TrueBlueGED

Wow. I think Niederreiter just prevented himself from scoring by trying to guarantee he score. Talk about (bad) puck luck.

Nope. I want to launch Paul Hamilton in the general direction of Neptune for making this a thing.

All season I felt like Lundqvist was on a one man mission to sink my fantasy team (he half succeeded), and now that that's out of the way, he's playing lights out. THIS IS THE LUNDQVIST I DRAFTED DAMMIT! I know none of you care about that. But the roundabout point is that he can steal this series and ruin any number of brackets 'round these parts.

My biggest worry right now is that Murray knows what he needs, knows what it takes for defensemen to be effective in the modern NHL...but is simply bad at actually identifying it in pro players.

Is it contradictory to say I really like the Preds, but also have no confidence in them at all? I think they've been less than the sum of their parts all year, and if they put it all together, they're the most dangerous team in the West. But betting on that happening all of the sudden, and Rinne not being awful, is quite the risky proposition.

You're not the only one allowed to smarm ;)

My coffee tastes like it has bourbon in it. Take that as you will.

But...but...but...I thought all coaches were the same and systems didn't matter? That's what you've been claiming all season, anyway.

I posted in the trade speculation thread I expect a big, and extremely controversial, move for a defenseman. And you're totally wrong about basketball coaches :p

I "boldly" predict Murray is going to execute a trade that half of us hate, and which will empower those who think he overpays. The obvious possibilities are Reinhart and Kane. If it's Reinhart, it'll be for a young defenseman we don't all love and think had limited upside, as opposed to Reinhart's perceived high ceiling. If it's Kane, it'll be for an established 2nd pair Dman, with people screaming we traded a 30 goal scorer for JAG #4 Dman.

I think this is an important point, and I think it's one that has been discussed around these parts before. More specifically, I think having veteran leaders who can't play are a big part of the reason there's a locker room rift between young and old, and subsequently, why the leaders can't get everyone to buy what Bylsma is selling. It's not necessarily that the young kids are a collection of egotistical nitwits, but that Josh Gorges is one of the guys telling them to do what the coach wants. I don't think the guy who can't complete a 10 foot pass is the guy you want going to bat for the coach if the younger and much more talented kids aren't inherently buying in. Now I'm sure that drives some people crazy, and they feel Gorges should be respected for his time served in the league...but I think that's just not the way it works. I also think this ties into what Lehner said about guys earning their ice time. The younger players see some of the old guard keep getting ice regardless of how poorly they play, then subsequently themselves get cut back for every single mistake, even if their overall contribution is greater. Stack this onto paragraph #1, and these are the types of things that lose the coach the room and drive division amongst the players themselves. The youngins will be like "Well of course you are with coach, he keeps giving you the same playing time no matter what." It's not workable. Now, maybe Bylsma doles out ice time because he's more forgiving of those who simply can't do better. That's not an unreasonable thing to do. But he's either oblivious to how this looks to some in his room, or he hasn't communicated properly his decisions (he might even think it's so patently obvious as to not need communication). I think this is connected to what Murray said about players wanting clarity and more black/white. I doubt that was only related to meeting times and punishment for tardiness--I think there's a clear relationship between that particular complaint and things like punishment for bad turnovers. If Gorges lost a shift for every turnover, he'd literally miss 50% of his shifts. I don't mean to single out Gorges, but he's the one who came out by far strongest in support of Bylsma when speaking with the media. A huge part of coaching is psychological, and I think it's pretty indisputable right now that Bylsma has failed on that front. The good news for you (four?) Bylsma supporters, is that this is the sort of thing that can potentially be corrected. I have zero hope that Bylsma adapts his tactical and strategic coaching methods, but this stuff is fixable. Regardless of where you stand on his system, if he stays, we all better hope he corrects his errors on this front.

So he's your average Masshole?

I feel better than I have since the season ended. My hope is he's going to bring the player exits to Pegula as support for his decision to move on. Pegula will say okay. And we'll have a new coach next season. The biggest tip off to me was his "Dan is my coach today" phrasing. That sort of language is normally a pretty big tip of the hand. At the very least, I don't see how anyone could have listened to that presser and not come away thinking Bylsma had flunked the psychology portion of the coaching equation. Some of us will never agree on systems, but there are clearly very real locker room issues between the coach and players.

Such is the nature of press conferences.

My hope tank has some fuel in it with this presser. It's not full, but I can get around town now.

Not if one was officially scheduled for, say, next Monday. I think there'd only be angst if the organization was silent on the matter.

I fundamentally don't understand the point of having the presser before a final decision is made on the coach.

Duchene isn't that young.

I wasn't as high as others on Hanifin coming out, but a move with him and Reinhart is at least logical.

This is ultimately why public comments by GMs, coaches, and players, all have limited utility, in my view. My most frequent thought when I hear anyone speak is "Well yea, what else could I expect him to say?"

I *almost* picked Pittsburgh to lose. The loss of Letang scares the hell out of me--he holds that entire blue line together.

That's more dead weight than can reasonably be pruned in one offseason, IMO. I'm also not sure Murray agrees that it's all dead weight. Though I'm in a very bad place with the team, it was still only the second full offseason where the goal was to improve the on ice product. Of the two, we had one year of significant improvement, and one year of small step back (which one could argue was more of a sideways step). Thats not train wreck...yet. If we're having this conversation a year from now...

Ennis is just bad luck, but Moulson's decline was absolutely foreseeable. Maybe not foreseeable in year one of the deal, but he was a perfect example of a player that falls into uselessness sooner rather than later.

On the other hand, the latter may be preferable to watching more Bylsma hockey.

On the bright side, maybe Murray legitimately doesn't know that the players he has acquired/drafted are for what Bylsma wants to do. Thus, he will not trade them for the purpose of getting players that better fit Bylsma.