Reddington
Well-known member
I guess I'd define the top lines as the ones that play the most and that get first crack at the PP. With this definition, Line 1 hasn't produced in over a month. I'm not blaming the linemates or players but the coaching. There is no discernable defensive system, which relegates the team to spending the majority of the time stuck in their d-zone. Also, shooting and winning are very loosely correlated. It's all about scoring plays and this team takes low percentage (some might say selfish) shots as opposed to making scoring plays by passing the puck to open players. If a player demonstrated their ability to be a top scorer but has hit a slump, I think I'd not demotivate them even further by moving them down (and constantly criticizing them, too.) Proven good players just need positive motivation; they're hard enough on themselves already.
Also, are we the only team in Hockey East that just roll their top lines on the PP. Doesn't every other team (at all levels and leagues) stack a power play line. These coaches don't, even though the PP is pathetic. What was Einstein's quote? "The definition of stupidity is repeating the same thing but expecting a different outcome".
The team plays at the sophistication level of a Squirt team of 10 year olds. The coaches don't have the experience or incentive to change it.
That's where coaches get confused - you can play a line like they are the top line, but if another line has better numbers is that line really the top line? That's why girls' hockey coaches for the most part are political rather than analytical. Then, there is job preservation, I really can't figure out what girls are the better girls and I will just roll lines and keep all the girls content enough to not complain to the ad.
Last edited: