Vogl occupies a similar mindspace as Bill Hoppe for me. Great when he's reporting facts, but I have no time for his analysis. Frankly, I'd rather get my takes from this board, hockey twitter, and select analytics/national folks than most of this team's most-visible reporters.
Again, I don't expect an accurate overview of team culture from someone who has already been loudly defensive of Housley, and who was so involved in the Lehner piece. This is the kind of take that's expected of someone who has already excused a major factor of poor team performance, and who can't comment on another.
Like, just looking at Lehner alone, you have a guy who:
- Was comparatively worse at his job than O'Reilly (by a lot)
- Plays the position most capable of dragging down a team
- Was in the process of dealing with substance and mental issues
- Did not possess what we think of as "good teammate body language" on the ice
- Was probably the most publicly shaded by his teammates
And yet, we're here talking about O'Reilly being a downer. The annoying part is, that analysis doesn't even line up with why the team has been competent.
Unless you think 90 would have poisoned the well with the new acquisitions, virtually every reason we've been good is either new or was already good on the team O'Reilly supposedly sucked the life out of. The only notable exceptions are Girgensons and Beaulieu, and each are finally getting more focused roles. The depth from the Blues deal hasn't even been much of a factor, as Thompson & Sobotka have been sub-replacement.
The biggest positive from the trade - that you probably won't be hearing from Vogl anytime soon - is that it's saved Housley from himself. Skinner has forced Phil to balance offensive deployments across his top six, and Rodrigues' apparent emergence as a checker means that he finally has a defensive unit involving none of his key offensive players.
I'm not sure any of that happens if O'Reilly and his 60% win rate is still around for defensive zone faceoffs.
