I'd like to see a fast team, with reasonable size, who have a very high hockey IQ and skill level. I want a bunch of guys who are hard workers, who loathe losing. And guys who are flexible - guys who have enough skill and hockey IQ to play more than one style, and can adapt to the changing philosophy in the NHL.
Basically quick, always moving their feet, aggressive on the puck carrier and in the offensive zone, strong passing (especially coming out of the defensive zone and setting up in the offensive zone and PP) and fun to watch.
Who wouldn't love that? But short of the olympic team, I don't think you'll get a full roster of guys like this anywhere, sadly.
In the years where we had Spezza and Fisher as our number 1 and 2 centres, I thought that one of the problems the team had was that the style that best suited one of them didn't suit the other at all well. That made it hard to move wingers up and down, develop a consistent attack, deal with injuries, etc.
I think we are pretty fortunate at the moment that, while Spezza and Turris are quite different players, they are at least close enough that our top lines can have a more consistent style. Add in Karlson, who is a truly elite high-skill player, and I think there is the nucleus of a pretty good puck possession team. So what I'd like to see the Sens model themselves after, to at least some degree, is the classic Detroit teams of the last decade and more.
We were missing three things in that recipe this year, IMO.
1) Steady goal tending. Players have to have confidence that the goalies are at least solid (spectacular shouldn't be required). Sens' goalies were up and down this year, so players inevitably begin to play to prevent goals, rather than to own the puck.
2) Smart defensemen. I mean hockey smart here, the ability to make decisions at high speed, be it from innate hockey smarts or having spent six years playing the same style in the minor leagues so that you are playing the angles when you eat your Cheerios in the morning. We all saw too much of our defense struggling with positioning, failing to adapt to dynamic offenses, and sometimes just looking like they weren't sure what they were doing next (although I thought that last was dropping by the end of the season? Or maybe my standards were slipping). I really think that we were missing Gonchar as much as we were Alfie, a lot of the time. For all his lapses he generally played a pretty smart, aware, game.
3) Consistent identity through the forward lines. The fourth line is never going to be a skilled as the first, but they should be able to play the same style of hockey. Half the time this season it felt--to me at least-- that when our fourth line was on the ice they weren't sure who they were meant to be. Were they supposed to be intimidating the other team? Slowing things down with physical play? Dumping the puck into the other end then keeping it there with aggressive fore-checking? Too often they seemed to decide that two minutes in the penalty box would give them time to think about it, or something. Maybe more than the rest of the team, I think your fourth line needs to be given, and drilled on, a very clear style of play, as they won't usually have the raw talent to improvise successfully.
Of course, that is assuming that we can resign Hemsky and choose to keep Spezza (and that Hemsky is willing to re-sign even if we don't bring back his countryman MM). If that entire line is gone.....forget everything I said. I'm not quite sure the right style then. Maybe it is more opportunistic, with more focus on close play in the neutral zone and on back checking to try and win the puck in hopes of scoring on the resulting rushes? Not sure who you model it on at that point.
