Posted by 
Pictured recliner far less attractive than real one.
You know, since I don’t get paid to coach hockey, have never coached hockey, and quite possibly never will (unless the school I work at randomly gets a girls hockey team, which it won’t, because I’m in Georgia) I feel a bit off harping on someone who was a Jack Adams finalist. It’s awkward.
As a fan, though, and as someone who has watched what is bordering on probably 1000 hockey games, I do know basic fundamentals of the game, and feel qualified to be a total armchair coach. Let me put my guacamole down and explain. One of those is you get people who can score on the ice. Another is that you do not shortchange your top forwards by cycling lines when you have people who should be playing but aren’t. Also, and this is an assumption, but usually you practice lines together with the intent of having them actually play together, and at the very least allow them a period to get used to each others’ tenancies and to develop team chemistry. That’s why most teams have set lines that only get changed out of absolute necessity.
So, taking all of this into consideration, could someone please tell me why Patrik Berglund was sat last Saturday in favor of Cam Janssen? Janssen’s sole purpose was to go out there and smack some people around… he also was given five minutes and two seconds of ice time. You switch a player who usually gets at the very least three times as many minutes, and who can score, out for Janssen? Cam serves a purpose, yes. But Berglund can score. He is going through a low period, but why not let him at least try to work through it. One bad game and you bench the guy? We lost 2-1. We could have stood some sort of scoring punch.
Speaking of scoring punch, David Backes was also sat for the entire second period:
Scrutiny and consequences are applied to young and old alike. While Berglund did not dress on Saturday, 31-goal scorer David Backes spent the entire second period on the bench.
Wait… what? I would like to watch a re-play of the first period so I can figure out what Backes did to warrant sitting on the bench for an entire twenty minutes of gameplay. Sit him for a few shifts. Talk to him and light a fire under his butt during intermission. I don’t know… but sitting one individual for a third of a hockey game for what you feel to be a bad period, and then necessitating the line pairings to be switched every shift to make up for it, seems to me to be a bit of a recipe for disaster, or at the very least some weird act of desperation buy someone who really doesn’t need to feel that way.
He rewarded Walt, McDonald, Perron, and Kariya with more than 10 minutes of ice time (they were the only four forwards who were out for that long). They had a pretty good game. But if you’re looking to win, get your scorers and your energy guys out on the ice. Murray makes the argument in the afore mentioned article that you have to get the Tkachuks and Kariyas out there because they want to win right now, and you can afford to sit the kids. That’s great, but if you play the Tkachuks and Kariyas too much, they get tired and don’t produce. You’re then stuck with under-producing elder statesmen and under-performing kids who can’t get a chance to fix problems in real life situations. Face it, practice is different than a game.
Some Other Articles That You May Enjoy:
As Spring Turns To Summer, Wild House Cleaning Continues
Rangers find a way….
Lecavalier Olympic cut?
Kessel back; Lecavalier demoted…
Lars Eller gets the call to cross the Mighty Mississippi
John Tortorella: media savvy!
We hope you enjoyed this post. As always, leaving a comment below is both appreciated and encouraged. Thanks!
