Dallas Stars Fans Should Hope For Success, No Matter What The System Might Be
It's been very interesting to me to try and gauge fan's expectations for this upcoming season. Just a few months removed from missing the postseason by a mere two points, the Stars are facing an uncertain but hopeful future as Joe Nieuwendyk resets a bit and starts truly building this team up. Using the money that would have likely gone to Richards, Nieuwendyk set this team up for a bright future while maintaining the present team as a very competitive one -- and perhaps even deeper than before.
Part of this plan involved letting go of Marc Crawford, a failed experiment in bringing a new and aggressive style of hockey to Dallas. Nieuwendyk is building this team to be physical and aggressive, and Crawford was supposed to be the catalyst for that. Yet the players already on this team had troubles assimilating into the exact system that Crawford wanted and it's become apparent that Crawford wasn't exactly the best coach to move that process along.
The end result was a team that did seemingly score more goals and was exciting to watch, yet suffered defensively and had all sorts of issues on special teams while resembling a team that could never really find it's identity. How much did Marc Crawford really change offensively for the team, other than attempting to implement a system that was more "aggressive" offensively?
| Year | Goals/Game |
| 2010-11 | 2.71 |
| 2009-10 | 2.80 |
| 2008-09 | 2.73 |
| 2007-08 | 2.89 |
| 2006-07 | 2.65 |
Enter Glen Gulutzan, rookie NHL head coach and just two seasons removed from coaching in the ECHL. If there ever was a coach that would be the exact opposite of Marc Crawford, it's Gulutzan -- a player's coach, who focuses on relating to his players and knows the best way to success sometimes is to mold the system to fit the players on the team. Since being hired, Gulutzan has spoken about being better defensively, being tough to play against and about being a hard-playing "two-way hockey team".
What has amazed me is that suddenly a number of fans are acting concerned. Not that this system won't work, but that it would be "boring"...
The past two seasons the Dallas Stars have been far from a boring team to watch. Their slow starts coupled with some great come-from-behind wins has sparked lots of talk about this team's resolve and character when their backs are against the wall. As we've discussed before, however, those shortcomings that would force those exciting victories eventually caught up to them and the team faltered in the second half of the season -- falling from the top of the division all the way to missing the playoffs by just one win.
So, was that brand of "exciting hockey" worth it? When Joe Nieuwendyk hired Marc Crawford, he wanted to change the approach this team was taking as a team. Nieuwendyk saw a farm system that was suffering from years of bad trades and a couple of bad drafts and filled with "gritty forwards" with barely any defensemen. He saw a team that had missed the playoffs a year after going to the postseason, with coach Dave Tippett apparently having lost the locker room.
Whether the decision to fire Tippett was the right one or not, Nieuwendyk was hired to make changes. That was the last-grasp panic move by Tom Hicks, on the eve of losing control of this franchise, and he wanted to try one last thing to jump start this organization into contention once more. What better way than to take the team in a whole new direction systemically?
Two years later and heading into his third season as a general manager, Nieuwendyk has grown and learned. He's seen that trying to force a style of "exciting and aggressive" hockey isn't exactly on par with building a successful team, especially when those players are not comfortable either with that system or with the coach that is teaching it. The more we learn about what happened with Marc Crawford, the more it becomes apparent that perhaps it wasn't the system anyway, but more about the coach that was standing in front of the team.
Aggressive offense or not, Nieuwendyk is intent on turning this into a tough, physical franchise. He's drafting big forwards and even bigger defensemen. He signed a number of "gritty" forwards in free agency this year who excel at playing two-way hockey and provide more depth for this team than we've seen in a number of years. No matter what style, however, Nieuwendyk wants this team to win.
Glen Gulutzan was hired not to implement a system, but to make this a successful team once more. Nothing else is more important than this fact.
There was thought that when Crawford was first hired that an aggressive, more exciting style of hockey would appeal to more hockey fans in this post-lockout era, especially since the Dallas Stars had apparently been stuck in the trap style of play since 1997. This wasn't the same NHL anymore and Crawford was supposed to usher the Stars into a new era of hockey -- a plan that backfired miserably.
So now we have the players and Gulutzan talking about defensive hockey, defensive responsibility and two-way hockey. All of these terms apparently scare fans into thinking the team is going to resort once more into a "boring" trap-style of hockey, similar to what the Texas Stars had down in Austin with Gulutzan as their coach. It's something that's been echoed on many different forums by Stars fans, worries that the Dallas Stars will turn boring once more.
The Texas Stars were one of the most successful teams in the AHL the past two seasons, and made the playoffs both years.
The Las Vegas Wranglers made it to the ECHL playoffs in five out of six seasons with Gulutzan as the coach.
The Stars were one of the better defensive teams in the AHL while playing a conservative style of offense, compensating for a lack of top-end talent at forward while having a deep reserve of defensemen.
The Wranglers were aggressive offensively and mirrored the style of hockey that Gulutzan employed as a player; gritty, hard working, non-flashy but effective.
Meanwhile, the Dallas Stars are missing the postseason while trying to force an "exciting" style of hockey onto the players and the team.
You tell me which brand of hockey is "more exciting" as a fan, because when it comes down to it only one thing matters at the end of the season: did the the team win and did they make the playoffs?
Fans should be hoping that Gulutzan comes in and preaches defensive responsibility. The Dallas Stars might have been more aggressive offensively, but the team allowed far too many back breaking goals early in games and at the worst possible times -- usually just after a Dallas Stars goal. The Stars allowed more goals than they scored last season, a recipe for disaster no matter how you try and spin it and it's amazing they came as close to the postseason as they did. In fact, if the Stars had slipped into the playoffs they would have been the only team in the NHL to make the postseason with a negative goal differential.
Boring or not, Glen Gulutzan has been hired to turn this team into a winner. Part of that job is to have this Stars team not allow as many goals as they have the past few seasons -- which entails preaching better defensive responsibility.
It may not be as exciting, but if the Dallas Stars are winning games -- that's all that matters.
33 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm not sure I get the whole "boring style" argument either....
I mean, look at the goals scored for the last 5 seasons. Virtually no difference whatsoever. It’s not going to get “less offensive” than before, because we were never really “more offensive” to begin with.
"I want to have Jamie Benn's babies. And you can quote me on that." - Brandon Worley
I feel like Crawford's system was never fully implemented.
They were supposed to be more offensive, but I always felt like they went back to Tippett-style playing, especially at the beginning of Crawford’s tenure.
Here's to all us girls who love hockey...and the men who play it.
RIP Scratch (7/9/74-9/7/11). A Dallas Star is forever.
by Brad_Richards_Rocks on Sep 12, 2011 8:37 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
The first season definitely. But last season, you could see what he was trying to do with the system.
Either way though:
His implemented system wasn’t effective, making it a coaching issue. OR
His system wasn’t accepted by any of the players, making it a coaching issue.
"I want to have Jamie Benn's babies. And you can quote me on that." - Brandon Worley
You know what's exciting? Winning.
Besides, the Stars don’t bore me. They never have. For me, it’s just exciting to watch them play, especially when they win.
Here's to all us girls who love hockey...and the men who play it.
RIP Scratch (7/9/74-9/7/11). A Dallas Star is forever.
by Brad_Richards_Rocks on Sep 12, 2011 8:35 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
Amen. Whether they win 1-0 or 9-8, winning is exciting.
Scoring a load of goals and losing isn’t going to put butts in the seats.
TracyJean1972: YouTube channel
@TracyJean: Twitter account
I think the main concern is we go the way of the other budget teams, and pull a Nashville/Phoenix-esque style
Two way hockey is quite exciting if you think about it, it means that Jamie Benn can smack people around and score goals, it means Loui Eriksson can do some Selke-calibre defensive play and snipe the living god out of Pekka Rinne.
And Grossman can smack someone, and smack them again, and smack them again for good measure, and sco… well okay, but I don’t think two way hockey is particularly boring, I think it actually puts more emphsasis on working a a group on both ends of the ice (instead of either relying on the Forwards to score more than them, or pinning your hopes on Weber, Suter and Rinne to hold the fort).
Tonight's forecast... a freeze!!!
James Neal - 45 points. Alex Goligoski - 46 points. Nieuwendyk lost?
by Great British Stars Fan on Sep 12, 2011 8:37 AM CDT reply actions
there is nothing boring
about the NHL playoffs. and Nashville and Phoenix have made the playoffs. So give me “boring”
go go goligoski
I was perfectly fine with the old 'boring' Stars
defensive style that won and got to the playoffs. I was not happy to see Tip let go, but also understand that Joe was hired to move things in a different direction.
But I don’t think his goal was to “exciting” offensive, but to win in the current environment. Rather I think Joe overestimated the impact of the new rules, or at least how the refs would enforce it, especially in clutch time and the playoffs. They did tilt things a bit more towards a skating brand of open hockey. But maybe not to the extent Joe thought. Also, the reality is we did not have personnel to fit that kind of hockey, we didn’t have the money to get free agents of that type and we weren’t drafting high enough to get the kind of elite skill needed to do that either.
Hopefully we can find the happy medium to fit the strengths of our roster while also positioning for the future under new ownership. But I don’t care how we get there, I want to see meaningful playoff hockey again.
Gritty, Defensive style hockey teams win Cups...
Look at the Bruins. They knock you around in the defensive zone and have a backstop named Thomas. They forecheck you in the offensive/neutral zone and get you to cough up the puck and create scoring chances. Look at the Capitals. They scored all kinda of goals during the regular season the last few years and went no where in the playoffs. They are trying to change to a more defensive team. That’s the type of team we need to be and Joe is building right now. We don’t have the caliber of players that Boston has, but we can compete and have quality prospects in the system.
by fivefourfighting on Sep 12, 2011 9:58 AM CDT reply actions
Agreed. The Caps did make progress this season into being more defensive-minded
But they are not there yet. Once they are, I think they Caps will be a heavy favorite to win the Cup.
TracyJean1972: YouTube channel
@TracyJean: Twitter account
i might be stretching here...
but it’s something similar to the whole A pitching will typically beat A hitting, particularly in the playoffs when you’re playing the best teams. you see it every single season in baseball.
while it’s nice to have an uptempo style hockey club what happens when you get into the playoffs and run into a seasoned, veteran team with lock-down potential? one that can altogether stop your PP and frustrate your overall gameplan?
what’s better; having an uptempo team that could beat a team like Columbus 5-1 on any given night or a team that can hang with DET, CHI, PHI, WAS, PIT, BOS, etc. on any given night b/c they can be stout against the PP, win faceoffs and not make mistakes?
killing an important PP is even just as exciting as a goal scored. we’ve all been there to witness that!
Same thing happens in footbal.
Everyone wants these gunslinging offenses, but they don’t win the SB without a great defense.
Defending Big D - Dallas Stars news & analysis
@brandonworley - Follow me on Twitter!
by Brandon Worley on Sep 12, 2011 10:05 AM CDT up reply actions
I would rather see "boring" hockey where we're winning
than “exciting” hockey where we can’t hold a lead in the late parts of the game, or where we have to stage a come-from-behind victory in the final seconds off of a quirky faceoff win, or where we have to take it to OT or the shootout too often. I’m sorry, but as exciting as it often was the past couple of seasons, it was not a good kind of exciting more often than not. And when you’re that close so many times, but then still can’t pull it out…blarg. Give me boring, steady, solid defense with some balanced offense any day.
by WingnutInStarsCountry on Sep 12, 2011 10:00 AM CDT reply actions
I think most hockey fans...
can understand a great defensive battle. Not every fan will like it, but true hockey fans can understand two teams battling it out with first one NOT to make a mistake winning it.
Like I said, not every fan is going to like it or understand it. Some fans just want “action”.
Fans might say they want more exciting hockey..
But whats going to put fans in the seats at the AAC is winning and making the playoffs. Benn brings plenty of excitement I think we could all say with his demolition of opposing teams with his checks and dekes.
by T-rom on Sep 12, 2011 10:23 AM CDT via iPhone app reply actions
The "more exciting" brand of hockey
is really just hockey for uneducated fans. It’s a style that results in lots of odd man rushes, 1-on-1s and breakaways, where the play is easy to see and understand, or you just have a player taking on the goalie. They’re exciting plays because of the speed at which they happen and the obvious recognition of a “scoring chance.”
I would say that the vast majority of us here are fairly well educated when it comes to hockey, and thus we can appreciated both excellent defending as well a goal that takes 15-30 seconds to set up, because we understand how the plays are developing. There’s no doubt a high degree of beauty when we get to watch Benn steal a puck and go off to the races, but there’s a whole other level for plays made between Ribs and Morrow, or the Sedins, or Datsyuk Franzen and Zetterburg, or Crosby and Neal… oh wait, oops. But you guys get it. It is fun to see hockey played a level that only these guys are capable of and not always the one player show you can get at any Junior level game
When your top player
is Brad Richards and your owner has bankrupted the team, it would be foolish to try to turn your team into the ‘99 Stars. Your best player would never flourish in this type system and you’re not going to be able to acquire high level talent to compensate for this. This is not the sole reason for the previous two years’ style of play but should be considered a significant cause.
Boring...
…is the new exciting. If only the ladies would recognize that in me.
Defending Big D's "Official" Western New York Representative
Don't call yourself boring.
Call youself a “hipster”
"I want to have Jamie Benn's babies. And you can quote me on that." - Brandon Worley
I don't mind "slow" hockey.
Stars killed Sharks with that type of play, when they were in playoffs last time.
And it wasn’t boring.
Good times are here and Stars will take what belongs to them. Sooner or Later.
Two words: Playoff Hockey
is anything but boring, and that is where we want to be. I went to Cedar Park a couple of seasons ago and watched the Calder Cup Playoffs and Gulutzan did a really great job with the team. Their compete level was incredible. (Jamie Benn wasn’t too shabby himself.) So far I have been impressed with what Gulutzan has said in the interviews he has given. One of the things he has said is he “wants to make hockey fun again”. Although there obviously has to be hard work, I think it should be fun. Afterall, when you love what you do for a living don’t you do a better job? And when you really like your boss, don’t you work even harder for them? So even though this is a game that these guys play that they love, it is still a job and they still have coworkers (teammates) and bosses (coaches/managers). So when that environment is “fun” it can only be better.
These guys want to win. They had a taste of success in 2008, and were so close to making the playoffs last season. I am excited about this season and I am more than cautiously optimistic about Studly Wonderbomb! Yes, health might be an issue, but if that becomes a problem then we didn’t break the bank to get him. I think Fiddler is going to be big for us too. (I would love to see Ott-Fiddler-Burish on the third line, but I know Ott will probably be in the top six – deservedly so.)
Overall if “boring” hockey gives us a team that bonds together like no other, a team that respects their coach and wants to play for him, a team that consistently puts together wins and makes it to the post season, then let’s see how “boring” people think it is then.
Championship rings don’t bore anyone.
If boring hockey means limiting the opposition’s chances, shutting down their superstar players and winning close games decided by a single goal then sign me up for a sleeper. Scoring lots of goals makes headlines and impresses casual hockey fans but tight defensive hockey breeds consistency and wins more games over the course of a season. The Dallas Stars I know and love used to dictate the tempo, frustrate the other team and then take advantage of the opportunities created when they made a mistake. I agree with those who believe the recipe for increasing fan support is winning not scoring more goals than last year. I’m excited to get this season going in a new (old?) direction.
"championship rings don't bore anyone"
Mark Cuban.
:-)
"I want to have Jamie Benn's babies. And you can quote me on that." - Brandon Worley
Let me make a suggestion
to the statement “…only one thing matters at the end of the season: did the the team win and did they make the playoffs?” What really matters is "did the team position themselves to be closer to WINNING the playoffs?
I don’t want to emulate the Coyotes or the Predators. I am greedier! I want Dallas to win it all! I grew up in St. Louis, and at one time they had the longest consecutive playoffs streak in the NHL,but they have never won it all. Moving here and then winning a Cup was more gratifying than 3 SCFs and lots of better than average teams.
True fans can survive even if this team does not win enough to make the playoffs. What is important is that Joe maneuvers this team closer to contending to win it all, even if that means we lose more than we win. Blasphemy, I know. But we learned through the sale situation that the agreements in place with the City of Dallas will keep the franchise here for a couple more decades. If we suck, attendance will be low, but if we are sitting in Los Angelos’ seat in 5 years, favored to win it all, attendance will be at capacity.
Joe’s signings this off season were brilliant! We might do better than we did last season and make the playoffs. Or we might just completely suck. But if we suck, guys that are “tough to play against”, on short term reasonable contracts are salable commodities at the trade deadline. If so, look for the Stars to stock up on youngsters with potential and draft picks, and get ready for what promises to be a deep draft year.
Some will lose interest. Dallas has a lot of fair weather fans that only support a winner, such as myself when it comes to baseball or basketball, but hockey fans will stick with the team. And at this point, anyone still following the Stars is most likely a true hockey fan.
You can have a great defense and a great offense.
The 2 are not mutually exclusive. Ie: Chicago, Pittsburgh….Nashville: They’re as defensively responsible as anyone but they’ll never win a cup bc they can’t score goals. You have to have both. And I do want to watch exciting hockey, who wants to be bored to tears but oh yay we won 1-0? If that’s the outlook you’re destined to be Nashville or Phoenix…is that the goal here?
Nobody is saying the two are mutually exclusive
The problem is 1) 1-0 hockey is not boring and 2) the message the last couple of years around the Stars has been “Offense first, last and always”. I know I’ve gotten the impression the Stars didn’t care about defense because if they scored a lot of goals, they were going to win anyway. It doesn’t matter if the Stars score 6 if the other team scores 7.
Go watch 2008 WCSF game 6 (4OT) or 1999 SCF game 6 (3OT) and tell me low-scoring games aren’t exciting. Both games were 2-1 and some of the best hockey I’ve ever seen.
TracyJean1972: YouTube channel
@TracyJean: Twitter account
I didnt imply 1-0, 2-1 games were boring....
They can be great..if there’s good pace, speed, chances, great saves, etc…the point is style. I don’t ever tune into a Nashville, Phx game unless it affects the Stars…because it’s not interesting. I watch teams like Washington, Pittsburgh, Chicago, LA, Vancouver…who play great defense but have an up-tempo entertaining style, that wins…..
I think the goal is to be both.
But I also don’t think there’s anything wrong with consistently winning low scoring games. The key being…winning.
Defending Big D - Dallas Stars news & analysis
@brandonworley - Follow me on Twitter!
by Brandon Worley on Sep 12, 2011 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions
I actually think 1-0 games are the height of good hockey
The holding of the breath when you get that feeling that the first team to score will win it. It makes the puck battles a million times more significant than a game where the teams are just trading goals back and forth in my opinion.
by Taylor Baird on Sep 12, 2011 4:02 PM CDT up reply actions
They can be good...if there's good pace, chances and great goaltending.
But they can also be incredibly painful to watch. But I also think Stars fans came up let’s face it…watching hideous hockey. Yes there was some great players, incredible skill and great games. But this was the height of the dead puck era. It’s unanimous across hockey the game is much better to watch now than it was pre-lockout. As Stars fans…the hard-nosed, defensive hockey gives us the warm and fuzzies bc that’s when we were great. The point is…we need to be great in the new NHL. Being Nashville or Phoenix isn’t going to be ultimately successful. So it does concern me to hear our coach putting us in the same breath as Phoenix and Nashville.
If we want to win in the post season
We can’t be the Predators or the Coyotes, we’ve all said it ourselves it gets you in the playoffs, but not any further.
Need a balance, hence two-way hockey teams always seem to be the winners of the Cup.
Tonight's forecast... a freeze!!!
James Neal - 45 points. Alex Goligoski - 46 points. Nieuwendyk lost?
by Great British Stars Fan on Sep 12, 2011 5:37 PM CDT reply actions

by 


























