...

Zone time! Nice!

Called it! Yay, Smith.

Totally in.

After official review...

Yay team.

If they would have scored some of you would have been saying that was one of the best periods of season.

Middle of the season road game for NJ.

It's actually a clever goal. Wish we'd try stuff like that more often.

Nice job.

Nice job.

What's up with Doug Allen's goatee? He has it just sitting on his chin like a toupee.

That's what you call chemistry.

This goes back to the debate on how the organization has viewed this season: step 2 of a development plan, or first year of attempting to ice a competitive team.

I guess the thing is that with past failed coaches, post Lindy (even though Lindy suffered from many of these as well), there were several issues that stood out: player usage, team prep, system, and special teams. Phil has addressed most of those in my opinion, and that includes player usage. The tools he has for offense simply aren't broad/good/deep. The only thing Phil really seems to have not addressed is the PP. However, that, again, comes down to the tools available. The areas where the players are a major factor, usage (as in: how to decide who to use and where) and PP, are really not Phil's "fault" so much as it the "fault" of Murray and JBotts. For the 10 game streak, Phil clearly was able to maximize his player usage. I think that evidence stands, when the players are playing right, he knows how to use them.

This is like criticizing a chef who has been given two ingredients to work with: filet mignon and carrots. There are only so many things one can do with such basic ingredients. But, maybe we're supposed to apply the axiom "a good artist doesn't blame his tools." Paint, Phil, paint! Paint for your life! That's more than I thought. He must have really blew the opportunity.

Wasn't Mitts given the opportunity to center Samson and Skinner the other day? It didn't last long, because the panic that has crept into his game is leading to bad decisions - can't do that against top-line defense.

I totally agree. Pommenstein being "slow" wasn't necessarily a negative for his performance on that line. So long as he was able to follow up the play generated by Eichel and Skinner, who would naturally draw most of the attention away from Pommers. He could hobble his way to a high percentage zone. No one expects the feeble old has-been to score a goal.

I'm a little...no, a lot...scared of this talk about Mitts being "ready", and banking on that happening. There is no way I would bank on him becoming anything in the NHL right now. Contrast Mitts' development to Dahlin's, TT's, Pilut's, or Ullmark's, just on our team alone. Look across the NHL at the development of other rookies. I don't think Mitts should be the automatic write in for 2C. Another issue: who is our trade bait for something like this? I think we all should be sick and tired of getting back players who are busts, so we'll need to pony-up to get a quality player back who will actually make a difference. I think we're talking TT, Pilut, McCabe, Larry, Samson (yes, I said it) or the like if you want a difference-make back. That's what's being asked for here, is a return that will make a difference. You're talking a first and maybe a second, at least a first, plus a good player to get someone worthwhile back.

You mean the '70s era karate chop fist pump when they score isn't enough?

What a bunch of whimpy forwards. Not a one wants to get into the dirty areas.

I agree with this. It would likely take a three year, though, if he makes it through the rest of this season and the first half of the next without missing more than a few games. At that point, as far as the rest of the league is concerned, his injury issues will be "in the past", so his value will be pretty high.

ROR, the Rodney Dangerfield of the NHL.

I caught that. That was a good funny.

If the snark snaps us from the cycle of misunderstanding, then the risk was worth taking. You are comparing two players with three years (or more) development behind them to someone who has just started their development. I don't see how this comparison makes sense given this fact alone. However, aside from those two players having already had been used at those positions in their development cycle, they are also individuals whose developmental paths are unique to themselves, just like Dahlin's.