The disappearing act of Gustav Nyquist

[Rzombo4 prez]

I don't think I need to write an essay about the problems with Blashill's coaching in every thread. You can't compare the AHL to the NHL. Nyquist would do just fine right now if he was in the top 1% of most skilled NHLers like he was in the AHL. I don't think it's a coincidence that Tatar and Nyquist have both been struggling under Blash. We dump the puck way too much and have poor puck support, this hurts everyone but especially the smaller guys that can't win those puck battles. The D isn't great but they can handle more than making a slap-pass to the offensive blue-line for a tip-in (essentially dump-and-chase). With our speed, we should be having our forwards come way deeper into the d-zone to pick up the puck than they are. There are things you can change even if you don't have Erik Karlsson and Kris Letang back there making outlet passes. We had a better transition game with Babcock, and it wasn't all because Kronwall was better. Back then, Dekeyser and Ericsson looked like decent outlet passers too. It's all about the structure of the system.

Not that Gus himself isn't responsible too. He's not shooting the puck nearly enough. He's not playing with confidence. He's got a bad habit of holding onto the puck for too long.

Ah, you want them to come lower so that the opponent is guaranteed to have at least three men stacked behind the puck? What a great recipe for neutral zone turnovers and winning hockey. Our wings could not collapse any lower in the defensive zone in case you haven't been watching. Bringing our wings lower on the regroup just makes it easier for our opponents to clog the neutral zone.

The transition game you are pining for under Babcock was not materially different than the **** show we are watching now and is no explanation for Gus' decrease in production. He ****ing invented the tip-in stretch pass after they took out the redline and obsesses about turning defensemen and making teams work 200 feet. We had very little transition offense under Babcock. What little we had came from turnovers in the neutral zone, not our defensive end. I don't know why you are somehow expecting more now when we had little under Babcock.

Our transition game sucks because our defense simply cannot beat the fore check on a regular basis and get the numbers working in our favor.

 

[HockeyinHD]

no, you've waived those claims, because it makes holland look better.

Well, better than the people here who leap on even the smallest perceived failure as a reason to eviscerate him, anyway.

A low bar, to be sure.

even 'decent middle 6 forward' would've been was one of the top 4-5 players on that wings roster. we had AHL-caliber players starting on our 3rd line that season.

A) He's a decent middle 6 forward now. He has a moderate track record to suggest this. He did not have that track record then.

B) Nyquist lost his spot when the team brought in Alfredsson and/or Weiss. Playing a guy like Nyquist on a 4th line with plugs for his NHL debut was a stupid idea then and remains stupid in hindsight. That's such an obvious argument it amazes me how often it needs to be repeated.

laughable. about that caliber players (as in not clear top liners) got 1st or 2nd rounder (and sometimes more than that) 6 times last TDL or in weeks before it.

6 whole times in a period first explained as 'not top liners' which is different than 'decent middle 6' obviously, and then expanded over a time frame to include 'weeks before it (the deadline)', and then being wholly unsubstantiated to boot? Why, that's about as common as hitting water when you fall out of a boat. Not a reach at all!

Purcell drew a 3rd, Stempniak a 4th, and I honestly don't remember any forwards going for 1's or 2's besides Hudler and Staal, and I don't even think either of them landed a 1.

If Detroit got lucky they could move Nyquist for a 3. I mostly think he'd pull a 4. I don't think his contract helps his value much right now, though. If he was a rental he'd be more of a 3. There's absolutely no way someone would trade a 2 for him. None.

 

[HockeyinHD]

Our transition game sucks because our defense simply cannot beat the fore check on a regular basis and get the numbers working in our favor.

They not only can't beat a half-decent forecheck this year... they can't do anything more than get throttled by it without at least 1 if not 2 forwards in to help them fish out the puck.

If an opponent runs two forecheckers into the zone it's a madhouse to clear the puck 75% of the time, and by the time it is cleared, oh look... line change time.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Ah, you want them to come lower so that the opponent is guaranteed to have at least three men stacked behind the puck? What a great recipe for neutral zone turnovers and winning hockey. Our wings could not collapse any lower in the defensive zone in case you haven't been watching. Bringing our wings lower on the regroup just makes it easier for our opponents to clog the neutral zone.

We don't have the talent to play a quick transition game, but our forwards speed is being wasted when they're standing still on the offensive blueline tipping in pucks. We need to attack with speed. It's not collapsing, I'm talking about those times when we go for a controlled breakout. If the other team clogs the neutral zone, dump the puck in as you have guys going up the ice WITH SPEED.

These two plays by AA show some of what I'm talking about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zexrgE-7OaE&t=8m30s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEGplNmdxws

As does this goal by Larkin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29-OaNeEiik

Let these speedsters wind up and give them the puck. The other team can stand still on their blueline all they want, using speed is how you punish them for that. I find it very frustrating that we have 3 of the top 10-20 fastest guys in the league and it just doesn't show. Mantha, Nielsen, Nyquist, Tatar etc aren't exactly slow either.

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

We don't have the talent to play a quick transition game, but our forwards speed is being wasted when they're standing still on the offensive blueline tipping in pucks. We need to attack with speed. It's not collapsing, I'm talking about those times when we go for a controlled breakout. If the other team clogs the neutral zone, dump the puck in as you have guys going up the ice WITH SPEED.

These two plays by AA show some of what I'm talking about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zexrgE-7OaE&t=8m30s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEGplNmdxws

As does this goal by Larkin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29-OaNeEiik

Let these speedsters wind up and give them the puck. The other team can stand still on their blueline all they want, using speed is how you punish them for that. I find it very frustrating that we have 3 of the top 10-20 fastest guys in the league and it just doesn't show. Mantha, Nielsen, Nyquist, Tatar etc aren't exactly slow either.

The only reason the team can even regroup (or "wind up" as you say) in two of those clips is because LA makes a line change and because Toronto and Det are 4 on 4. Furthermore, those plays are far more of a function of the respective passes than Larkin and AA's speed. If you want to replicate those plays you need to find a way to consistently get people in position to make those passes in a properly timed fashion (which is far easier said than done and far more complicated than simply "winding up").

You fail to appreciate just how easy it is to defend the neutral zone and force the dump when you have five guys behind the puck actually ready to defend. This is where that illusive structure truly comes into play.

 

[PuckDynasty]

Everyone has regressed under Blashill. Not sure what he's still doing here.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

With our offence (which is our biggest problem right now), Vanek and Neilsen are great FA adds, Larkin, Mantha and AA are young, but solid, Abby and Helm are what they are, shouldn't have been extended as they were, but it is what it is. Glendening, Miller, even Ott are bit players. Where we've fallen down is in the Nyquist/Tatar/Jurco/Sheahan range. We were counting on Nyquist and Tatar to be the new Z and Dats (rightly or wrongly), and they haven't.

I don't think we were counting on that even just offensively. However, I thought both guys (Tatar and Nyquist) would be more successful than they are right now. They haven't really added much to their games since they became chalk talk players and it shows. D's plan to stop Tatar and Nyquist and they have not adapted to that in my opinion.

 

[Whoshattenkirkshoes]

How can't people tell that the guy just sucks at hockey. All you have to do is watch the games.

 

[Pavels Dog]

The only reason the team can even regroup (or "wind up" as you say) in two of those clips is because LA makes a line change and because Toronto and Det are 4 on 4. Furthermore, those plays are far more of a function of the respective passes than Larkin and AA's speed. If you want to replicate those plays you need to find a way to consistently get people in position to make those passes in a properly timed fashion (which is far easier said than done and far more complicated than simply "winding up").

You fail to appreciate just how easy it is to defend the neutral zone and force the dump when you have five guys behind the puck actually ready to defend. This is where that illusive structure truly comes into play.

You missed the point by trying to pick apart those specific plays. We can definitely attack as a more cohesive unit that better utilizes the speed of our forwards, instead of sticking two wingers to the offensive blueline and having a d-man try to hit them with a slapshot.
If you're going to play dump-and-chase hockey, the key is to actually get guys with speed going into the o-zone so they can get to pucks ahead of the d-men. We frequently fail brutally at this simple thing, even on the powerplay.
Part of why the top line has been good since Mantha stepped in is because he actually has the speed, size and reach to get to pucks and out-battle the opposition. But you can't have a team with 20 guys that have the physical tools of Anthony Mantha. It's not a winning strategy.

But I realize it's pointless trying to argue on this board that Blashill is a major problem and one of the biggest reasons we are this bad. I mean, after all he's coaching the same system as Cooper and look at Tampa.

 

[InjuredChoker]

red wings are tied for 26th in points per game.

how many teams above them don't have single elite player, legit 1st line forward or pairing defenseman?

 

[RedWingsfan55]

Nyquist is absolutely useless. I've been saying this for a while now, the guy literally brings nothing to the table.

He loses every single puck battle he is in. Every single one..

Careful though, some posters on this site still defend Nyquist for some strange reason.

I wouldn't say he is useless teams need third line players. Problem is the wings have 17 third line players...

 

[odin1981]

Its pretty bad when our top 6 only has about 2.5 top 6 players on it. Aside from Green we don't really have a d-man who can pass (kronner still can but his skating or lack there of can't really make the time or skate to open a lane up anymore). The skill is gone.

They need quite a bit more skill in very important places. Z won't be much effective longer this season either cause his back will start depreciating in the next 10 games or so too.

So if you look forward we have our #2 center as Z who is getting worse and worse every year who will need to be replaced, a #1 center, and 3/4 of our top 4 d especially our top unit cause Green will walk outta here quickly when his deal is up. It very well looks like this will have to be a 7+ year rebuild. And our prospect pipeline is empty as ****.

 

[HIFE]

...But I realize it's pointless trying to argue on this board that Blashill is a major problem and one of the biggest reasons we are this bad. I mean, after all he's coaching the same system as Cooper and look at Tampa.

Your analysis of tactics is appreciated but I think you're placing too much weight on them being a factor to Nyquist struggling as an effective forward. 100% of fans agree, Blashill blows. It still isn't an answer to the larger part of the equation- why our players are collectively this impotent.

There's very little variance between NHL systems. Take Calgary, Islanders, Columbus, Washington, the Wings, etc. you'd have to really split hairs defining major differences in style of play. Sometimes the D hit an open man, who may dump it or create space to carry the puck. Other times it's a shot and tip in as described, on and on and on. Each team cycles back on forth with the same types of attempts.

Our problem? The forwards for the most part are either so decrepit they're wearing back braces to hold themselves upright or are total ******* under pressure who can't get themselves open or make a competent play to maintain possession. Recently this argument was raised: it's not our defense, who make standard breakout passes/chips/dumps etc. neutering the offense, but the inability of 90% of our forwards to do something unexpected/exceptional with the puck once it's on their blade. Our forwards don't have the brilliance or strength to win a board battle. In the neutral zone we get pinched constantly; the oppositions D can cheat more than usual against small, nonthreatening players. If you play the game you know what I'm saying.

As Nyquist's confidence dwindles so does his threat level in the NHL. His head-fakes aren't fooling anyone. I'd argue we don't even have a "chalkboard" level player worthy of consideration by other teams and haven't for some time. May be "keep an eye on the AA kid he's quick" or "pay attention when Green tries to rush in", but in general the Wings roster isn't looked at to be feared. Rather we're viewed as a must win and failure for not ripping away 2 points.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Your analysis of tactics is appreciated but I think you're placing too much weight on them being a factor to Nyquist struggling as an effective forward. 100% of fans agree, Blashill blows. It still isn't an answer to the larger part of the equation- why our players are collectively this impotent.

There's very little variance between NHL systems. Take Calgary, Islanders, Columbus, Washington, the Wings, etc. you'd have to really split hairs defining major differences in style of play. Sometimes the D hit an open man, who may dump it or create space to carry the puck. Other times it's a shot and tip in as described, on and on and on. Each team cycles back on forth with the same types of attempts.

Our problem? The forwards for the most part are either so decrepit they're wearing back braces to hold themselves upright or are total ******* under pressure who can't get themselves open or make a competent play to maintain possession. Recently this argument was raised: it's not our defense, who make standard breakout passes/chips/dumps etc. neutering the offense, but the inability of 90% of our forwards to do something unexpected/exceptional with the puck once it's on their blade. Our forwards don't have the brilliance or strength to win a board battle. In the neutral zone we get pinched constantly; the oppositions D can cheat more than usual against small, nonthreatening players. If you play the game you know what I'm saying.

As Nyquist's confidence dwindles so does his threat level in the NHL. His head-fakes aren't fooling anyone. I'd argue we don't even have a "chalkboard" level player worthy of consideration by other teams and haven't for some time. May be "keep an eye on the AA kid he's quick" or "pay attention when Green tries to rush in", but in general the Wings roster isn't looked at to be feared. Rather we're viewed as a must win and failure for not ripping away 2 points.

I can mostly agree with what you're saying and still think we're actually playing a style of hockey that doesn't suit the team and makes plenty of guys look worse than they actually are. Systems may not differ greatly, but there can still be major differences in how teams try to execute things like a dump-in, a controlled zone entry, a cycle, how they play zone defense, and obviously the powerplay. And of course it's up to the coach to get the players to execute.

Toronto last season was looked at as a must-win, easy 2 points. But they played with great structure, they outworked a lot of teams, they had some of the best possession metrics in the league. They just didn't have the skill/creativity to have much success. I don't think that's what going on with this team. We may not have an elite player in his prime, but that's not an excuse. Colorado's the worst team in the league and they arguably have 3-4 elite players. Arizona's 2nd worst and they have at least 1 in OEL. 1 or 2 or 3 elite players doesn't turn around a team that is badly coached. I've seen it many times in a workplace environment, a bad boss can make an entire workplace miserable and lower everyone's morale and performance. It doesn't mean everyone suddenly became terrible at their job.

 

[Frk It]

i can mostly agree with what you're saying and still think we're actually playing a style of hockey that doesn't suit the team and makes plenty of guys look worse than they actually are. Systems may not differ greatly, but there can still be major differences in how teams try to execute things like a dump-in, a controlled zone entry, a cycle, how they play zone defense, and obviously the powerplay. And of course it's up to the coach to get the players to execute.

Toronto last season was looked at as a must-win, easy 2 points. But they played with great structure, they outworked a lot of teams, they had some of the best possession metrics in the league. They just didn't have the skill/creativity to have much success. I don't think that's what going on with this team. We may not have an elite player in his prime, but that's not an excuse. Colorado's the worst team in the league and they arguably have 3-4 elite players. Arizona's 2nd worst and they have at least 1 in oel. 1 or 2 or 3 elite players doesn't turn around a team that is badly coached. I've seen it many times in a workplace environment, a bad boss can make an entire workplace miserable and lower everyone's morale and performance. It doesn't mean everyone suddenly became terrible at their job.

 

[Reddwit]

I think the calamity over Tatar and Nyquist is overblown. They're talented players but they will never be guys who can succeed no matter what type of game is played. I think they're a poor fit for this coach and the PP isn't creating any space for them either.

To me, they're another incarnation of Filppula and Hudler - guys who can put up 38 points or guys who can put up 58 - just depends on the environment.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Yeah. You think he's saying "I'm a terrible coach, it's all about the players"? He's saying the team didn't have the players to be good last year. Which is 100% true. Did you see that roster? The fact they even won a game is a testament to Babcock's coaching ability. Insert good players into good system = results.

 

[Frk It]

I think the calamity over Tatar and Nyquist is overblown. They're talented players but they will never be guys who can succeed no matter what type of game is played. I think they're a poor fit for this coach and the PP isn't creating any space for them either.

To me, they're another incarnation of Filppula and Hudler - guys who can put up 38 points or guys who can put up 58 - just depends on the environment.

The mood on them is very similar. Some are starting to turn on them, just like what happened with Filppula and Hudler over the years. Towards the end people were ready to drive them to the airport.

Then they went on to have a few productive seasons elsewhere. Filppula is even having a better season than Frans Nielsen right now.

 

[Frk It]

Yeah. You think he's saying "I'm a terrible coach, it's all about the players"? He's saying the team didn't have the players to be good last year. Which is 100% true. Did you see that roster? The fact they even won a game is a testament to Babcock's coaching ability. Insert good players into good system = results.

No he's saying, and he's said this many times, that it's more about good players than a good system. IIRC in an interview when he was coach here, he essentially said he would take good players over a good system any day.

Not sure why you are expecting one without the other.

 

[Pavels Dog]

No he's saying, and he's said this many times, that it's more about good players than a good system. IIRC in an interview when he was coach here, he essentially said he would take good players over a good system any day.

Not sure why you are expecting one without the other.

I think you're reading too much into comments like that. From his perspective, of course having good players is the most important part. Because that's the part he can't influence. He will always coach a good system, so he sees how different the results are depending on the quality of the players. It's like a master chef saying he'd rather have good quality food items rather than a great recipe. It's not the same as thinking the chef isn't extremely important in the way the food is handled, prepared, combined and cooked. Blashill may not have filèt mignon to work with but he's not preparing a very appetizing dish with what he does have.

 

[InjuredChoker]

avs don't have a single elite player on their roster. unless top 20 or so at particular position counts as elite.

biggest issue with the avs isn't coaching either. it's overall talent.

 

[Frk It]

I think you're reading too much into comments like that. From his perspective, of course having good players is the most important part. Because that's the part he can't influence. He will always coach a good system, so he sees how different the results are depending on the quality of the players. It's like a master chef saying he'd rather have good quality food items rather than a great recipe. It's not the same as thinking the chef isn't extremely important in the way the food is handled, prepared, combined and cooked. Blashill may not have filèt mignon to work with but he's not preparing a very appetizing dish with what he does have.

I guess we have a different expectation for what our ingredients should yield. Which is fine.

avs don't have a single elite player on their roster. unless top 20 or so at particular position counts as elite.

biggest issue with the avs isn't coaching either. it's overall talent.

They have a top 10 offensive defenseman IMO, and 2 pretty good young centers. They are underachieving similar to the Panthers and Sabres, IMO. Depth is pretty bad though, and goaltending has been awful.

Those teams should be expecting more with guys like Barkov, Ekblad, Eichel, Ristolainen, Mackinnon, Barrie, etc.

Not sure we should be expecting a lot more as well without those types of players.

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

But I realize it's pointless trying to argue on this board that Blashill is a major problem and one of the biggest reasons we are this bad. I mean, after all he's coaching the same system as Cooper and look at Tampa.

The issue isn't that you are criticizing Blashill, but that you are trying to hold him and him alone accountable for the sins of Holland and our players. We are where we are because of Holland. You, unfortunately, drank his Kool Aid all summer long and are far too committed in your defense of his every step and the streak to abandon ship at this point. I am sorry to be the one to tell you this, but this team just is not as good as you were told it was or wanted to believe it was. Had you shown any willingness to be critical of Holland or our personnel, you would have figured this out much earlier.

Is Blashill a good coach? No, not at this point, not at the NHL level. Our PP is awful and I do hold him primarily responsible for that. Will his replacement, however, get materially different results? Unlikely. Do you know why? At the highest level of sport there are no great coaches and no great systems, only great players. Hell, systems in hockey are at best guiding principles to be applied when the situation allows. This isn't football.

There is a very good reason that Blash (and Babcock before him) do what they do. Contrary to popular belief, they aren't total idiots. You are upset with our system because we lack the talent to do what you want us to with the regularity you want us to. Again, that is on Holland, not Blash. At the end of the day we are a team with no elite players, yet you expect us to play as if we were a team with elite players. If you want to consistently skate the puck into the offensive zone, we need to dramatically improve the talent level of the team and our ability to move the puck from the backend.

Blashill will be replaced. It may not happen until the end of the season, but he will be replaced. If you are expecting drastically different results from his successor in terms of outcome, style or system, you will be very disappointed. The best we can realistically hope for at this point is improved specialty teams.

 

[Henkka]

Todd Nelson has created AHL Best power-play (27.7%) at Grand Rapids. PK is 10th best (83.2%).

Blashill never had good power-play at Griffins, for reason or another.

Nelson will be quite sure next in line.

 

[RedWingzz]

Nyquist hasn't scored in ages, yet coach Jeffrey promotes him to the top line

Another classic by Blashill.