With Tampa out, Calgary on the brink and Toronto in a rough fight mean Size > Skill?

[Orfieus]

NHL.com just released an article about Tampa saying Lightning needed more grit, less glitter to avoid quick end to Cup run,

"How do you reconcile tying an NHL record with 62 wins playing one way, and that way might also be the reason they couldn't win one game against the Columbus Blue Jackets in the Eastern Conference First Round?
How do you change playing style to have a better chance to win in the playoffs when doing so could mean winning fewer games in the regular season, making it harder to get to the playoffs?"

With Calagry on the brink to an early elimination and Toronto in a dog fight with Boston, is the idea that skill wins championships simply not true?

When you look at NYI/WPG/STB/Vegas/(Washington?), and the success they are all having with big gritty players should a team focus on that? Is Size + Grit >>> Speed + Skill

edit: I forgot to ask, if this is correct and Size + Grit is infact>>> Speed + Skill is that good for the game?

Click to read more...

 

[jw2]

Two middle size guys and a tall skinny guy.

Never used the fat one.

 

[John Johnson]

It's all about team chemistry and clicking at the right time, confidence goes a long way too.

 

[c9777666]

We're just 2 years removed from a team winning back to back Cups that was not exactly loaded with size.

 

[boredmale]

Two middle size guys and a tall skinny guy.

Never used the fat one.

1 Skinny, 3 Fat

 

[TIGERCOOL]

Toronto is outhitting Boston in their series, and no one EVER accused them of being a gritty team.

Ennis and Moore have both knocked Zdeno on his ass. If they stood on each other's shoulders it'd be about pound for pound.

It's about preparedness, compete and intensity. Not size.

 

[rfournier103]

My short answer is personnel matchups make this hard to answer. It’s a case by case basis.

Some teams are “fast,” but can’t handle hard hitting and physical squads.

Others can.

Some “physical” teams can’t contain faster opponents.

Others can.

I think coaching and individual talent play a role here. One would think that slower player always in position might have a very slight advantage over a faster player out of position who has to play “catch up.” I don’t care how fast you are - that gets tiring.

I think it’s good for the league. It shows that hard work and a little elbow grease CAN pay off sometimes.

Toronto is obviously faster top to bottom than the Bruins, but the Bruins are fighting them tooth and nail and are tied as we speak. Is one system or skill set better than the other? I don’t think so. Could go either way and will likely be won by the team that executes their game plan the best.

 

[jw2]

1 Skinny, 3 Fat

Do you even play Ice Hockey?!?

 

[koyvoo]

So I guess we're gonna return to the Dead Puck Era.

These playoffs on a whole have been highly entertaining. I don’t see it as size, I see it as compete level.

Take CBJ for example, yes they’re a heavy team but if not for their undersized stars in guys like Panarin and Atkinson competing like monsters, they may not have won.

He also uses COL as an example, but they have outskated the flames. They’re not winning on goonery. These teams are succeeding with speed and skill and relentless effort.

 

[Deen]

Size is playing a factor this year. No doubt.

 

[boredmale]

Do you even play Ice Hockey?!?

Yes friend had a Nintendo

 

[Deen]

The run and gun teams are having trouble right now.

 

[MNRube]

There is no magic blueprint for being a true contender. The closest thing I can think of is to have a team capable of matching up with anyone. You need a good mix of grit, game-breakers, depth and chemistry/brotherhood.

That last one is often overlooked on HF because we are hockey nuts who want to analyze every little thing we can, but it's hard to analyze an intangible thing like leadership or chemistry.

 

[Atas2000]

NHL.com just released an article about Tampa saying Lightning needed more grit, less glitter to avoid quick end to Cup run,

"How do you reconcile tying an NHL record with 62 wins playing one way, and that way might also be the reason they couldn't win one game against the Columbus Blue Jackets in the Eastern Conference First Round?
How do you change playing style to have a better chance to win in the playoffs when doing so could mean winning fewer games in the regular season, making it harder to get to the playoffs?"

With Calagry on the brink to an early elimination and Toronto in a dog fight with Boston, is the idea that skill wins championships simply not true?

When you look at NYI/WPG/STB/Vegas/(Washington?), and the success they are all having with big gritty players should a team focus on that? Is Size + Grit >>> Speed + Skill

edit: I forgot to ask, if this is correct and Size + Grit is infact>>> Speed + Skill is that good for the game?

So the claim is Columbus, Colorado and Islanders have no skill and win it by size and grit? Bold claim.

 

[PoutineSp00nZ]

We're just 2 years removed from a team winning back to back Cups that was not exactly loaded with size.

It goes back and forth. Almost like there isnt one infallible way to win

 

[ccman68]

So many things went wrong for us that series. Would love to blame the entire loss on size so we would have an easy fix but sadly that's not how it works.

 

[koyvoo]

So the claim is Columbus, Colorado and Islanders have no skill and win it by size and grit? Bold claim.

Columbus and Colorado in particular have definitely outskated, out hustled and outskilled the opponent.

 

[tfong]

Never knew MacKinnon had no skill lol.

Tldr: nothing to do with size or skill, it's who wants it more. The AVS definitely wanted it more sofar than Flames.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Didn't Tampa have more hits than Columbus in every game of their series?

 

[Orfieus]

It goes back and forth. Almost like there isnt one infallible way to win

I agree, but maybe one philosophy has more success then the other? If building a big gritty team can get you success in the playoffs that is probably easier to build then a team based around speed + skill

 

[go comets]

It takes the perfect mixture of skill, size, grit and ability to win the physical battles. Experience also plays a big roll....

 

[GlitchMarner]

We may be in the midst of another transition to a period in which "heavy" hockey wins out, yes.

Right after the '04 lockout, Carolina won the Cup with a speedy offensive team. The next year ANA (a more physical) team won it the next year, but DET and PIT (skilled teams) won in 2008 and 2009, followed by Chicago (another skilled team) 2010.

For a period of time, teams like LA, BOS and ANA had success, but by 2015 the League was trending more toward speed and skill (TB and NYR had success that season and met in the ECF) and Tampa, the Rangers (when they were actually good), PIT, MTL and TOR enjoyed success between 2014 and this season (with this season also being the highest scoring in years), but the Caps (who have transitioned from a skilled team to a heavier type of team) won the Cup last year and in this year's playoffs teams that can be a pain in the ass to play against (NYI, CLB, CAR, STL) are causing problems.

 

[hooverdam]

The idea that the Avs are winning on size over skill is ridiculous. Yeah, the Avs have some physical players who can lay the body but it's just typical playoff physicality. They're not chasing after hits or initiating after the whistle stuff the way the Flames are; they always have the puck. They're controlling the pace of the game via shot share. And their speed is giving the Flames fits.

 

[HawkeyTalkMan]

Size narrative overplayed here.

There wasn't much size among the 2013 Hawks, 2015 Hawks, 2016 pens, and 2017 pens

You can fight through size and tough checking if you either A) have a ton of speed or B) are patient and are tacticians with execution especially on zone exits, getting through the neutral zone, etc

 

[RustyCat]

1 Skinny, 3 Fat

I always went 2 skinny 1 fat.

Basically two Ehlers and one Big Buff.