Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
LGR4GM

Should we be talking more about Arttu Ruotsalainen

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

Definitely agree w/ the bolded.

Pilut is a good puck moving / offensive D-man that needs IMHO to be paired with a guy that can move people from the front of the net.  His best pairing on the Sabres (as currently constructed) is Ristolainen as their strengths are rather complementary & each can cover weaknesses of the other.  (Pilut can't move people; Risto isn't great at moving the puck.)

On a cheap deal, he's an asset.

the bolded is what we are lacking. We already have better or just as good puck moving D men. We need more of those guys for them to pair with. I think the Housley/JBot idea of having all these attacking D men was folly. If we added any D man to this roster I'd want it to be a big stay at home type. 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have given him a shot to win the bottom six role.  I think he still could.  If R2 has a pulse, he should be easily able to beat out Reider.  Sorry, Reider is a useful player, but he's not a player you give a full time spot too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PerreaultForever said:

the bolded is what we are lacking. We already have better or just as good puck moving D men. We need more of those guys for them to pair with. I think the Housley/JBot idea of having all these attacking D men was folly. If we added any D man to this roster I'd want it to be a big stay at home type. 

buffy the vampire slayer no GIF

Whenever I hear this all I think about is that this means, large guy who hits things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dudacek said:

Speaking of Pilut, are we good with our left side if Adams lures him back from the KHL?

(Dahlin/McCabe/Pilut/Irwin)

Or should we be shopping for better?

McCabe is still someone who to me is more of an ideal third pair player, but 1/3/3 on LHD, with an upgraded goalie, would be enough for now I'd expect. We do have Samuelsson and Johnson as reasonable shot 2nd pair prospects on the way. 

If Dahlin take a jump we expect, he'll probably elevate his partner similar to how Olofsson was/is a bonafide top 6 player with Jack, and probably more mid-6 (in his current iteration) last season. In that sense, if Jokiharju is on the top pair, I see a 1/2/3 or even maaaaybe a 1/2/2 on the right side. 

Some on twitter think the D is a mess, to me I think it's in reasonable shape as long as they keep Risto off the top pair, and probably Montour. I like Jokiharju there, myself. To be in good shape back there we probably need a RHD for LHD swap but I just don't think it's going to happen since we need a goalie more. 

24 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Well he is in Toronto now, and the world does revolve around it.

They kept talking about how they were thrilled with the Simmonds acquisition because they "knew what they were going to get". 

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PerreaultForever said:

the bolded is what we are lacking. We already have better or just as good puck moving D men. We need more of those guys for them to pair with. I think the Housley/JBot idea of having all these attacking D men was folly. If we added any D man to this roster I'd want it to be a big stay at home type. 

They already have 2 big ones that play physical (Ristolainen & McCabe) & Dahlin likes to play physical as well and will now have a body enabling him to do that.

Also, Irwin (shakes head) is a stay at home defenseman apparently.

Not many teams have more than 2 guys that can play physical.  Pilut is fine on the 2nd or 3rd pairing with the earlier caveats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

buffy the vampire slayer no GIF

Whenever I hear this all I think about is that this means, large guy who hits things. 

It kind of is, but you need that. You need a balanced roster to win. You look at the way Boston paired Chara with McAvoy and Carlo with Krug. That's the kind of thing you want. Too much puck moving and not enough defense and you lose in the playoffs, like the Leafs.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Taro T said:

They already have 2 big ones that play physical (Ristolainen & McCabe) & Dahlin likes to play physical as well and will now have a body enabling him to do that.

Also, Irwin (shakes head) is a stay at home defenseman apparently.

Not many teams have more than 2 guys that can play physical.  Pilut is fine on the 2nd or 3rd pairing with the earlier caveats.

idk a thing about Irwin but of those I only consider Risto as physical. Dahlin we shall see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Taro T said:

They already have 2 big ones that play physical (Ristolainen & McCabe) & Dahlin likes to play physical as well and will now have a body enabling him to do that.

Also, Irwin (shakes head) is a stay at home defenseman apparently.

Not many teams have more than 2 guys that can play physical.  Pilut is fine on the 2nd or 3rd pairing with the earlier caveats.

 

16 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

idk a thing about Irwin but of those I only consider Risto as physical. Dahlin we shall see. 

 

  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

It kind of is, but you need that. You need a balanced roster to win. You look at the way Boston paired Chara with McAvoy and Carlo with Krug. That's the kind of thing you want. Too much puck moving and not enough defense and you lose in the playoffs, like the Leafs.

I don't agree. I think you're trying to give credit to a dead style of defender. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Thorny said:

 

 

I remember that. little Brian Campbell knocked out Umberger once too.

 

Everybody can do it once in a while, and little guys can knock out big guys but in no way do I consider McCabe a consistent tough guy. He's a very average sometimes inconsistent D man. Not a bad guy to have at the right price, but nothing special either. 

Bottom line, our D is not tough and is not tough to play against. There is some potential there, but we do not get better adding Pilut over the current 6. I stand by that. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't agree. I think you're trying to give credit to a dead style of defender. 

Right which is why Tampa won the cup 2 years ago rather than this year where they dressed 7 D men, played Maroon, etc. and often outhit their opponents. Right, it's a dead style. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't agree. I think you're trying to give credit to a dead style of defender. 

I think you see stay-at-home and immediately read big-slow-dumb-unskilled.

It really just means a guy who thinks defence first and is good at limiting scoring chances.

And believe it or not, strong and nasty helps if it happens to be part of the package, especially over the course of a playoff series.

Edited by dudacek
  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

buffy the vampire slayer no GIF

Whenever I hear this all I think about is that this means, large guy who hits things. 

It's sometimes helpful to have that guy at your disposal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Right which is why Tampa won the cup 2 years ago rather than this year where they dressed 7 D men, played Maroon, etc. and often outhit their opponents. Right, it's a dead style. 

Yea bogo definitely was a reason they won... or something. Out hitting your opponent means 1 thing, you don't have the puck.

12 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I think you see stay-at-home at immediately read big-slow-dumb-unskilled.

It really just means a guy who thinks defence first and is good at limiting scoring chances.

And believe it or not, strong and nasty helps if it happens to be part of the package, especially over the course of a playoff series.

Perhaps

9 minutes ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

It's sometimes helpful to have that guy at your disposal

Sometimes if you're not a good team overall. It's Dalton Smith all over. I'll take Dahlin who can do that but doesn't have to. I think Borgen is what a "stay at home" defender is now. 

Edited by LGR4GM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Yea bogo definitely was a reason they won... or something. 

Perhaps

Sometimes if you're not a good team overall. It's Dalton Smith all over. I'll take Dahlin who can do that but doesn't have to. I think Borgen is what a "stay at home" defender is now. 

You aren't going to stay so locked in your belief system that you simply refuse to see what was obvious are you?  You can scoff at Bogo all you want to, it's an easy target, but you know full well Tampa got over the top by shifting their team towards less skill and more toughness. Everybody, and I mean everybody and every so called expert has pointed this out. It's damn obvious.

You said the same sort of things when St. Louis won, with their toughness. and you probably said it about Washington before that but I don't remember. Balanced teams, teams that CAN play tough when needed AND be skilled, those are the cup winners. Few exceptions. probably only Pittsburgh with Crosby at his best, but they too got ousted numerous times by lesser/tougher teams like Philly and Boston. 

I won't disagree on Borgen though. I am hopeful he will sooner than later be good enough to be part of one of those pairings. and maybe Samuelsson too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I think Borgen is what a "stay at home" defender is now. 

Exactly. Even including the nasty. Let’s hope he’s a good one.

Henri Jokiharju, at least the one we got as a rookie, was mostly a stay-at-home defencemen. Didn’t rush the puck much, or join the rush much. He made sure he was in the safe position as the rush came towards him, stepped up well at the blue line, shadowed his man well in the zone, mostly made good decisions about when to chase and when to stay put, separated the puck carrier from the puck, got in the passing lanes and safely got it out of the zone.

His two weaknesses on defence were stopping the power rush to the net and tying up his man in front. Oddly enough, two things where more length, or  strength would have helped him.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

bogo definitely was a reason they won

To be fair I thought he stayed at home for most of his stint with us. 

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

You aren't going to stay so locked in your belief system that you simply refuse to see what was obvious are you?  You can scoff at Bogo all you want to, it's an easy target, but you know full well Tampa got over the top by shifting their team towards less skill and more toughness. Everybody, and I mean everybody and every so called expert has pointed this out. It's damn obvious.

You said the same sort of things when St. Louis won, with their toughness. and you probably said it about Washington before that but I don't remember. Balanced teams, teams that CAN play tough when needed AND be skilled, those are the cup winners. Few exceptions. probably only Pittsburgh with Crosby at his best, but they too got ousted numerous times by lesser/tougher teams like Philly and Boston. 

I won't disagree on Borgen though. I am hopeful he will sooner than later be good enough to be part of one of those pairings. and maybe Samuelsson too. 

Because you and a lot of ppl like you use toughness as separate from skill. I will NEVER forget when we signed Dalton Smith and it was going to be some cure all and he was going to toughen us up blah blah. It isn't about toughness v skill, just like it isn't about out hitting your opponent. It is about battle with skill. Dahlin never gets talk about as a stay a home defender although he is nasty in his own end. The reason is because he doesn't always have to hit you to take the puck or move it up ice. Tampa Bay didn't suddenly win because they added Maroon. They won because the entire team as a hole was able to use their skills and push themselves over that hump. They didn't hit a goaltender that stonewalled them, they had learned how to push through. Don't come at me and say Washington and Tampa and Pittsburgh won because they added a couple hitters, those teams won because the plays that actually matter were tough and able to use and adapt their skills for the intensity of the playoffs. Intensity doesn't mean hits, it means faster game with more forechecking which is what we see in the playoffs. Bogo didn't win them a cup. Maroon didn't win them a cup. Little old Brayden Point had the most GWG for Tampa. Hedman who is tough and skilled was the best player. You think toughness is what beats skill, it isn't. Hard work beats skill and sometimes in a 7 game series if the skill levels are close enough, that hard work is enough. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Right which is why Tampa won the cup 2 years ago rather than this year where they dressed 7 D men, played Maroon, etc. and often outhit their opponents. Right, it's a dead style. 

This right here is my problem. You are equating staying at home in the defensive zone and hitting things with winning. That isn't right, it hasn't been in over a decade. Tampa outworked their opponents and generated more shots in a lot of the games. They did this by having a good forecheck and by being vastly superior to every team they faced in terms of skill. Columbus was no where close to Tampa in skill. Boston was a little closer but I think Boston is reaching the over the hill era. The NYI play the most boring trap style because they don't have skill. Tampa lost what? 4 games over 3 series. 

The Sabres don't need "stay at home" tough defenders who hit. They need Skilled determined defenders who battle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't agree. I think you're trying to give credit to a dead style of defender. 

 

17 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

It kind of is, but you need that. You need a balanced roster to win. You look at the way Boston paired Chara with McAvoy and Carlo with Krug. That's the kind of thing you want. Too much puck moving and not enough defense and you lose in the playoffs, like the Leafs.

My 2 cents.

Things I want my defensemen to be able to do:

-In the D zone, get the puck back.  However they need to do that, stick checking, strength in the corners, however, just get it.

-Be good in defensive transitions, generally requires good skating and often some size/strength

-Skate well and ability to use that in offensive transitions

-Make good breakout passes

-Control the net front area, which generally requires strength

-PP QB/offensive zone skills

On a roster, you kinda need a mix of players who can do all of these things.  Very few players are good at all of them.

As you can see, some of these things benefit from good strength/size, but if a player doesn’t have other qualities to go with it, they don’t fulfill many of my desired skills.

Note that my list does not include “toughness” because that can mean a lot of different things to different people.

Edited by Curt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, dudacek said:

Exactly. Even including the nasty. Let’s hope he’s a good one.

Henri Jokiharju, at least the one we got as a rookie, was mostly a stay-at-home defencemen. Didn’t rush the puck much, or join the rush much. He made sure he was in the safe position as the rush came towards him, stepped up well at the blue line, shadowed his man well in the zone, mostly made good decisions about when to chase and when to stay put, separated the puck carrier from the puck, got in the passing lanes and safely got it out of the zone.

His two weaknesses on defence were stopping the power rush to the net and tying up his man in front. Oddly enough, two things where more length, or  strength would have helped him.

 

Joker is a guy who puts up 5g and 25a in a few years and someone will say wow I did think he added that much to the offense.  He has the defense down and as he matures the offense will follow.  
 

He is going to be a core piece this group long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...