GM Hockey
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
GM Hockey

You are not connected. Please login or register

Senators Direction for the Second Half: Ottawa Sun

+6
beedub
wprager
Cap'n Clutch
LeCaptain
Snuh
SeawaySensFan
10 posters

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Go down  Message [Page 2 of 3]

SeawaySensFan


Franchise Player
Franchise Player

Cap'n Clutch wrote:The issue is with the players but why aren't they performing? They wouldn't do it for Paddock nor for Murray when he stepped in for the final 20 games or so. They aren't performing for Hartsburg either. What's the answer? You can't fire the whole team.

One thing I absolutely will lay on Hartsburg is his proclamation of accountability. Where the Hell is it? Benching Schubert, McAmmond, Donovan and Bell at times through out the season just doesn't cut it IMO. I think some of these players are a little too comfortable. What we NEED Spezza and Heatley to win? Really? Look at our record. I'd rather lose with them learning something by being benched or scratched than lose with them floating out there.

Hartsburg has been giving the big-money players the velvet glove treatment all year.

One of the carrots a coach has is the #1 power-play unit. He could have used that as leverage to get something out of the players who weren't pulling their weight.

Instead, he keeps letting the "big guns" have those gravy minutes despite unsatisfactory production and work ethic. Then he goes on to put Mike Fisher on the point. This decision is what has me leaning away from viewing Hartsburg as a sympathetic victim.

He clearly is letting the Big 4, including Fisher, run the team.

Snuh


Rookie
Rookie

Cap'n Clutch wrote:The issue is with the players but why aren't they performing? They wouldn't do it for Paddock nor for Murray when he stepped in for the final 20 games or so. They aren't performing for Hartsburg either. What's the answer? You can't fire the whole team.

One thing I absolutely will lay on Hartsburg is his proclamation of accountability. Where the Hell is it? Benching Schubert, McAmmond, Donovan and Bell at times through out the season just doesn't cut it IMO. I think some of these players are a little too comfortable. What we NEED Spezza and Heatley to win? Really? Look at our record. I'd rather lose with them learning something by being benched or scratched than lose with them floating out there.

I know you can't fire or trade the entire team, but you said it yourself. Neither Paddock or Murray couldn't motivate the players to play at their highest level. Now Hartsburg is under the gun because the same thing is happening. You could place Scotty Bowman behind that bench and you'd still have the same results. I don't know what the answer is, but I don't think yet another coach is the answer. Both Murray and Hartsburg are perfect for a rebuilding team if it comes to that.

Guest


Guest

SeawaySensFan wrote:
B B B Bird is the Word wrote:
SeawaySensFan wrote:
B B B Bird is the Word wrote:If we are indeed setting ourselves up for the next few years, and calling this season a bust, I think we need a new coach NOW. We need someone who can get the most of his players, not just to win games, but to increase their trade value. Hartsburgh has proven that he can't do it - young guys are sucking and so are the vetrans. I know it's getting old, but I really think the Dung hockey these guys are playing are the direct result of Hartsburgh, thus the apparent brutal offers we are getting from other GMs. Motivation isn't the problem, its using the players incorrectly and causing them to suck.

Quite the opposite.

Hartsburg would have been fine if this was a team of young, up and coming players. But they are largely veterans with a proven coach-killing component leading the way.

If the core is kept, hire a ballsy, in your face coach. If a new direction is adopted, Hartsburg becomes an ideal coach for the immediate future.

sorry, I'm not following your post - Quite the opposite? to what? Again, not sure what you are saying.

What are you saying? Are you not following my post. Again, I ask what are you saying?

Rebuild = keep Hartsburg

Keep the core intact = fire Hartsburg

heh - this could go on for a while. Sorry, I just didn't follow your post. My only point in that lot of burble I wrote, was that I think the Senators need a coach who can get the most of these under performing players. If nothing else, to increase their trade value so that Murray can have a chance at improving the team through trades.

wprager

wprager
Administrator
Administrator

Snuh wrote:
B B B Bird is the Word wrote:I think that everything is likely figured out in Murray's eyes, and the hold up is selling his vision to Melynk, and getting the go-ahead from him.

I'd like to think so too. I hope that's the case and that Melnyk can be sold, and in turn, can be patient the rest of the way and stay the Diddle out of hockey decisions that he knows nothing about. I'd like to think he has some faith in his GM.

Well, with all due respect to Murray, he hired Paddock (mistake) and Hartsburg (mistake for this particular lineup). The team has been horrible for more than 12 months now and there is nearly no indication that thing are changing. So at this point it's hard to argue that Murray/Hartsburg no any more about what to do here than Melnyk, or I or you.

SeawaySensFan

SeawaySensFan
Franchise Player
Franchise Player

B B B Bird is the Word wrote:heh - this could go on for a while. Sorry, I just didn't follow your post. My only point in that lot of burble I wrote, was that I think the Senators need a coach who can get the most of these under performing players. If nothing else, to increase their trade value so that Murray can have a chance at improving the team through trades.

You're right, but you know as well as I do that was the case at the beginning of this season. Hartsburg was a bad hire for the team that we currently have.

Murray doesn't deserve the opportunity to fire another coach. The only that will save him is to sell a plan that involves trading a core player or two and Hartsburg continuing to coach a younger, hungrier team next year.

I doubt Melnyk buys it, though.

Guest


Guest

You say we need to get rid of Hartsburg because he the big 3 can't play in his style. Heatley and Spezza couldn't play under Paddock, and Spezza couldn't play under Martin's system (or some people say). Spezza also couldn't adapt to the style he was asked to play at the world championships and he quickly found himself falling to the 3rd, then 4th lines.

Maybe the problem is that Spezza and Heatley can only play under one system. If that's the case then get rid of both. I would want players who can adapt to the situation and system rather than having to have the system tailored to them. Heatley and Spezza are predictable, and that makes playing against them easy. Teams know how to check them because they only want to play one way.

Yzerman was the same until Bowman convinced him to alter his style. The issue isn't with the coach or Management staff, it's squarely on the shoulders of the players. Getting rid of the coach now will set the rebuild back at least an extra year.

Guest


Guest

wprager wrote:
Snuh wrote:
B B B Bird is the Word wrote:I think that everything is likely figured out in Murray's eyes, and the hold up is selling his vision to Melynk, and getting the go-ahead from him.

I'd like to think so too. I hope that's the case and that Melnyk can be sold, and in turn, can be patient the rest of the way and stay the Diddle out of hockey decisions that he knows nothing about. I'd like to think he has some faith in his GM.

Well, with all due respect to Murray, he hired Paddock (mistake) and Hartsburg (mistake for this particular lineup). The team has been horrible for more than 12 months now and there is nearly no indication that thing are changing. So at this point it's hard to argue that Murray/Hartsburg no any more about what to do here than Melnyk, or I or you.

I agree he's made mistakes with his selection of coaches - wasn't it reported that Hartsburg wasn't his first choice? Murray seems to have settled for second/third choices a lot.

Guest


Guest

Dawg's Wife wrote:You say we need to get rid of Hartsburg because he the big 3 can't play in his style. Heatley and Spezza couldn't play under Paddock, and Spezza couldn't play under Martin's system (or some people say). Spezza also couldn't adapt to the style he was asked to play at the world championships and he quickly found himself falling to the 3rd, then 4th lines.

Maybe the problem is that Spezza and Heatley can only play under one system. If that's the case then get rid of both. I would want players who can adapt to the situation and system rather than having to have the system tailored to them. Heatley and Spezza are predictable, and that makes playing against them easy. Teams know how to check them because they only want to play one way.

Yzerman was the same until Bowman convinced him to alter his style. The issue isn't with the coach or Management staff, it's squarely on the shoulders of the players. Getting rid of the coach now will set the rebuild back at least an extra year.

I think they need someone to break them or break them up. Vinny is an example of a guy who was broken and became effective but that seems to be a coaches job. Worst thing that happened here was Paddock, he was a weak coach. Martin was strong (although I hated his philosophy) no-one can argue that he wasn't rigid in his approach. Murray was strong (and I liked his philosophy) he made the players do what he needed done. Paddock gave the boys a taste of freedom and they thrived for a bit, then got lazy and it stuck. I think Hartsburg's problem is that he is not a strong enough or rigid enough personality. These players need to be told what to do and forced to do it.

I am loathed to change coaches again because these players should play no matter who's behind the bench but you can't trade a whole team. These guys need an a$$ kicker and Hartsburg has proven he is not, despite talk to the contrary early on. This team has heard words before.

beedub

beedub
Veteran
Veteran

Snuh, if what you are saying is true, then Spezza and Heatley have become the most spoiled little babies. Can't motivate yourself for $7 million plus a season.....don't let the doorknob hit you on the a$s on the way out. These guys need to be moved, to obtain draft picks, prospects and very valuable cap space

Guest


Guest

Dawg's Wife wrote:You say we need to get rid of Hartsburg because he the big 3 can't play in his style. Heatley and Spezza couldn't play under Paddock, and Spezza couldn't play under Martin's system (or some people say). Spezza also couldn't adapt to the style he was asked to play at the world championships and he quickly found himself falling to the 3rd, then 4th lines.

Maybe the problem is that Spezza and Heatley can only play under one system. If that's the case then get rid of both. I would want players who can adapt to the situation and system rather than having to have the system tailored to them. Heatley and Spezza are predictable, and that makes playing against them easy. Teams know how to check them because they only want to play one way.

Yzerman was the same until Bowman convinced him to alter his style. The issue isn't with the coach or Management staff, it's squarely on the shoulders of the players. Getting rid of the coach now will set the rebuild back at least an extra year.


the top three were all in the top twenty is scoring last year. The team didn't win a lot of games, but it wasn't because the top line wasn't scoring. This year's brutal numbers are a reflection on Hartsburg's inability to cater the team game to the talent (or lack of talent) he has been given to work with.

Guest


Guest

B B B Bird is the Word wrote:

the top three were all in the top twenty is scoring last year. The team didn't win a lot of games, but it wasn't because the top line wasn't scoring. This year's brutal numbers are a reflection on Hartsburg's inability to cater the team game to the talent (or lack of talent) he has been given to work with.

So last year the big 3 scored but we got scored on a lot and lost. This year they arn't scoring, but we arn't being scored on a lot and we're still losing. Seems to me that means no matter what system is in place the Big 3 can't win.

Guest


Guest

Dawg's Wife wrote:
B B B Bird is the Word wrote:

the top three were all in the top twenty is scoring last year. The team didn't win a lot of games, but it wasn't because the top line wasn't scoring. This year's brutal numbers are a reflection on Hartsburg's inability to cater the team game to the talent (or lack of talent) he has been given to work with.

So last year the big 3 scored but we got scored on a lot and lost. This year they arn't scoring, but we arn't being scored on a lot and we're still losing. Seems to me that means no matter what system is in place the Big 3 can't win.

Last year it was our defensive zone coverage that was to blame for losses, and this year it is the D's fault for not getting the puck up to the forwards. I think it is the D that can't win...what a freakin' mess.

Riprock

Riprock
All-Star
All-Star

I think the problem is the pairings. We need to spread out the abilities. Pair a defensive minded player with an offensive one. Balance the speed, don't have a slow pairing. You need to compliment the other players weaknesses with strength.I think they've started to address that now, but it's the time it takes to adjust and build chemistry and rapport.

Guest


Guest

Well it seems we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think firing the coach will do anything. Murray has to take some blame, but ultimately the players take the majority of it. Is it the d's fault Fisher has miss fired at least 10 times in scoring oportunities. Same for Vermette and Heatley should have about 10 more goals than he does. Even given the fact the players can't get the puck up to the forwards they should still have another 30 goals on this team. Those 30 goals would translate into about another 5-6 wins.

Watching the Bruins game last week I found it odd that their D, which isn't terribly mobile, was able to break out of their end very well. The forwards were dropping back down low (close to the goal line) and moving up with the D with speed, giving the D more choices to pass. Hartsburg made comments earlier in the year about Forwards having to help and come back deeper in their end to help the breakout. If anything I blame him for not holding the players accountable, but then again I'm not in the room so I don't know whether he has done that or not.

Guest


Guest

SeawaySensFan wrote:Hartsburg would have been fine if this was a team of young, up and coming players. But they are largely veterans with a proven coach-killing component leading the way.

If the core is kept, hire a ballsy, in your face coach. If a new direction is adopted, Hartsburg becomes an ideal coach for the immediate future.
co-sign

Guest


Guest

Dawg's Wife wrote:You say we need to get rid of Hartsburg because he the big 3 can't play in his style. Heatley and Spezza couldn't play under Paddock, and Spezza couldn't play under Martin's system (or some people say). Spezza also couldn't adapt to the style he was asked to play at the world championships and he quickly found himself falling to the 3rd, then 4th lines.

Maybe the problem is that Spezza and Heatley can only play under one system. If that's the case then get rid of both. I would want players who can adapt to the situation and system rather than having to have the system tailored to them. Heatley and Spezza are predictable, and that makes playing against them easy. Teams know how to check them because they only want to play one way.

Yzerman was the same until Bowman convinced him to alter his style. The issue isn't with the coach or Management staff, it's squarely on the shoulders of the players. Getting rid of the coach now will set the rebuild back at least an extra year.
Assuming Spezza continues playing the way he is now, the same may one day be said about he and Hartsburg. I'm not saying Hartsburg will be a Bowman.

Guest


Guest

DashRiprock wrote:I think the problem is the pairings. We need to spread out the abilities. Pair a defensive minded player with an offensive one. Balance the speed, don't have a slow pairing. You need to compliment the other players weaknesses with strength.I think they've started to address that now, but it's the time it takes to adjust and build chemistry and rapport.
I've been saying that all season long. Actually, I was saying that all through 07-08 too. But for some goddam reason, they are obsessed with this Phillips/Volchenkov duo. They love to have that pairing and "compensate" with a fully offensive combo - Redden/Mez, Kuba/Picard.
Same goes for the idea of splitting Heatley and Spezza, mentioned earlier in the thread. I have no idea why its so impossible for them to try different ways to make that work? They've done it with Fisher taking Spezza's spot and also when they split the three up completely, but they've never tried leaving Alfie with Spezza and making Heatley carry his own line. It doesn't take that much imagination to see that as a possible solution...It may not work, but they've tried so much random Dung (Ruutu on the top line?? wtf) and yet they won't try that..?

Riprock

Riprock
All-Star
All-Star

And what I've always said about a line of Heatley-Spezza-Alfredsson is that there's too much skill on that line and not enough toughness, grit and size. Not that Spezzan and Heatley are "small" but they hardly play like 6'3" guys. You need to put a real powerforward upfront with them. Look at the PPG line a few years ago in Anaheim. They were dominant because they were strong and could score. They drove the net, grinded the boards, and crashed and banged infront of the net.

If Spezza and Heatley had a guy like Bertuzzi, Nash, Iginla, Penner, Morrow, or the like, they'd be able to get open and free for the pass and goal.

Look at the Nash-Getzlaf-Heatley line from the WC. Nash has the size and the skill to dominate a game at both ends. No problems there. Heatley's got a wicked one-timer, all he does is get open in the slot or the wing. Getzlaf can score, set up the goal, and bang along the boards and plant himself infront of the net. Pure domination.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 3]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum