AJC > Sports > Columnists > Archives > 2005 > December > 11 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USMultiple personalties collide on ice again
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Jeff Schultz
A team takes a 3-0 lead. The other team scores four straight. The first team rallies to win in a shootout. Spin central refers to this as the “new NHL.” Not sure if the “H” still sounds for hockey or hooey. But I digress.
It’s no excuse. The new NHL is all about 5-on-4 or 4-on-3 or anything but 5-on-5. But the lack of flow that defines the sports now doesn’t full explain what has happened to the Thrashers. Or, more accurately, what hasn’t happened to the Thrashers.
Hockey is a free flow game. “Systems” are another way of saying, “When the puck is at point A, we do this. When the puck moves to point B, we do that.” But it has little in the way of set plays or structure.
But what teams can have, even in today’s NHL, is an identity. The Thrashers don’t have one. They have 12. They are Sybil on skates.
They opened Sunday’s game at home by falling behind 3-0 to the Chicago Blackhawks, who haven’t won a Stanley Cup since 1961 and might not win it again until 2061. Then they rallied to take a 4-3 lead only to fall in a shootout.
Here’s the rose-colored perspective: The Thrashers earned a point in the standings, giving them three out of a possible four in the past two games. Despite the team’s injury problems in goal, they aren’t close to playoff extinction with more than half the season to go.
Here’s real life: From period to period, from game to game, we still don’t know what to expect.
It’s not about the goaltending. It’s not about the blur of power plays and penalty killing situations. It’s about a team of players not having developed any sort of playing personality through 31 games.
That’s on the coach. Bob Hartley has been asked often about his team’s consistency problems. More often than not, like Sunday, he points to the rule changes. But it’s on him to make five players on the ice actually look like they’re on the same team.
“Unfortunately for coaches, you see a lot of games like this,” he said.
“You don’t know what kind of flow you’re going to get. It’s going to take weeks. Maybe it’s going to take months, it’s going to take years. The players are making huge efforts, but you still see plenty of hooking, holding and tripping. Why? Because that’s the way we taught them how to play for the last 15 or 20 years.”
But that doesn’t explain everything. It doesn’t explain trailing Chicago 3-0 after 12 minutes.
Sometimes the Thrashers look like a force. Sometimes they drift. Sometimes you witness both ends of the spectrum in a two-minute span.
There is little to their game right now that says, “This is who we are and what we do.” Because right now, guessing which direction the Thrashers will go is like anticipating the direction of a whiffleball when it’s thrown into the wind gust.
“I don’t know how to explain it, but I know the problem has to be fixed right in this room,” Bobby Holik said. “The thing is, we know how to play every game. We’re just not doing that. Words are cheap. Obviously we have a problem. A serious problem.”
Holik has been part of the problem. He admits it. A Chicago player went around him, leading to the first goal of the game. Holik came back to deliver some vicious checks and won a key face off to set up a goal by Ilya Kovalchuk near the end of the period.
But Holik was signed to be a force and prevent lulls like the one the team has been in. He was minus-2 Sunday, and is now a minus-12 on the season, worst among the team’s forwards.
“I feel a lot of responsibility — I’m a big part of it,” he said. “But we’re all looking for the exact formula to be consistent.”
The rules aren’t changing. So the team has to.
Permalink | Comments (22) | Categories: Jeff Schultz, Thrashers / NHL
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By John Crawford
December 11, 2005 10:05 PM | Link to this
All we heard about for years was building this team through the draft and using young players for the long haul, not the short term. It looks like we have a fairly old team, like the Rangers used to always have. Do we have anything left in the minors or have we totally scratched the long haul thing? Have we put everything into this year? And if so, seeing that this is just a .500 club, what does that leave for the future?
By Connor
December 11, 2005 10:59 PM | Link to this
It’s all about goaltending. The Thrashers are starting a mediocre MINOR LEAGUE goalie, let alone a true NHL goalie and they are still only 7 pts out of a playoff spot. Remember, Garnett couldn’t even start for the Wolves last year, let alone make an NHL Squad. So with the truly sub-par goal-tending, the team’s record is as expected.
Once Lehton and then either Dunham/Shields gets healthy, hopefully by January 1, the team will finally be ready to roll.
By Scott
December 11, 2005 11:23 PM | Link to this
Connor is right. If Kari Lehtonen was in goal the Thrashers would not have the mediocre record they have right now. Even if they had Mike Duhnam they would be near the top of the division. Garnett was a backup minor league goalie and now he’s expected to play in the NHL? Hardly. As for John’s comments, we still have a strong minor league system but we have been getting better each year so our picks have been higher up in the draft. No more immediate impact players like Heatley, Kovalchuk, or Lehtonen. Also let’s be honest, this team misses Dany Heatley. You could tell it last season whenever he got back from his injury he was a force on the ice and made everyone around him better. I still wish Waddell didn’t trade him even though Heatley wanted it. It’s crazy to think one bad decision by Heatley a couple of years ago could impact an entire franchise for years. Sadly we lost not one but two important parts of our team that night and the world lost a good human being in Dan Snyder.
By TonyC
December 11, 2005 11:36 PM | Link to this
I agree that Garnett is an AHL rookie who has through circumstance become an nhl rookie, but his play especially the last 3 games has been adequate. With the exception of his east-west movement, every facet of his game has gotten to a level that you’d expect from a young #2 in the NHL. This is not to say that he hasn’t suffered from lapses in concetration, but you see his game steadily improving.
I feel that Coach does have some serious work to do, although I’d hate to see him get fired. I think the job he did in the past 1.5 seasons he’s been here has been one that should give him a little bit more cushion. It’s refreshing to see Holik’s comments, but I think we all are from Missouri at this point: “Show me”!!! I was a huge supporter of the Holik move, remembering the nasty, handy Holik that wore #16 for the Devils….I am dismayed that we seem to have gotten the Madison Square Garden Holik.
That being said I watched the young D that Chicago has and couldn’t help but think “we got who in the 2nd round instead of Duncan Kieth in ‘02” I know that many many people have blasted DW in this area for just this sort of thing, and I believe they’re more right than wrong.
That being said, I may be changing my mind about Coach. Greg DeVries as your #3 shooter??!!?!!??? WTF? I’m sorry I would have rather seen Larsen, or Boulton, waaay before we saw #7 as a shooter!!! We had 1 point, why not put Petro(who’s been very motivated lately), or Stefan as your #3??? That decision in the shootout has done more to erode Coach’s credibility in my eyes than the lackadasical(spl?) play of the team.
Things need to change. Unfortunately, most of the guys I’d like to see go have contracts that seem to make the idea of someone picking them up in a trade and getting someone of value back, pretty unlikely.
By LAC
December 12, 2005 03:46 AM | Link to this
I really hate to think how BAD it could be tuesday night against Detroit. Sunday was just amazing…
The bottom line is this… This is YEAR SIX or waddell’s FIVE YEAR plan. He PROMISED the playoffs in the fifth year.
We look like the Curt Fraiser days… Hartley is a VERY GOOD coach, who has little if any say so in player personnel.
Simple… We should have won sunday. Once we took the lead, we stopped, slowed down, let up whatever, but we have a LOT of Dead Wood out there and I do not mean sticks.
Holick/Modry/Stefan/Viger for starters have TO GO, and GO NOW, Chicago, ECHL whatever, but Holick is simply THE WORST PLAYER ON THE TEAM ! And WHO brought him here for MILLIONS ??????? don waddell the “great hockey mind of all times”.
Simply put… We are NOT making the playoffs this season, pure and simple and these STUPID owners better wake up and at the least hold waddell to his own words… No playoffs…NO JOB !!! I still say if he was MY GM… he would have been GONE several weeks ago… I accept NO excuses at my position… It’s a damn shame these worthless owners do… And aol/time-warner was this bad ?????
But smile there is always next year !!!!!!
By Brendan
December 12, 2005 11:02 AM | Link to this
Uggh. Re-read Jeff’s column. 8th paragraph down. “It’s NOT about the goaltending.” Jeff Schultz is correct. Patrick Roy can’t save this team.
Check out Manasso’s article today, it’s about “inconsistent play.” Schultz says the team’s “lack of personality” is the coach’s fault.
Ummn, I can only partly agree. I honestly do believe Hartley is doing all he can to cook with the “spoiled ingredients” Don Waddell brought back from the supermarket.
Trouble is, we’re still eating the leftovers of that “Thanksgiving Dinner Debacle.”
I, too, was surprised by deVries as a shootout contestant. But, he did win the overtime for the Thrashers vs. Philly on a break-a-way goal. I’m sure that stuck with Bob Hartley. It’s the Thrashers only successful effort after 60-minutes of play. I think we’re 1-0-4 in overtime games.
LAC is correct. This is not a playoff team. When Lehtonen comes back, we’re not going to blaze a path through the rest of the league.
Hopefully, a very “frank discussion” will take place between Hartley and Waddell over who stays and who goes at the trade deadline. Also, this summer’s draft will have a few decent players. I hope Hartley gets “consulted” about what is needed, since he’s cooking Thanksgiving dinner, known as our season.
By Pat
December 12, 2005 11:22 AM | Link to this
While the points brought up about the goaltending are valid. Schultz brought up a better point in his column that has so far, gone unoticed. Bobby Holik is a -12 so far this season, the worst of all forwards. Goaltending, while it may be a part of it, is not the whole problem. It’s the lack of total team defense. A goaltender is only as good as the players playing defense around him, and there is no one on the team that gives an effort on defense. You have an all-star front line in Holik, Kovalchuck, and Hossa, and while each of them can score with the best of them, they have no concept of how to defend in the new NHL. You can have Patrick Roy back there in goal, but if he doesn’t have anyone backing him up. He’s still going to give up goals.
By Mick
December 12, 2005 12:20 PM | Link to this
Brendan is correct, as is Jess (of course).
GOALTENDING ISN’T THE PROBLEM
Thats the road people always take. Blame the goalie. Garnett is playing spectacular with the team he has infront of him. Goaltending is not the issue. Shields and Dunham are both reaching their peaks, or have reached them, and it shows in their play and injury numbers. The Thrash have some of the premier goaltending prospects in the world, but a goalie can only do so much for a team.
Like Jeff stated, its a complete lack of chemistry. And sure you can blame Hartley for it, thats the typical road. But its not his fault. You can only do so much with what you have, you can mix up lines all you want, but its still up to the players to get it done.
Hartley’s problem is Waddell. You can’t mix a group of high flying young talent who are already (or are fastly becoming) big stars, with older, “veteren” players who used to be stars. The is no way to get chemistry out of that mix. Its like adding pickels to a peanut butter sandwhich, its just not done.
Brendan has it right again, even when Lehts comes back, we still will have a heck of a time gunning for the playoffs. As spectacular as Lehtonen is, again, he will only be able to do so much. And I hope I don’t see people coming and ranting on the boards about Lehtonen’s play once he returns.
Changes will have to be made in the off season. We’ll have to wait until then to see progress.
By Mick
December 12, 2005 12:22 PM | Link to this
Ack, thats JEFF not Jess. Massive typo…please, spare me your wrath JEFF!
By JB
December 12, 2005 12:26 PM | Link to this
I attended both games this weekend. A very loud supportive and enthusiastic crowd on Sunday. Schultz hit it on the head. Inconsistent Play …… that is it. Garnett is going to give up some soft goals….that is a given….he is a rookie who probably should be playing for Gwinnett. That`s life….
What nedds to happen and hasnt so far is oue veteran leadership hasnt stepped foward and realized that Garnett has to be protected. Our defense namely Modry and Sutton have to be called out and held accountable. Holik needs to be held accountable. The last time I looked the rest of the league is playing by the same new rules we are. That is no excuse. If you cant adjust then **Bye Bye**. I dont care if Modry was a force in Hartleys estimation back in03-04.....he isnt now…..the bottom line is what have you done for me lately. And lately Modry, Holik, Stefan and Sutton aint gettin it done. If it takes ownership eating contracts and cutting people loose, then do it. Ownership can hold DW accountable.
And that is another word I will use here * Accountability* When you make the big bucks at the GM, coaching and playing levels of the NHL….EVERYONE IS ACCOUNTABLE…No F*&^%ing EXCUSES.. We need to take stock and see who wants it and who doesn`t. The next 2 weeks are huge..7 points out of a playoff spot is not much, but we need to move closer..lots of home games….. When Heatley and the Sens come to town Jan 2 we should know!!!
By RC
December 12, 2005 01:19 PM | Link to this
JB you are exactly right. You took the words right out of my mouth. It is definetly not the goaltending-getting blown up on the wing twice has nothing to do with Garnett-if anything Garnett is getting better and I for one was impressed with his play. I am eager for Lehts arrival and the great departure for some. We need more speed and grit in the defense. Holik, I can’t even believe he is still around. I think a couple of times yesterday he left his man in the defensive zone and what happened-he shoots…he scores. I have seen this in more than one game. Holik does not not need a “wake up call” he needs his bags put in the taxi and taken far far “away”. Six years-Six losing seasons thats a good way to get Hockey out of Atlanta-I truly hope things can turn around and it needs to be soon. However, as far as I can see nothing is being done. As for Garnett, I hope he sticks around for #2, I think he as at least earned that.
By briton
December 12, 2005 01:37 PM | Link to this
This blaming the young goaltenders is driving me nuts! Waddell and Hartley made the decision to play rookies in net. Last season Garny was backing up Lehtonen so didn’t see much time in the AHL (spent the year before in Gwinnett) while Berkie split playing time during his first pro season (when he wasn’t on the IR) with another goalie in the ECHL. The team knew what the limitations were on the rookies and decided to go with them instead of finding someone with experience early on (even before Shields). It’s kind of unfair to blame the kids for not meeting whatever expectations we had for Lehtonen or even Dunham. Both guys got their first NHL experience and have a lot to learn…whether they’ll be NHL level goalies in the future is yet to be seen. But until someone can prove to me that those kids enjoy losing and have not been putting forth the effort that they themselves are capable of, I hold Waddell and Hartley responsible for the goaltending situation.
In that sense, it’s not the actual goaltending…it’s poor decision making by Waddell and Hartley. I think there’s enough discussion of “poor decisions” made to go around…
And just to reiterate, it helps if the goalie (whoever that may be) had some solid defense in front of them to cut down on the number of shots and keep guys from in front of the net. On the flip side, if the offense is working hard, creating opportunities and finishing things with goals, then inexperience in net is less of a concern because we’d be outscoring by enough of a margin.
As for consistency, obviously every team has a period here or there where they fall apart. But this is something far worse. The team has too much of a “focus on the shift/period at hand” mentality. They need to remember that each period is 20 minutes long, each game is 3 periods, and the season is 82 games long. The only way to reach the post-season is to keep it in sight, keep the big picture in sight. One good play here or period there won’t get us anywhere.
Holik is right, talk is cheap…so start playing!
By briton
December 12, 2005 01:51 PM | Link to this
In the meantime…it’s time to start taking a long, hard look at what we have and where we are and then where we need to be and what we need to do to get there. Including who we want to lead us there. Start planning early for off-season changes and take any steps we can now in those directions.
By Mark
December 12, 2005 01:57 PM | Link to this
Having complained about the defense previously, particularly DeVries, Modry and Sutton, I have to say once again that the problems with our record have little to do with the goalie issue. These three guys have not played well for the first two months and it has to get better.
Having said that, this weekend’s games were the best Modry and DeVRies games of the season. They were both much better with their angles, trapping pucks on the boards and clearing the zones. Sutton, on the other hand continues to play in slow motion.
I thought it was just me, but I missed seeing Sutton for much of the second and third periods Sunday. The stats confirmed that he didn’t play much after his play in the first period and rightly so —- either put that 6’5” body to work or sit down and let the others play. It certainly got Petro turned around and maybe it will turn Sutton too. But I wonder how much that played into the late goal by Chicago to tie the score and our inability to keep them out of our zone in overtime.
By Bob
December 12, 2005 03:35 PM | Link to this
It’s not just the goaltending. But a bunch of problems would be helped by better goaltending. I’d bet we’d have won at least 4 to 5 more games if Lehtonen was in goal.
I bet we’d have beat Chicago yesterday with a real goalie in net. And the guys will skate better in front of good goaltending. I noticed a lot of the guys working on trying to block shots more in our own zone. I think we a good goalie, they’d be playing more aggressive defense and this team would have better breakouts.
I’m interested to see what does really play out when Lehtonen returns. I guess that as long as he stays healthy, they’ll start playing a little above .500.
By Chazz
December 12, 2005 05:35 PM | Link to this
Am I the only one who can’t stand Sutton? I hear he works hard, and he gets a lot of ice time, but I still just think that he’s not that great…
By LM
December 12, 2005 06:57 PM | Link to this
Before you blame Bobby Holik for his dismal +/-, or for losing “his” man, think a bit about the role that he’s playing. The guy is a premiere checking center. He’s an excellent face-off man. That means that you throw him on the ice every time the other team’s top line is out there. You put him in all the difficult face-off situations. Even at his very good above 50% win percentage on face-offs, some of those are going to be lost, and difficult situations come from that. Bobby really should only have to cover one guy while he’s out there. And yet, when you see him diving towards Atlanta’s net, inches from saving that goal against but not quite… is that really “his” man that got away?
Nope. Never is. It’s someone else’s guy that floated away, and what you notice is Bobby trying to cover the problem, not the loser D man who wandered off. Take a taped game sometime and watch just what Holik is doing instead of watching the puck, and you’ll hopefully figure out why teams keep giving this guy big contracts. Holik is very nearly always in exactly the right place, and often in about two right places at the same time. The problems come around when the team is asking him to be in three right places. Nobody plays that big.
By LAC
December 12, 2005 08:55 PM | Link to this
Brenden spells it out EXACTLY THE WAY IT IS.
THE Best comments are by him…JB very close second…
I simply cannot understand when we took the lead yesterday, we started playing scared, Really.
We quit forcing the play and then we do the ONE thing I simply DO NOT UNDERSTAND… We start to STAND around. It was nuts to see 5 blue jersey’s in a square formation, while the Hawks skated in among us…It was CREEPY to see. But it happens every game at three or four points during a game.
Watch tuesday night if Detroit gets a goal ahead… what will they do… GO FOR THE JUGULAR that’s what. They Know how to win… we do not.
Bob is a good coach and THANK GOD he is here, there are players who are working hard and smart, problem is more are not than are, simple fact,,,watch a game and do the math.
Which just mystifies me that this clown THE Great don waddell, does nothing and sits on his hands. But remember, he backed himself into this corner when he pushed the cap to the limit… isn’t that nuts, WE ARE PUSHING THE CAP…Who’d ever believe that ?
So Ole don has us heading down a DEAD END. With NO money left, Savard will be gone next year and likely a few others, Just think Holick has to be rolling in the bed every night thinking how he stiffed old don !
Watch Hossa go after his three years here…Then we have ZERO for Heatley.
But old don’s still minding the fort… Too bad don… the Indians already burned it down !
By JB
December 12, 2005 09:40 PM | Link to this
We start to STAND around…..I need to quote you there LAC….EXACTLY..we stop moving our feet on the PK too.If we do this tommorow against Detroit, WE WILL PAY DEARLY. The Wings will expose our floating. The Thrashers need to play a strategy much like they did against the Flyers. A very strong forecheck and block the back pass from the corner to the front of the net.
Detroit`s goaltending can be exposed…..lots of rebounds from Osgood…. bang the net bang the net…..we need to get 2 points
By Mick
December 12, 2005 09:41 PM | Link to this
Bob: Goaltending ain’t the issue. Read what Jeff and Brendan have both said, I’ve just been basically repeating it. Its not Garnett’s fault his D-men are lazy and slow. He is doing the best possible job that can be done, and you have to give the kid credit, since he was supposed to be the Wolves’ starter…not the Trashers’. And even when Lehts comes back, it ain’t going to turn our season around just like that, until we work on getting our slower, older guys outta here, and especially playing as a team…nothing will change.
By Brendan
December 12, 2005 10:23 PM | Link to this
I have a serious question for Jeff Schultz and all the bloggers: “Are Marc Savard’s days numbered in Atlanta?”
Aside from the “Why, yes. Every single player in the league retires at some point.” I’m really not looking for THAT as an answer. What I meant was, “Will Don Waddell move him at the trade deadline, or offseason, claiming that he’d be ‘too expensive’ to keep anyways?”
If so, do you “buy” that? I think a frank evaluation of Savard is in order. Point #1, do you see Marc Savard as a “cornerstone” of this franchise in years to come? If so, what are you willing to pay him? Moreover, what do you think he’d “fetch” on the open market? Not only in terms of dollars, but also, in trade value. Could Savard fetch a high 1st round pick? If so, would you do it? Savard is 28. He’s got plenty of years left in him. We know what we’ll get out of Savard. Do we know what the pick will turn into? The “pick” won’t make the “big money” until later. If you’re thinking in “financial terms.”
I have no idea, truthfully. But since Marc is outscoring guys making $6 million-a-year, I’m sure he could be looking at $5 million to $5.5 million. The Thrashers must counter-argue that Savvy puts up the big numbers because of his linemates.
I’m not sure that offering Savard $20 million over five-years is something Marc would do anyways. That’s just $4 million-a-year. He may feel he can do much better than that. But, other teams might only offer $5 mil-a-year for two years, fearing making a mistake. If other teams are hesitant to sign longterm, this could open the Thrashers “window” for retaining Savard’s services.
Point #2: Who do you move if you want to keep Savard? Bear in mind, Savvy is two-years older than Hossa. Which player has had a better career? Savard or Hossa?
Then, there’s another, more sensitive argument to be made. Do you like Canadian players more than Euros? Inevitably the word “grit” comes into play. But I still think no one protects the puck once it’s in his possession better than Hossa. I’ll credit him for that.
These are the tough decisions a GM must make.
By JB
December 12, 2005 11:51 PM | Link to this
Dump Sutton and Devries` contracts and keep Savard…..We have 2 blueliners that have no business making what they are paid. I am afraid to even ask what Modry is making…..In the new NHL under a hard cap, you are going to see 4-5 players and a star netminder eat up most of the money…..journeymen will fill the rest of the roster. You will have some tough decisions to make.
A young team that jells like Carolina or the Rangers may be the ones that makes a run at the Cup, because they will have the most cap room to make adjustments and fill needs