TropicalFruitGirl26

I agree the Leafs' priorities should be trying to find ways to improve the defense. That doesn't necessarily mean drop players and bring in others...although, that could be the obvious first reaction. It could be a matter of having your current crop of defensemen play a bit differently...the team is obviously going to put up goals, so how can the defense, relying on that, improve their coverage schemes.... or an even simpler solution? Just muddle through (outscoring teams is a GOOD way to 'muddle' while you figure this out!), while the younger defensemen like Dermott and Reilly continue to improve. In-their-prime guys like Zaitsev, Gardiner, and this new KHL'er Ozhiganov are simply gonna have to play smarter in their own end. As for Rick Nash, I don't believe he returns to the NHL. I think he is done as a player. HOnestly, watching him in his waning days with the Rangers and when he got traded over to Boston, he didn't appear like a man whose heart n soul was in the tough game of hockey any longer. He still showed talent (and I am sure if he DID return, he wouldn't be a complete waste of a roster spot based on talent alone), but he would be a far cry from the type of hungry player with a long term commitment to winning that a team like Toronto, or anyone else for that matter, needs. And yea, he is nowhere near fast enough to keep up with many opposing clubs these days...not that killer speed was ever a forte of his. I've pointed the Rick Nash thing out to others before, and I've gotten back, "Well, Patrick Marleau is older and about as fast as Nash, and he can still play well at the NHL level AND with the Leafs"... True, but Marleau also still seems to have that desire to win, to put in the extra hard work, to go through the pain and punishment of an NHL season in order to win a Cup that Rick Nash, at least on the surface, seems to lack. I just would not be surprised at all to find out Nash decided to call it a career and just enjoy his family life and personal pursuits now....or maybe pop up on a broadcast booth somewhere donning a suit and enjoying just talking about the game he once played very well.

As a mostly 'small market' team supporter, I tend to like having the salary cap. Of course, I realize that whether a fan likes the cap or not would depend on their market size. Whether it's hockey or baseball, I think the big money club fans would, of course, rather be able to spend whatever they wanted on players, while the smaller market clubs' fans would like the chance to have a star player or three on their teams to be able to compete with the "big boys". I am not surprised that a Toronto fan would want the cap eliminated. Totally understandable. But from a competitive standpoint, I think the cap does its job pretty well. I'm not so sure a "luxury tax" is much of a deterrent to big money clubs. In baseball, clubs like the Yankees, Dodgers, and Red Sox go over it all the time...despite them saying they'd like to keep things under. I think NHL owners would be the same way.....or worse, since NHL ownership and management can't seem to control themselves with the contracts they hand out as evidenced by the many work stoppages the NHL has been through already, they would absolutely blow up the NHL and possibly ruin it for good by turning it into the NB freakin A. Really good teams and really bad teams? Not for me, thanks. That's exactly how pro basketball is set up, and it is one of the many reasons couldn't give two hoots about their sport....very predicatable with the same ol teams always in positions to win titles, with the occasional Cinderella team somehow squeaking through... I like the NHL parity as well. Then again, while I support whole heartedly the Tampa Bay Lightning and Minnesota Wild, I fancy myself a TRUE overall NHL fan and can be found enjoying many other teams' games, even becoming a pseudo fan of a given team (if only for a short while), because I am sure to find some exciting storyline going on and the outcome of winning and losing hardly ever predictable. I STILL think great teams can be great....only with a salary cap, it goes beyond just stacking the lineup with All Stars. In the NHL, to be truly great, in addition to having the better players, you need to have smart management, savvy scouts, and a plan and vision in place to keep a team competitive for years to come based on rising and declining players and what you pay those players to be part of your core. I've come to truly appreciate the job that some GMs have done in this way. It is an art in and of itself! I think what the NHL needs is a steady cap number....one that is high enough for big money clubs to spend, but not so high that lesser revenue clubs can't compete. We currently have what...a 78 mil cap? I think we are approaching that number. Maybe something between $80M-$85M would be the sweet spot. I mean, if a GM can't ice a competitive hockey club given 80-85M a year, then he must not be much of a GM....because if handing out big contracts is all it ever takes to be considered a "top GM", then sign me up because I can spend money with the best of them.... just ask my husband! Seriously though, I am FOR the cap. I think league parity is important in ANY sport....I mean, why have franchises around if they are going to be perennial "losers"?? Again, I can certainly see the point of view from big market club fans, but for the sake of the sport...EVERY team should be able to ice a competitive hockey club. And if GM's find themselves 'hamstrung' by certain contracts, then maybe it was their own fault for not having the vision to look beyond the next year or three for being able to have enough money to pay good players to stay on board.

It's going to be interesting to see how the Oilers deal with the Bruins tonight. I watched most of the Boston-Calgary game yesterday, and it seemed a tale of beginnings and endings... Calgary started out strong, but seemed to fizzle a bit towards the end, while Boston started out weakly, and seemed to gain strength as the game wore on. Of course, Calgary got the results where it counted, on the scoreboard, but my point here is, Boston KNOWS they played right with Calgary, even outplayed them at points and they are gonna go into Edmonton today, following that hard-to-swallow loss, on a mission.....tired players or not. Boston has become quicker since phasing out older players for talented younger ones and they have ALWAYS been sound defensively, so if the Oilers continue to employ dump n chase against them, it could be a long night for Edmonton. On the second game of a back to back, the Bruins could be RIPE for a type of game where talented forwards like the Oilers have could carry more and make them work harder to take the puck away from Edmonton. Otherwise, I see Boston exploiting dump in chase schemes, and using the momentum they finished last night's game with to take out their loss frustrations to Calgary on your Oilers.

Yea, I am not understanding this kind of strategy at all from Edmonton given who they have on the roster. I mean, from Line 1 with McDavid all the way to Line 4 with Kyle Brodziak, they have guys who SHOULD be able to carry the puck more, and if they have the puck more, perhaps as a team, can put their talents to better use on the attack instead of having to play defense all the time because the other team recovered the puck first. I am not a big Kyle Brodziak fan, but I believe when he played for the Wild, he did just that...carry the puck more...in fact, the whole Minnesota team when he was there was known as a "possession" team because most of the guys did just that...and it afforded the team more opportunities to score. From a pure talent point of view, this current Edmonton team appears to have more offensive ability than those Wild teams Brodziak was on.....yet do NOT employ the strategy that team with lesser raw ability did. I don't like blaming coaches for the lack of player execution on the ice, but at some point, you really DO have to look at the guys giving the marching orders. In this case, it honestly does feel like the players aren't being utilized in the best possible manner.

Well, the top of the division (Jets and Preds) seems about right... I gotta think whichever of St. L, Min, or Dallas gets it together first claims spot 3....maybe the Avs sneak into number 3 if they can develop a line beyond their top line. Blackhawks likely occupy the bottom once again, but don't tell them that right now....they are on fire offensively. Unfortunately for them though, their defensemen are shells of their former selves and no where near match the speed of the forward units.

Hahaha... Flyer fans NOW buying into Hagg...

Whelp...... Another closely played game, another loss. Its great Minnesota hung in there with a Cup contender, but the "losing by an inch" game is past old now. At some point, if the Wild fancy themselves a playoff team, they need to come with some solid wins against teams NOT named Chicago or Arizona (who they see tomorrow night interestingly enough) Later boys. Looking for a better result against a struggling Coyote team back at the X.

I don't care much for the "loser point" either, but at the same time, how many times have teams barely gotten into the playoffs based on the loser point, and done well afterwards? I say, even if its not deserved, you take the loser point, you LIKE the loser point, then see what you can do as a team from there. Personally, and I've gone on and on about this on this site for a long time, I'd like to see the whole point standings thing revamped...but it is what it is...and under the current rules, I'd rather have the loser point than NOT have it. But that, really, is a subject for a whole different thread.....you get me going on the point standings system and look out.....

There ya go boys..... Something a bit to cheer about. 2nd period coming to a close and Granlund and Koivu cut the deficit. 4 min to possibly get the equalizer. Let's see if that goal fires the team up finally.

A turn over by the Wild defense that gives Zac "Cro Magnon" Rinaldo a scoring chance...... Oh how far this team has fallen.. At least when they were defensive minded and boring, they at least played smarter and covered better... Rinaldo getting a scoring chance....that right there may warrant someone's job review on Minnesota....

See, just now...offensive zone, Wild have the puck...guys are standing around...no movement to scoring areas, no support for the guy along the boards....etc.... Just too easy for Nashville to manage that. Preds on the other hand, get the offensive zone, support their guys, have guys moving to scoring areas....big difference between a Cup contender and a team that just barely may make the playoffs.

No doubt both those boys need a kick of some sort in the rear....but tangling with a non-NHL'er mini goon like Rinaldo is not the ticket. I mean, really, if either Nino or Charlie go off for 5 with Rinaldo, that is a clear win, hands down, for the Predators..... trading a 4th line 6 or 7 minute a night player for a more important piece from the Wild.

Last two or three shifts....the Wild making life a bit uncomfortable for Rinne around his own crease. Nothing by him of course, but still, I can tell by Rinne's body language and his face when the camera zooms in that he isn't liking the Wild crowding his crease...which is why the Wild should be doing EXACTLY that!

Hendricks vs Rinaldo... Not much of a fight, but you know, kudos to Hendricks for taking him on (he did do a nice job of just rag dolling him a bit down to the ground), because, I certainly don't want that idiot Rinaldo bothering a guy like Niederreiter, Coyle, Granlund, Zucker, etc when those guys should be focused on the game

Agree. That said, I will take these small victories (even if by luck), because this team can use anything and everything they can get ahold of to get some team confidence back. They seriously look way too tentative out there and a Stanley Cup contender like the Predators will absolutely EAT up any team that doesn't play with confidence.