matt trick
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2007
- 9,779
- 1,381
A few (non-analytical; read as: likely biased!) perspectives that I think have contributed to Karlsson's underperformance:
1. Some puck luck. If there is a HDCA and Karlsson is on the ice, it seems like it goes in. He's legitimately at fault for some of those, but I'd say it will average out. Similarly, if Jones gives us a stinker, I tend to have a frustrating giggle when Karlsson ends up being on the ice.
2. Not playing behind Timo/Hertl/Couture. Maybe he is playing with them more, but it seems if Burns gets a point it's with those guys or the PP. Now Burns has been a big part of that domination, but that is clearly our best line.
3. Not on the first PP. For a while Labanc, Couture, Hertl/Thornton, and Pavs were rotated with Burns/Karlsson. Now it seems like it Burns and the first PP exclusively, with Karlsson playing with Kane, Donskoi, Meier, and Vlasic. Which group would you rather play with? I believe (with zero evidence) that keeping Karlsson will be conditional on getting him and Burns to run a PP, or figuring a way to split Couture/Labanc and Hertl/Pavs
4. Some Lazy/confused play. Totally have to admit that Karlsson has given up on plays that have resulted in goals. Similarly, he's been way out of position on a few.
5. The team still doesn't know how to leverage him. Kane not getting the pass through on the PP last night was frustrating. They hardly seem to find Karlsson on 3v3 or odd-man rushes. The team's cycle game seems inconsistent with the fly the zone role that he was so exceptional with in Ottawa. This could be because our team plays a heavy, methodical game, rather that a quick-strike one.
I sincerely hope we keep Karlsson, but even as a super-ardent supporter, have to admit it's frustrating. I do believe it will get figured out.
1. Some puck luck. If there is a HDCA and Karlsson is on the ice, it seems like it goes in. He's legitimately at fault for some of those, but I'd say it will average out. Similarly, if Jones gives us a stinker, I tend to have a frustrating giggle when Karlsson ends up being on the ice.
2. Not playing behind Timo/Hertl/Couture. Maybe he is playing with them more, but it seems if Burns gets a point it's with those guys or the PP. Now Burns has been a big part of that domination, but that is clearly our best line.
3. Not on the first PP. For a while Labanc, Couture, Hertl/Thornton, and Pavs were rotated with Burns/Karlsson. Now it seems like it Burns and the first PP exclusively, with Karlsson playing with Kane, Donskoi, Meier, and Vlasic. Which group would you rather play with? I believe (with zero evidence) that keeping Karlsson will be conditional on getting him and Burns to run a PP, or figuring a way to split Couture/Labanc and Hertl/Pavs
4. Some Lazy/confused play. Totally have to admit that Karlsson has given up on plays that have resulted in goals. Similarly, he's been way out of position on a few.
5. The team still doesn't know how to leverage him. Kane not getting the pass through on the PP last night was frustrating. They hardly seem to find Karlsson on 3v3 or odd-man rushes. The team's cycle game seems inconsistent with the fly the zone role that he was so exceptional with in Ottawa. This could be because our team plays a heavy, methodical game, rather that a quick-strike one.
I sincerely hope we keep Karlsson, but even as a super-ardent supporter, have to admit it's frustrating. I do believe it will get figured out.
