Post-Game Talk: Washington Capitals vs Le Club de hockey Canadien de Montréal @7PM

[HTFN]

Well...except Titanic hit that iceberg because she was going too fast and ignoring the warnings of icebergs. In other words they were being foolish. Not sticking their heads in the sand and being too conservative.

That's just the same thing at different speeds. The Capitals might be extending the time it takes to reach the point of no return, but that won't matter much if they don't pay attention to the remainder of the trip.

The organization didn't re-invent its own hockey culture, it just transplanted another one and called it a day. There is no evidence of adventurous coaching or systems changes, only questionably-conscious "safety net" tendencies developed over years of transmuting an organization's "luckier" prospects into middle-six forwards. That, and a top down adherence to the notion that trying harder while making mediocre decisions will turn them into good ones.

Even the premise is flawed. Skill is cold, calculating, and repeatable. It rewards practice with small, but measurable, improvements. Will is an emotional force that can either be stolen away, or negatively impact your ability to make detached, logical decisions. While not irrelevant in sports, it implies that Will can be turned on the way a superhero powers up, making a mockery of earned competence. It's the reason we love watching Miracle on Ice, but it's also the reason we inexplicably root for the white kids in Hoosiers. It's an underdog mentality with inherent weakness built in. This team doesn't need to be the plucky upstart that's just happy to be there, it needs to be the machine that makes other teams kind of wish they weren't.

The motto might as well be "Need Over Speed", or "Hype Over Snipes".

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

I'll take a hungry rookie over a complacent veteran any day of the week, experience be damned. I'd really like to see Walker tried out for 4LW at some point.

Not sure I'd swap Schmidt for Bowey. The problem with the defensive core isn't in their bottom-pairing, it starts at the top with Carlson.

Well I wasn't aware we targeted complacent veterans in our trades. Come on....

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Pens last year for instance?

Except for the really crappy prospects we have no idea if most of our guys are NHL ready or not until we play them. Vrana looked a year away after training camp then boom he's one of our best players. Absolutely no one thought DeAngelo was NHL ready this year and boom he looks like the next coming of Yandle in Phoenix. We stand to lose absolutely nothing from waiving Chorney and replacing Bowey with Schmidt for 5 games or so. I'd bet money he'd be one of our top 2 defensemen for a stretch simply because he'd be playing an offensive game on adrenaline. And even if the prospects aren't the answer them just being competent in the NHL at their age could make them much more attractive trading chips. Like when Conacher looked amazing with the Lightning and was traded for Ben Bishop that year. Imagine if we call up Stephenson, he shows himself competent enough at his age that Coyotes would be willing to trade Hanzal for him at the deadline. Vs him just being in the AHL all year contributing nothing to the club

Stop throwing out the "lightening in a bottle strategy". It's a fools errand to try and replicate it.

As for the rest, the coaches and Gm make those decisions. I feel fairly good trusting the professionals judgement for the most part over your strategies. I would love to see Bowey get a sip in DC. There's just little reason to rush it right now. If here were dominating the AHL, by all means get him up here.

 

[Sam Spade]

People are really taking a 2-1 lose to the second best team in the NHL kinda hard, no?

They can't/won't win every game.

 

[HTFN]

Stop throwing out the "lightening in a bottle strategy". It's a fools errand to try and replicate it.

As for the rest, the coaches and Gm make those decisions. I feel fairly good trusting the professionals judgement for the most part over your strategies. I would love to see Bowey get a sip in DC. There's just little reason to rush it right now. If here were dominating the AHL, by all means get him up here.

For whatever it's worth, despite my above post on the general feel of things, I echo this sentiment about Bowey.

I am, however, wondering if translating AHL and NHL performance isn't more varied and complicated than ever as the requirements to stay effective in the NHL evolve. In that sense, almost everyone of importance should find a few games before the expansion draft, if for no other reason than to better understand how to utilize their offseasons to minimize the impact of any losses.

 

[Langway]

Stop throwing out the "lightening in a bottle strategy". It's a fools errand to try and replicate it.

...and yet their telegraphed plan for beefing up the third line come playoff time seems to rely upon two rookies...

 

[HTFN]

People are really taking a 2-1 lose to the second best team in the NHL kinda hard, no?

They can't/won't win every game.

This is the same result-oriented approach that doomed the team last season. How you win matters more than winning, and how you lose matters more than the actual loss. While a team shouldn't rely on their ability to dig themselves out of a hole, a team that sees itself challenging for the Stanley Cup should certainly be putting together more consistent efforts to do so.

The fact that they either aren't, or can't, should upset them more than it appears to. The players' propensity for "we had a hard time caring" quotes has been the biggest red flag in the organization since the middle of last season. Alzner's got a few headshakers that almost have to be feeble jabs at other players, because otherwise I don't know how a player who has been captain material for the majority of his competitive career would excuse and normalize that attitude.

I don't exactly prefer the authoritarian coaching style, but every comment like that ought to be a ticket to the press box. For all the **** I just gave the "Will Over Skill" motto, you still have to have some. It's just that this team is still trying to rent the willpower other teams have owned and built on for years. Will won't beat Skill when Skill tries just as hard as Will can.

 

[Dr John Carlson]

Well I wasn't aware we targeted complacent veterans in our trades. Come on....

Wasn't saying that. What I meant was that there are potentially NHL-ready prospects in the system that deserve a look for a few games at this point in the season than a guy like Winnik. You questioned whether rookies are regularly what puts a team over the top, and it's pretty easy to see how well that worked out in Pittsburgh last year. It's not necessarily rookies that make the difference, it's young and cheap ELC talent that the best teams utilize. Chicago has featured guys like Saad (twice), Teravainen, Leddy, Shaw, and Kruger playing important roles in their last 2 Cups while on an ELC. Now, the Capitals' only regular skater on an ELC is Burakovsky, and he doesn't exactly inspire confidence that he can play a meaningful role on a good team. The point is that they don't get good enough value from their depth players, yet potentially good value depth players are currently in Hershey. Calling up Vrana was a good first step but it remains to be seen if they intend on keeping him up.

Actually, now that you mention it, their recent deadline acquisitions of Curtis Glencross and Mike Weber (both of whom have not played an NHL game since leaving Washington) leads one to question if they actually do target complacent veterans.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

...and yet their telegraphed plan for beefing up the third line come playoff time seems to rely upon two rookies...

We'll see.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

I have no problems with guys that are NHL-ready getting some games. I don't think any major surprises or revelations are likely though from those games imo. I'd love to be wrong.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Wasn't saying that. What I meant was that there are potentially NHL-ready prospects in the system that deserve a look for a few games at this point in the season than a guy like Winnik. You questioned whether rookies are regularly what puts a team over the top, and it's pretty easy to see how well that worked out in Pittsburgh last year. It's not necessarily rookies that make the difference, it's young and cheap ELC talent that the best teams utilize. Chicago has featured guys like Saad (twice), Teravainen, Leddy, Shaw, and Kruger playing important roles in their last 2 Cups while on an ELC. Now, the Capitals' only regular skater on an ELC is Burakovsky, and he doesn't exactly inspire confidence that he can play a meaningful role on a good team. The point is that they don't get good enough value from their depth players, yet potentially good value depth players are currently in Hershey. Calling up Vrana was a good first step but it remains to be seen if they intend on keeping him up.

Actually, now that you mention it, their recent deadline acquisitions of Curtis Glencross and Mike Weber (both of whom have not played an NHL game since leaving Washington) leads one to question if they actually do target complacent veterans.

Another proponent of trying to catch lightening in a bottle. I wish we had some rookies of the caliber that the Hawks or the Pens had. We have one that I see.

 

[SpinningEdge]

But at the same time we can ignore the risk of the defense as constructed being abysmal offensively this year because hey muh vets.

Our offense isn't terrible for our D guys. It's the system.

So having Bowery come up makes no difference because of the system.

Stick to the system.

The system.

 

[Revelation]

Our offense isn't terrible for our D guys. It's the system.

So having Bowery come up makes no difference because of the system.

Stick to the system.

The system.

The system doesn't work when your starter lets harmless shots go in off his ass. So they need to find some way to inject more offense to cover their goaltending deficiencies that are so bad no system can shield them. This is the easiest cheapest attempt to do so.

 

[Revelation]

Another proponent of trying to catch lightening in a bottle. I wish we had some rookies of the caliber that the Hawks or the Pens had. We have one that I see.

Their rookies are no better than ours aside from the time the Hawks signed Panarin. They're just forced to use them because of their cap situations and many of them stick. Hartman, Sheary, Rust, Kuhnhackl, Hinostroza, Motte, Kempny, TVR aren't of a different caliber than Bowey/Vrana/Stephenson/Barber/Sanford. They also go through many more that they end up discarding.

 

[g00n]

That's just the same thing at different speeds. The Capitals might be extending the time it takes to reach the point of no return, but that won't matter much if they don't pay attention to the remainder of the trip.

The organization didn't re-invent its own hockey culture, it just transplanted another one and called it a day. There is no evidence of adventurous coaching or systems changes, only questionably-conscious "safety net" tendencies developed over years of transmuting an organization's "luckier" prospects into middle-six forwards. That, and a top down adherence to the notion that trying harder while making mediocre decisions will turn them into good ones.

Even the premise is flawed. Skill is cold, calculating, and repeatable. It rewards practice with small, but measurable, improvements. Will is an emotional force that can either be stolen away, or negatively impact your ability to make detached, logical decisions. While not irrelevant in sports, it implies that Will can be turned on the way a superhero powers up, making a mockery of earned competence. It's the reason we love watching Miracle on Ice, but it's also the reason we inexplicably root for the white kids in Hoosiers. It's an underdog mentality with inherent weakness built in. This team doesn't need to be the plucky upstart that's just happy to be there, it needs to be the machine that makes other teams kind of wish they weren't.

The motto might as well be "Need Over Speed", or "Hype Over Snipes".

This is the same result-oriented approach that doomed the team last season. How you win matters more than winning, and how you lose matters more than the actual loss. While a team shouldn't rely on their ability to dig themselves out of a hole, a team that sees itself challenging for the Stanley Cup should certainly be putting together more consistent efforts to do so.

The fact that they either aren't, or can't, should upset them more than it appears to. The players' propensity for "we had a hard time caring" quotes has been the biggest red flag in the organization since the middle of last season. Alzner's got a few headshakers that almost have to be feeble jabs at other players, because otherwise I don't know how a player who has been captain material for the majority of his competitive career would excuse and normalize that attitude.

I don't exactly prefer the authoritarian coaching style, but every comment like that ought to be a ticket to the press box. For all the **** I just gave the "Will Over Skill" motto, you still have to have some. It's just that this team is still trying to rent the willpower other teams have owned and built on for years. Will won't beat Skill when Skill tries just as hard as Will can.

Epic posts from HTFN as usual. Well said.

This isn't about one loss. We have speculated about what's at the root of the Caps culture for a loooong time. We have been tempted to blame the Captain when we see him gliding, or cherrypicking, or hear about him skipping optional skates. But the problems pre-date Ovechkin's arrival and if it were an effort-by-example situation then #8s early career as a goal-scoring freight train that ran at 100% intensity (to the point he could be seen panting on the bench after every shift) should have been enough to break that culture down and reshape it in his image. But that didn't happen.

Why not?

That's the question we should be asking ourselves. If even the most energetic and committed player in the NHL wasn't enough to lift this team out of its funk and instill a champions work ethic (and mentality) then what's it going to take, and what is standing in the way?

 

[Langway]

We'll see.

Unless you expect them to not just move salary out to make a trade possible but also send out assets on top of it, it's clearly their stated intention. Sanford could end up on the fourth line over Winnik perhaps rather than on a scoring line, although at this point I don't see the fit regardless when it comes to Sanford. They're too soft as currently constituted no matter how you cut it. The players play soft, loose and cute individually as always and it speaks to just how flimsy their team attacking typically is. Whether it's 65 or 82 it doesn't really matter.

The only person that's matched Ovechkin's on-ice passion from a managerial standpoint was Boudreau and it was with a mostly garbage defense. As much as Ovechkin is a gamer, though, he's never been a true student of the game and that over time sets a bad precedent. If your best players aren't learners how does progress occur? Doesn't their simultaneous overconfidence and underperformance in pressure situations boil down to this operational dysfunction? He's a great player but for me he's still nonetheless not what he could be and that goes for a lot of players at this point. That they don't seem to care as long as they're moderately successful as a team proves IMO that Trotz isn't the right figure at the helm. I don't think he knows how to get greatness out of players, particularly skilled players. The whole work ethic-based approach HTFN mentioned speaks to this. It's not the approach that shifts them out of 'just enough to get favorable results' mode.

 

[Hivemind]

The cruel irony is that of all the coaches they've had during the Ovechkin era, Oates may have come the closest to being the proper systematic/cultural fit for growing the players' ability to perform. He was the only coach they've had that stressed attention to detail not just in the defensive zone, but in transition and on offense. He took the most engaged approach in trying to mold players to fit a fleshed out system. Obviously that was far outweighed by his many great flaws as a head coach, which is why he was justly axed. His own attention to detail blinded him of his ability to see the entirety of the work he needed to accomplish.

Trotz is a coach who can get a respectable-to-good performance out of a mid-tier roster, but many of us just don't see that "next level" with Trotz or his system. I was encouraged by his first year in Washington, but part of that may just be getting out of the post-Oates hangover. And despite the President's Trophy last year, many of Trotz's negative attributes began to creep back into the team as the season progressed, and have fully emerged this year.

The lack of clear alternatives out there and some recent results (albeit flawed results against mostly poor quality teams) have bought Trotz more time. There's no immediate need to fire Trotz today or later this week. I suspect he survives the season. But the red flags have presented themselves clearly, and cannot be ignored forever.

 

[Alexander the Gr8]

I'm at Kettler right now. What I'm seeing confirms a lot of what I thought.

 

[twabby]

I'm at Kettler right now. What I'm seeing confirms a lot of what I thought.

Please share some thoughts when you get a chance. Thanks.

 

[Dr John Carlson]

Another proponent of trying to catch lightening in a bottle.

How about the Kings? Toffoli, Pearson, King, Voynov, and Nolan were all on ELCs for them at various points during their Cup years. San Jose last year had Hertl, Tierney, Nieto, and Donskoi. It's not lightning in a bottle. It's what the best teams do.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

I'm at Kettler right now. What I'm seeing confirms a lot of what I thought.

That the gear in the proshop over priced.....I know the horror of it all!

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Epic posts from HTFN as usual. Well said.

This isn't about one loss. We have speculated about what's at the root of the Caps culture for a loooong time. We have been tempted to blame the Captain when we see him gliding, or cherrypicking, or hear about him skipping optional skates. But the problems pre-date Ovechkin's arrival and if it were an effort-by-example situation then #8s early career as a goal-scoring freight train that ran at 100% intensity (to the point he could be seen panting on the bench after every shift) should have been enough to break that culture down and reshape it in his image. But that didn't happen.

Why not?

That's the question we should be asking ourselves. If even the most energetic and committed player in the NHL wasn't enough to lift this team out of its funk and instill a champions work ethic (and mentality) then what's it going to take, and what is standing in the way?

remind me who the most energetic and "committed" player in the NHL is again, because it certainly isn't Ovechkin and never was. Maybe I could go with the energy tag early in his career, but most committed in the NHL? Had an Ovechkin off-season ever come across (in the press) as anything more than a nice party bender? I love the guy but let's not make up fairy tales of his offseason commitment. I'm not sure he's got a "champions work ethic" that you mention. Seems clear over the years.

The organization is not some sick or broken entity IMO. They simply haven't gotten the winning formula of Cup winning roster, excellent coaching and a little luck.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

How about the Kings? Toffoli, Pearson, King, Voynov, and Nolan were all on ELCs for them at various points during their Cup years. San Jose last year had Hertl, Tierney, Nieto, and Donskoi. It's not lightning in a bottle. It's what the best teams do.

You're telling me these singular players were the difference makers in winning the Cup? I must have missed that SJ Cup win. And again...if the Caps had those guys waiting in the wings I'm all for it, but we know they one guy who fits that bill.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Their rookies are no better than ours aside from the time the Hawks signed Panarin. They're just forced to use them because of their cap situations and many of them stick. Hartman, Sheary, Rust, Kuhnhackl, Hinostroza, Motte, Kempny, TVR aren't of a different caliber than Bowey/Vrana/Stephenson/Barber/Sanford. They also go through many more that they end up discarding.

I can't buy your story than Stephenson, Barber, Sanford are Cup difference makers today. Sorry.

 

[HTFN]

remind me who the most energetic and "committed" player in the NHL is again, because it certainly isn't Ovechkin and never was. Maybe I could go with the energy tag early in his career, but most committed in the NHL? Had an Ovechkin off-season ever come across (in the press) as anything more than a nice party bender? I love the guy but let's not make up fairy tales of his offseason commitment. I'm not sure he's got a "champions work ethic" that you mention. Seems clear over the years.

The organization is not some sick or broken entity IMO. They simply haven't gotten the winning formula of Cup winning roster, excellent coaching and a little luck.

Yet a Cup winning roster wouldn't behave the way these guys behave, and excellent coaching wouldn't allow them to.

It's like the need to protect their self-esteem (protect the Will) has outweighed the need to crack down on a regression to old habits (fix the Skill). They don't have an "Us Against The World" attitude, more of a "The World Is Against Us" thing. The losing mentality is baked into their organizational mantra.

Trotz showed up ready to try something new, but now he needs another "something new". Rather than invent one, it's like he's decided to dust off Nashville's late-2000's playbook and faithfully recreate it, down to the muffin powerplay.

Why is it that our best players rarely add new dimensions to their game, and often regress just as quickly as they improve? When a season ends in disappointment, wouldn't you rather see the team respond by bring even more facets to the table, instead of crossing their fingers next time?

This isn't to say that the players are necessarily unwilling to change, they certainly did with Oates, but for the most part I don't believe that they actively seek it themselves. Should we seriously be almost a decade into Backstrom's career and finding that he shoots even less than he used to?