The Dallas Stars: A 35,000 Foot View
We're trying to get used to this whole "losing" thing. It's not easy. I think we're a lot better off just assuming that we won't have to get used to it for long because next season is going to be SO much better.
You know, just like we said last year?
The season has only been over a couple of days and as fans, it's difficult at first to know where to begin the autopsy. Kind of like...autopsying the family dog. (That is, if your dog kicked you in the groin repeatedly and made you pay thousands of dollars on season seats and merchandise.) OK, bad example, but you get the idea. We can be a bit biased and emotional at times. One way to start is some good old fashioned knee jerking. Fire Crawford! Trade Ribeiro! Fire Nieuwendyk! Get rid of Turco! (yes, some people are still saying this...) and it goes on and on.
The smarter way is probably to chill out and take the old "35,000 foot view" of things. That's what I'd like to talk about today a little bit, and also get a sense from everyone on what your mentality is going forward.
First: What did the Stars try to do this year?
In my opinion, they tried to take a team built to play hockey one way, and make them play hockey a different way without changing any of the (significant) pieces. They had a stated goal of playing hockey the way the Penguins and Red Wings, etc do; To play a puck possession, up-tempo game with speed and lots of skill, and they wanted to do it with the 7th lowest paid roster in the NHL.
Which is to say that they tried to grill a steak with an EZ Bake Oven...
Mike Heika said it easy and fast earlier this week:
It's a lot easier to find good defensive players on a budget than it is good offensive players. Phoenix ranks third in the NHL in goals against average at 2.30 but also has the second-lowest payroll at $42.1 million. Nashville has built its team on defense and has the third-lowest payroll at $43.5 million. So teams that typically win on the cheap do it with defense. Another way to say it is that teams that pay less will typically look at what they have and say "How can I craft my coaching strategy to fit this cheapo group of players?" Rather than saying "I don't care who we have, this is how we're going to play," which is kind of what the Stars did this season. Now, to their credit, they can point to the forward group and say that there's enough talent there to play that way. It's hard to argue there. Once again this off-season I don't think anyone is going to be complaining about the forward group coming into camp. Richards, Benn, Neal, Eriksson, Ribeiro, Morrow, etc...it's quite a list. It's not too shabby at all. But the defensive group must now be scrutinized by the team itself, not just us this year. Last year it was easy to say that "Oh well, we're going to play different, and that will help Trevor and Mark, and everyone else is a year wiser, etc..." This year, other than being forced to parrot such lines by the economic difficulties presented by Tom Hicks ownership, I can't imagine hearing all the same lines again about the exact same group of players. They know it has to change. We know it has to change.
"We shouldn't have fired Dave Tippett"
"We shouldn't have hired Marc Crawford."
"We should get rid of Crawford."
These are all things that people quite frequently say as they walk down the stairs after a game at the American Airlines Center this year. I've heard them. Over and over and over again. These statements, if you trace the logic of them, all point to the same man, whether people realize it or not (mostly not). If you're the kind of person who says things like that, then I think what you're really trying to say is "We shouldn't have hired Joe Nieuwendyk," right?
Joe Nieuwendyk said goodbye (I really don't think fired is the right word) to Tipp because Tipp doesn't think the game like he does. Tippett likes to play it safe. He wants his personnel to sit back and wait for the other team to make a mistake. Gm Joe wants his team to get up and "go-go-go." To be the aggressors You have to ask yourself, "Do we have personnel to make either of those systems work?"
Phoenix does. They have a better group of defensive players, and there's no question they have better goaltending (thank you Anaheim for sending Bryzgalov off for nothing.) It's working for Dave this year because he has the tools. Like he did here in 2008. That style of play wouldn't have worked any better in Dallas this season than Crawfords did.
At 237 goals for and 254 against (versus 230 for and 257 against last year) it's not clear that it would have been any different at all.
To say you want to keep Dave Tippett (and I'm not necessarily disagreeing with this) or that you want to get rid of Marc Crawford (likewise) is to say that you don't like Joe Nieuwendyk or his philosophy. Don't point at the coach (yet). Address the man pulling the strings if you're inclined to say things like that. Joe Nieuwendyk hired Marc Crawford knowing exactly what he wants to do. The onus is on Joe now to get the pieces that work right for the coach he hired. If he does that, and then judges the coaches efforts a failure, we can talk about a new one.
It nearly did work...kind of....
The important thing to remember is that we should think of it as a process. It didn't work perfectly the first year with Les Jackson's leftovers and players that knew only the old system most of their careers, if not all.
As I look at the season as a whole, I think of the struggles they had along the way and how many things had to go wrong for them to miss the playoffs. The list is quite long.
- Terrible shootout struggles. Fix that a little and how much closer are you? Quite a bit. Maybe all the way to the 8 seed.
- A horrible goal scoring drought in November
- A horrendously inexplicable road losing streak straddling January and December.
- An uncanny inability to win three in a row.
- A horrible post Olympic restart following what was a brilliant stretch before the Games.
Fix one or two of these, just a little bit, and think of how much closer they would have been. That has to be their mentality going into next year if no big changes are going to happen. They have to believe that if they tweak a couple of things here or there, and keep doing what they were doing, particularly at home, and they'll be in the tournament next year. If they don't believe that, then what else are they supposed to do?
You and I can believe differently, though. Do you believe those things are fixable by current personnel/players, or is it all interconnected to the lowest paid defense in the National Hockey League?
Improvement can reasonably be expected or hoped for from some players. Kari Lehtonen showed great potential down the stretch. Mark Fistric is still a work in progress, I believe that very firmly. Grossman is another that is still maturing, I think. Benn and Neal should get a little better too, if that's possible, and Tom Wandell: It's next season or never to take that next step.
I've said it before, and I will keep saying it again and again. Next year will be one too many years. If they bring back this same group next season, then it's the old "doing the same thing the same way and expecting different results" thing: Insanity. Stupidity. Call it what you will.
Or am I the insane one for continuing to buy season tickets for the same group of players and daring to hope for different results?
37 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm wondering why everyone
keeps pointing to the coaches and GM when the one obvious thing in common between those two teams is the players. I’m not a fan of Tippet and wasn’t upset at his firing. I’m not a fan of Crawford and don’t particularly like his hiring but we appear stuck with him so at this point the onus is on the players.
Brenden Morrow is not an uptempo, skating player. He’ll make the 4th highest amount on the team and at this point can he be counted on to provide the offense to support that dollar commitment? Also is he the best player for the spot he holds on this team? If Morrow can’t excel in this system shouldn’t he be traded to improve the defense?
Mike Ribeirio isn’t an uptempo player, but he’s shown at times the ability to score consistently. His carousel of linemates this year didn’t help. At 5 million dollars though is he the best 2nd line center for this team? On the other hand Richards is only signed through next season. Can they really trade Ribeirio before inking Richards to an extension? If Brad doesn’t re-sign and Dallas trades Ribs the center position could be nothing short of awful in 2011.
What was the graphic Ralph and Razor showed about Robidas’ production?
First 40 games played – 10 goals – 17 assists for a .675pts/gm avg
Final 42 games played – 0 goals – 14 assists for a .33pts/gm avg
Robidas fell off the map in the 2nd half. At age 33 is it a safe bet to gamble that the first half is who he is as a player rather than the 2nd half? He got a lot of pp goals and points early then was so bad he was demoted to the 2nd unit. He didn’t have a single point on the powerplay from Dec. 19th on. This is our anchor on the blue line? Can’t 3.3 million be better spent on a more consistent and productive player? On a budget there can only be so many high dollar guys. If you bring in another 4 million dollar defenseman will Ribeiro’s salary alone be a big enough cut?
Brad Richards had one of the best seasons of his career. He carried our powerplay at times. They’d have been near the bottom without him on it. He makes a lot of money on a team that can’t pay a lot. He finished 7th in the league in points and if he can duplicate that kind of production next year he’ll be in line for another similar contract. I don’t know that the Stars can afford that and improve in other areas. Will Brad want to stay on a team that isn’t a legit Cup contender? If he doesn’t re-sign this summer can you play the waiting game and hope he changes his mind before the deadline? If by then he still doesn’t and you’re hanging around the 8th spot will management have the guts to trade its best player at the deadline? Do you want it to get that far?
These are just a few issues regarding some players. What about Neal? Did Niewy over pay for Ott and if not then isn’t he doing what you want from Morrow? Can you/should you keep both? Is Benn a bonafide center? If he’s a 55-65 point center but a 30-40 goal winger is the team really better served with him at the pivot?
The point of all this is that laying it at Tippet or Crawford’s feet doesn’t change anything. These are the players you have, now who’s best suited to play in this system and what will management do to improve the porous defense.
Crawford hasn't coached a team to conference finals in a decade
If key signed players aren’t suited to his system, given the list you just put on the block, the system needs to be adapted. Crawford’s failure to maximize talent does belong at his feet, though the lack of reliable defense admittedly isn’t his fault.
Niewy knows Dallas needs to keep Richards and if at all possible. Ott is signed, and only time will tell how well he pays off. But I’m very perplexed by how you’re going after Morrow. He’s No. 5 in points after Richards, Eriksson, Neal and Ribero coming off an ACL injury, throw in a gold medal, a no-trade clause, a contract through 2013 and the way many, many fans adore him… are you denying his job is far more secure than Crawford’s?
You and Heika are on similar pages roster-wise: http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/04/10/2104685/how-the-dallas-stars-roster-contract.html
I'm after Morrow because
at times he didn’t show up this season. He’s had major injuries the last couple of years, is older and plays a position of depth on a team that has weaknesses in other areas. If Morrow is the 3rd best left winger on the team why would you keep him over Neal and Benn? What about Ott? Is Dallas really going to pay him to play on the 3rd line?
His comments about not wanting to fight because he was more worried about the Olympics than the Stars really bothered me. He showed far more commitment and heart wearing the white and red in those two weeks than he did the entire year this year for Dallas. What happened to the heart and soul guy? If it was the injury is he fully healthy? Will he return to what he used to be? If he’s a 20 goal, 50 point player though 4 million is too much for a team on a budget.
His NTC is a concern but if Niewy says I’ve got to make some moves and we’d like to shop you he probably wouldn’t turn down a trade as long as they didn’t attempt to ship him off to a terrible rebuilding team like Edmonton, Florida or Carolina.
My opinion is that magical 2007 was his peak that he’ll never reach again. If that’s the case they need to move him before a real decline sets in and the rest of the league notices he’s not what he once was.
They generally say it takes
about 1 1/2- 2 years to recover from the injury he had. Not necessarily because it keeps bugging the person, but because of the fear of getting it hurt again. That’s probably why Morrow said and acted the way he did, especially with the chance to play in the olympics.
I’m not saying it’s right, but having had a knee injury like that myself, it’s definitely understandable. I’d look for him to bounce back in a big way nex season.
Those are my feelings exactly.
Morrow has been frustrating and disappointing.
Here's to all us girls who love hockey...and the men who play it.
by Brad_Richards_Rocks on Apr 13, 2010 3:45 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
This is a dead horse and I can't convince anyone of anything
but it’s very sad that his most widely circulated quote of the year is a misquote and sad that people swallow it so easily because it serves their purposes.
Morrow said:
“That would be the last thing I’d want to do — go and get in a fight with him, hurt my hand or something and have to miss the Olympics on top of everything else that has happened with our team, that would be a kind of shot at me for getting in a fight with him and having to miss that tournament.”
I’ve listened to most player interviews and I’ve never heard any player, including Morrow, fumble partial sentences for that long. BaD are pressing him on why he didn’t get into a fight, and I think his shame is evident. I believe it’s crystal clear that he’s thinking out loud and he’s not describing his rationale during the game, but doing what he does all the time — trying to frame a situation in terms of why a bad situation can be a good thing going forward.
Morrow was saying that Avery would have tried to injure him intentionally. He was describing his role in the Olympics as a positive for the team, and letting Avery take that would have been a blow. The guy didn’t become “me-first” overnight, people.
As I’ve said elsewhere in the last few days, I don’t think Kari is the next scapegoat — I think it’s Morrow. I don’t know that “lead by example” works with kids who don’t know what they’re doing yet, which is worrisome. I hope for the best for him because I think he’s still the heart and soul guy, but the team/body’s a bit of a mess. I’m not going to turn on him for being insanely accessible to the media and fumbling through a potentially perilous string of thoughts.
I believe he was better on the Canadian team because the team was functional. I believe he was better on the 2007 Stars team because the 2007 Stars team was functional.
Wandell
I feel pretty confident in Wandell. We just have to see how he returns from injury. I still want to beat the ever loving tar out of the bastard in Vancouver who didn’t latch the damned board door that caused this injury.
I'm gonna post this again...
Please forgive me for the repost but I think this is a way better spot than the Modano/Lehts/Turco tribute story.
Summary: What needs fixing is the Defense!
You know I heard during the Min. broadcast that Marty’s Save percentage was .913 which was better than his average so I went and crunched some numbers that I think are actually quite telling.
Shots/Game Saves/Game Shots/Min Saves/Min
20.46153846 18.92307692 0.420221169 0.388625592
21.61290323 19.90322581 0.441079658 0.406188282
24.70909091 23.03636364 0.424289728 0.395566656
22.57534247 20.60273973 0.378068364 0.345033265
23.88235294 21.44117647 0.415345269 0.372890026
23.34328358 21.25373134 0.415515409 0.378320935
24.88709677 22.62903226 0.425186002 0.386607881
26.93243243 24.18918919 0.460596256 0.413681535
30.28301887 27.64150943 0.519753886 0.474417098
These are career numbers for Turco. With the last line being this year. He averaged 3.3 more shots per game then the next closest year, made 3.5 more saves per game than the next closest year and I broke down by minute as well since Games played doesn’t take into account when he was pulled or replaced a backup. Notice the last two years are the highest totals in every category which means that he’s had to do the most work he’s ever done in his career per minute/game and when you break it down by shots and saves instead of goals per minute you see he’s actually done better the past two years than any other previous year. The problem, in my opinion is that the defense has let way too many shots get through.
I know Turco would say it’s ultimately his responsibility to keep the puck out of the net and he won’t make excuses, but his defensive support has been horrible the past two seasons and even though he has better save numbers the sheer number of shots faced means that he has let in more goals than usual… just food for thought before we as a fan base say good riddance. I for one will be sad to see him go.
I didn't see...
But how did Larsen look in Minnesota? I’m guessing that he was solid since nobody is talking about him. I’ll be honest, I really don’t feel like this team really needs a #1 defenseman more than they just need 3 Fistrics and 3 Robis. I mean the reason this D isn’t that good is because of the nose dive in D talent after the first line. I mean, and let me know what you think, Daley just isn’t cut out to play defense his body is too small to take body’s out of the crease, and goals go in very easily off of him. I don’t think they need an outstanding D man more than they need just three solid guys. I’m still firm in believing Skrastins is a solid defender that does all the right things but never got back to his level of play after the olympics and didn’t really get it back from playing a game every other day. I like Joe, I like Crow, and I feel like this thing comes back a lot better after a couple of off season moves. I like to see a trade of Ribs and package Daley with him if you’d like, for some solid blue liners cause let’s face it, a draft pick won’t pay off for at least 3 years.
So you're either against Joe...
Or you’re for him? Can’t I say that he’s made some really good moves for players but that Crow was the worst possible coach available?
I’ve never liked him, never respected him and never thought that his system looked good. I don’t think the players believe in him and it doesn’t sound like he truly believes in them. He overplays his top lines (the significant minuses show that) and doesn’t seem to know how to match lines at all.
Whether it’s Crow or Huddy, SOMETHING is very wrong with the entire defensive system. I’m not sure that it really all falls on the players. I think they set themselves up for defeat by the entire system and it means more mistakes, which weighs heavily on a young D corps.
I don’t know whether Huddy has entire control or the system is shared between the two coaches but it really doesn’t seem to work. The positioning is horrible, the breakout of their own zone is HORRENDOUS and they look completely unsure of what to do all the time. It looks very unnatural for most of them, and I think that falls on Huddy.
But Crow is just terrible at getting them to play to their ability. He’s always been that way so why would you expect something else?
Here’s hoping they can at least hang in there until he’s fired before the trade deadline next year.
I'm saying that Crawford doesn't have
the right players to make his system work yet.
When he gets players generally perceived as being better fits, and THEN can’t get them to fit, I will start crucifying him.
Certainly not after one year with someone else’s players.
by Brad Gardner on Apr 13, 2010 9:43 AM CDT up reply actions
So you're saying...
That a team should draft and develop players for a certain style for a decade and then trade them off for a coach who has yet to prove himself in this league?
I think I must have missed the entire point of a coach.
And absolutely everything I said above still applies. It’s just a terrible, terrible system. The numbers from his past don’t lie. His teams have always trended down, not up.
Hey, I'm not a big fan of the system either
I like safe Dave Tippett hockey, personally.
I’m just saying: Joe wants them to play this way but when you’ve got Matt Niskanen and company making the first all important first pass out of the zone, it doesn’t work.
by Brad Gardner on Apr 13, 2010 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions
I kindly disagree with you...
Tipp hockey, while it gets you to the playoffs, we’ve seen that in most cases it doesn’t get you far. I’m a firm believer in if you want it, go take it because what happens when you play a team that doesn’t make mistakes? I know one doesn’t exist, but there are some that give you fewer chances to capitalize. There’s about 16 of them every year.
by bigtill2002 on Apr 13, 2010 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions
But with this payroll
You have to look at Nashville and Phoenix and say “Oh, that’s how you win with a small ass payroll”
Which is what we have, and it’s what we’ll have next season too.
by Brad Gardner on Apr 13, 2010 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions
Good point...
Long story short I think we can sum this up with, until new ownership comes in, EVERYTHING is gonna be a moot point. Welcome to Limbo, TX. Population: us. :(
by bigtill2002 on Apr 13, 2010 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions
But what have PHX and NSH
won? yeah they’re in the playoffs but neither has won a series. On a budget its important to get there but that’s not who I want to model my franchise after. They have a nucleus to be more LA than Nashville if they’re willing to make some hard choices about older players, perhaps struggle again next season and continue to draft well.
The other question...
Is all of this for not if a new owner comes in and get’s rid of Joe? We’re saying Joe needs to do this and that, but does Joe even still have a job with a new ownership group?
That's a good point. It's entirely possible they could go another direction
But I’m not sure how that works with eating all those coaching contract $$$$
And new ownership will probably be as tight assed in the wallet department at least for a little while until they get their feet under them.
by Brad Gardner on Apr 13, 2010 9:44 AM CDT up reply actions
I think new ownership
Would be foolish if they got rid of what we currently have. I’m sure they would know your roster moves are way different with money to spend. I feel like ownership would know that one solid move, and this team has all the pieces in place. Although, I don’t know how somebody with enough money to buy the Stars thinks since I don’t have enough money to buy the Stars.
Honestly
If Morrow doesn’t get his game going again next season he needs to be moved. Sentimentality is nice and all, and I love him as a player, but I don’t want 4 million bucks tied up in him if he isn’t playing worth it. If we could move him for an upgrade on defense, I’d be all for it.
Give Morrow another season...
I’m fairly certain you’ll like what you see. That’s a huge injury to overcome.
by bigtill2002 on Apr 13, 2010 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions
Yes, an ACL injury is a big one to overcome, but he played fine in the Olympics. The knee didn’t look like it was bothering him at all. He just can’t use it as an excuse anymore.
My problem with Morrow is that he seemed to care more about Team Canada than the Stars. I hope he gets his sh*t together by next season…
Here's to all us girls who love hockey...and the men who play it.
by Brad_Richards_Rocks on Apr 13, 2010 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions
hmmm
I disagree with that but if he DID care more about Team Canada than the Stars I wouldn’t blame him one bit. I mean you’re talking about a job (granted a fun job) versus national pride and something you’ve wanted to do since you first understood what hockey and Canada were and doing it in Canada no less.
by Guy Johnson on Apr 13, 2010 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions
I know
And that’s precisely why I’ve been hesitant to fully out-right agree with anyone wanting to trade him this offseason. Although, like I said, if it netted us a significant upgrade on defense, I’d grit my teeth and deal with it.
I’d much rather see Ribs moved for defense, put Benn on the 2nd line center slot, and then Wandell on the 3rd line center slot. Not much loss then at center. I’m confident our wins will be fine with Eriksson, Neal, Morrow, and Ott. Ott plays well when he gets quality linemates, and if we’re paying him 3 million bucks a year, he needs to be in the Top 6.
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
by Guy Johnson on Apr 13, 2010 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions
I agree...
With a decent D in front of him and his puck handling ability, he’s the best option for a solid 2-goalie system. It’s not his fault he was left out to dry.
Tell you one thing, he’s going to make a fine addition to a cup contender.
If he goes to the West
We’ll rue the day…
by Guy Johnson on Apr 13, 2010 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions
What a bunch of bullsh...
I knew it was an inevitability but It’s like Mo said, put anybody behind this team and his numbers will suffer. So who’s a good fit for him? I feel like Washington would be a good fit for him, better defense than he’s used to and a hot offense. If he wears a jersey from a Pacific team, I’ll be pretty upset. Hope you get a cup Marty, just wish we coulda got you one in a Stars uniform. I bet the Sharks are excited to hear this. Godspeed, Marty.





















