Andrew Amerk Posted November 25, 2011 Report Share Posted November 25, 2011 I agree with you. I guess my problem is that I'd go the exact opposite route. Build out from your all-world goalie and given him five to six great defensive defensemen and make it damn near impossible to score. Wasn't this the late 90's Sabres model/ early 2000's Devils/ current Nashville? The difference between the Detroit/Sabres model, is that the West is less tough/rugged than the East, so it would work more effectively for the Red Wings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted November 25, 2011 Report Share Posted November 25, 2011 Wasn't this the late 90's Sabres model/ early 2000's Devils/ current Nashville? The difference between the Detroit/Sabres model, is that the West is less tough/rugged than the East, so it would work more effectively for the Red Wings. um, what? I challenge you to find more than two people that agree with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Amerk Posted November 25, 2011 Report Share Posted November 25, 2011 um, what? I challenge you to find more than two people that agree with this. I know at least a half dozen at my job alone that would agree. Most Western Conference teams are not built with the same amount of toughness that a lot of Eastern teams have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted November 25, 2011 Report Share Posted November 25, 2011 I know at least a half dozen at my job alone that would agree. Most Western Conference teams are not built with the same amount of toughness that a lot of Eastern teams have. Columbus, LA, Dallas, Phoenix, Anaheim would beg to differ. East teams make up the bottom five last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderbread Posted November 25, 2011 Report Share Posted November 25, 2011 Columbus, LA, Dallas, Phoenix, Anaheim would beg to differ. East teams make up the bottom five last year. Sorry double a I gotta agree wit chz here. The west typically seems like a more rugged division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Amerk Posted November 25, 2011 Report Share Posted November 25, 2011 Columbus, LA, Dallas, Phoenix, Anaheim would beg to differ. East teams make up the bottom five last year. And what are you basing your toughness scale on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvelo Posted November 25, 2011 Report Share Posted November 25, 2011 Well which is it? mainly forced Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted November 25, 2011 Report Share Posted November 25, 2011 Very interesting article in Tuesday's WSJ contended that the "puck-moving defenseman" is a dying breed because the two-line pass is now legal. I didn't agree with it, but I did think the reasoning was interesting. I wish I could post a link to it, but I read it on paper and I don't subscribe to WSJ's web service anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
korab rules Posted November 30, 2011 Report Share Posted November 30, 2011 Wasn't this the late 90's Sabres model/ early 2000's Devils/ current Nashville? The difference between the Detroit/Sabres model, is that the West is less tough/rugged than the East, so it would work more effectively for the Red Wings. um, what? I challenge you to find more than two people that agree with this. I know at least a half dozen at my job alone that would agree. Most Western Conference teams are not built with the same amount of toughness that a lot of Eastern teams have. You must work at ARC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted November 30, 2011 Report Share Posted November 30, 2011 4. The only problem with the Sabres trying to follow this model is that much of the Red Wing success over the last decade revolves around 3 NHL superstars(Zetterburg, Datsyuk and Lidstrom), and an always TREMENDOUS supporting cast. I lived in Detroit for 6 years (moving just after their '97 Cup win). The Wings are, more than anything else, a system team. There are lots of players that do really, really well with the Wings, then move on and thud for the rest of their careers (Marty LaPointe, for instance.... decent career after leaving, but he was better with the Wings.) When they have that strong system, moving people around is less traumatic when the injuries occur, or when their stars retire or sign with another team. The Sabres have several guys that are every bit as talented as Zetterburg and Datsyuk, but the Sabres are so-so in terms of sticking with the system. Part of the Detroit system is strong backchecking and constant hustle. When the Sabres play a similar system for three periods, they are an excellent team. When they get away from it, they lose to the Islanders. What makes the Wings a good team isn't so much the talent of their top players; it's the way they do the little things, the unglamorous things, the unnoticed things. Challenge. Steal the puck. Pin your check to the boards for that extra half second. Keep your feet moving and your stick active. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.