the hell the latter four aren't sticking their ***** in front of the net and doing the same.

don't agree one bit with the bolded. look at Chicago, Colorado, Pittsburgh, NYR, SJ, LA, VAN, BOS, WAS, PHI, ANA and some other very talented squads. Their top 6 is just that, their top 6. it doesn't change unless injury. It's the same guys night in night out, not changing lines. They develop chemistry, know each other, know where they'll be, their strengths, weaknesses, etc. the top talented teams. Thats how you develop commaraderie and get better. ******* switching lines every night. stick with things that work, not just doing experiments and hoping.

 

[Bringer of Jollity]

don't agree one bit with the bolded. look at Chicago, Colorado, Pittsburgh, NYR, SJ, LA, VAN, BOS, WAS, PHI, ANA and some other very talented squads. Their top 6 is just that, their top 6. it doesn't change unless injury. It's the same guys night in night out, not changing lines. They develop chemistry, know each other, know where they'll be, their strengths, weaknesses, etc. the top talented teams. Thats how you develop commaraderie and get better. ******* switching lines every night. stick with things that work, not just doing experiments and hoping.

Many of those teams have players that are constant fixtures in the top 6, but the exact top 6 is not consistently static in composition. Sutter has no problem mixing up his top 6 lineup and dropping or raising a player here and there and fiddling with the chemistry when needed. The players that tend to be constant fixtures in those roles also have very specific reasons for being there. You're not exactly going to play a Patrick Kane on a checking line, for example. Problem for Stalberg is, he can't even prove he's a better player than a Nick Spaling at this point, let alone justify being handed a consistent top 6 role.

 

[glenngineer]

Many of those teams have players that are constant fixtures in the top 6, but the exact top 6 is not consistently static in composition. Sutter has no problem mixing up his top 6 lineup and dropping or raising a player here and there and fiddling with the chemistry when needed. The players that tend to be constant fixtures in those roles also have very specific reasons for being there. You're not exactly going to play a Patrick Kane on a checking line, for example. Problem for Stalberg is, he can't even prove he's a better player than a Nick Spaling at this point, let alone justify being handed a consistent top 6 role.

Maybe Spaling has and always will be the better player?

 

[PFL615]

Maybe Spaling has and always will be the better player?

Doubt it Spaling has barely sniffed over 20 points in a season. Stalberg has doubled him with 43 points.

You would expect Spaling to put up more numbers since he was taken in the 2nd round compared to the 6th round pick in Stalberg.

It's obvious if given a chance and used correctly Stalberg would be the least of the Nashville Predators worries.

 

[Drake744]

When he was with Chicago, he was an odd man out because of an extremely talented roster. Now he's an under-performing bottom liner? Did he become a different player overnight? No. In Chicago he was able to play in a system that highlights what he brings to the table, he just had too many guys in front of him. He doesn't fit here because Trotz is scared to death of not sacrificing offensive potential in exchange for necessary two-way hockey, no matter the player.

 

[PFL615]

Many of those teams have players that are constant fixtures in the top 6, but the exact top 6 is not consistently static in composition. Sutter has no problem mixing up his top 6 lineup and dropping or raising a player here and there and fiddling with the chemistry when needed. The players that tend to be constant fixtures in those roles also have very specific reasons for being there. You're not exactly going to play a Patrick Kane on a checking line, for example. Problem for Stalberg is, he can't even prove he's a better player than a Nick Spaling at this point, let alone justify being handed a consistent top 6 role.

Your post completely different from what you where saying before. So it goes from lines are swapped all the time and players cannot expect to play on ideal lines to they are not "consistently static in composition"

So you don't play Kane on a checking line but it's ok to put Stalberg, Smith, FF, and many others and expect them to produce? Especially after you sign a guy and make it seem like he is going to be a big part of the offense.

 

[Bringer of Jollity]

Your post completely different from what you where saying before. So it goes from lines are swapped all the time and players cannot expect to play on ideal lines to they are not "consistently static in composition"

So you don't play Kane on a checking line but it's ok to put Stalberg, Smith, FF, and many others and expect them to produce? Especially after you sign a guy and make it seem like he is going to be a big part of the offense.

Two different things. Line shuffling happens all the time in the NHL, with nearly every coach in the league. That said, you're also likely to find players like Toews, Kane, Kopitar, Getzlaf, etc... consistently playing top 6 minutes.

I don't see what the disconnect here is, though. Stalberg's nowhere close to the level of those guys to warrant getting top 6 time absent of production. He also doesn't have any particular skillset that makes him a necessary fixture in the top 6 or the PP, minus his speed, which he lacks the finish to capitalize on.

 

[PFL615]

Two different things. Line shuffling happens all the time in the NHL, with nearly every coach in the league. That said, you're also likely to find players like Toews, Kane, Kopitar, Getzlaf, etc... consistently playing top 6 minutes.

I don't see what the disconnect here is, though. Stalberg's nowhere close to the level of those guys to warrant getting top 6 time absent of production. He also doesn't have any particular skillset that makes him a necessary fixture in the top 6 or the PP, minus his speed, which he lacks the finish to capitalize on.

Actually they don't most teams keep guys together and build chemistry and consistency. So tell me who plays top 6 minutes for the Nashville Predators who have a particular skillset, have finish, and capitalize on it?

 

[Predsrule]

His cap isn't huge by any means. I say we give him another year b4 we ship him of for free.

 

[Bringer of Jollity]

Actually they don't most teams keep guys together and build chemistry and consistency. So tell me who plays top 6 minutes for the Nashville Predators who have a particular skillset, have finish, and capitalize on it?

Frankly, we don't have much of anything on the forward end of that caliber. Nobody with a real great shot, nobody who is a go-to playmaker, only one player who's a screener/deflection guy. Due to this, I wouldn't expect our lines to be set. That said, some combo of:

Fisher
Legwand/Cullen
Hornqvist
Smith
Wilson
Bourque
Stalberg
Spaling
Beck/FF (when called up)

From that group, you could make a reasonable case for Fisher, Legwand, Hornqvist and Smith getting consistent top 6 time, but I think it's open from there.

 

[tinkezione]

When he was with Chicago, he was an odd man out because of an extremely talented roster. Now he's an under-performing bottom liner? Did he become a different player overnight? No. In Chicago he was able to play in a system that highlights what he brings to the table, he just had too many guys in front of him. He doesn't fit here because Trotz is scared to death of not sacrificing offensive potential in exchange for necessary two-way hockey, no matter the player.

I might be totally out in the woods, then, but I'd see one possible conclusion could be that in Chicago it was partly that his confidence got slowly destroyed by being trapped behind too many guys ahead, and partly that he seemed to get quite frustrated at the end (the incident in playoffs, for example) and in Nashville with the current Trotz system, he has a fair share of difficulties in rebuilding his confidence because he cannot rely on his strengths?

Thanks for the discussion that opened up from my simple question: it's just too bad to see a talented guy like him having a season like this. Frankly, I was expecting much more of him right off the bat.

 

[thecloser]

Two different things. Line shuffling happens all the time in the NHL, with nearly every coach in the league. That said, you're also likely to find players like Toews, Kane, Kopitar, Getzlaf, etc... consistently playing top 6 minutes.

I don't see what the disconnect here is, though. Stalberg's nowhere close to the level of those guys to warrant getting top 6 time absent of production. He also doesn't have any particular skillset that makes him a necessary fixture in the top 6 or the PP, minus his speed, which he lacks the finish to capitalize on.

no he's not as talented as those guys but he's one of the most talented on our team so he should be getting top 6 minutes. ridiculous.

 

[Armourboy]

I haven't been impressed with him but tbh I think its partially his fault and partially Trotz fault. The guy was signed to be a top 6 forward, yet his has had relatively few games to get or play top 6 minutes. I understand he maybe hasn't done as well as people hoped, but you know, when you give a guy that kind of money, put him on the line he should be on and let him prove himself or fail.

At this point of the season its over anyways, why not just throw him on it for a stretch and see what happens. If he fails completely then you trade or bury the guy, but if he doesn't then maybe you have found part of the solution.

Its really hard for me to completely blame a guy for not putting up numbers when he is anything but a grinder buried on a grinder line. Let him sink or swim, but let him do it from a position of strength rather than a position of weakness.

 

[PFL615]

I haven't been impressed with him but tbh I think its partially his fault and partially Trotz fault. The guy was signed to be a top 6 forward, yet his has had relatively few games to get or play top 6 minutes. I understand he maybe hasn't done as well as people hoped, but you know, when you give a guy that kind of money, put him on the line he should be on and let him prove himself or fail.

At this point of the season its over anyways, why not just throw him on it for a stretch and see what happens. If he fails completely then you trade or bury the guy, but if he doesn't then maybe you have found part of the solution.

Its really hard for me to completely blame a guy for not putting up numbers when he is anything but a grinder buried on a grinder line. Let him sink or swim, but let him do it from a position of strength rather than a position of weakness.

Well said!