Blame and excuses for the Lightning's failings
There's a sense of hopelessness and melancholy hanging over the Tampa Bay Lightning at current with knowing that their season is over, even with ten games left in the 2009-2010 NHL season.
There seem to be two types of reactions to this taking place among the Lightning faithful.
For starters, there is finger pointing and blame being passed around. I would be a hypocrite if I were to present myself as above the blame-game. There's enough evidence from our game-threads to know that I've had issues with coaching this season...
Yet laying blame is beside the point. The second reaction that you can see from the fans - or at least the media - is excuse making. The excuses are seldom tied to the blame, but they are still excuses none the less. Reasons why the team is tanking and excuses for hypothetical's of what would have made the team more competitive.
Case in point: Sunday morning you could find Damian Cristordero of the St. Petersburg Times lamenting the lack of acquisition of a puck-moving defenseman at the trade deadline, and lamenting the fact that the Bolts had lost Paul Ranger early in the season. This would have opened up the offense and taken pressure off the forwards and so on, and so forth.
Yet, having a puck-moving defenseman isn't a cure-all acquisition in the least. The Lightning defense has not played well the majority of the season, period. While the skill is there on paper, they have often times not played as a cohesive unit. Even with a puck-moving defenseman that aided the offense, it does not make up for fundamental flaws that were exploited and cost the Bolts games.
Let's go further on this and ask what-if, just for humors sake. What if this sought-after puck-moving defenseman was acquired? What would be accomplished besides the fact that instead of tanking 11 of the past 14 games, the Lightning would continue on their mediocre play that had followed them all season? They've never quite played great hockey, but never quite played horridly either. Would that level of consistent-inconsistency have earned a first-round playoff berth for the Bolts? And wouldn't it have assured a first-round bouncing in the playoffs as well?
Could that, ultimately competing for a playoff spot, even have happened given the coaching upheaval during the Olympic break? Jim Johnson has been an invisible persona with the Lightning since his "promotion" and head coach Rick Tocchet has kept him at arm's-length. Loyalty to a deposed assistant instead of working with new staff is not ultimately working with the team's best interests in mind.
At what cost, as well, would you be willing to pay for a first-round tossing from the playoffs? Is it worth messing with the long-term development of the club for a one-and-done playoff series? Oh, sure, the playoffs are known as the "second season" because just about anything can happen... But with how the Lightning had played during the majority of their first season, is there any reason to expect them to be more competitive during their second?
There are countless excuses to make for why this season went south as it did: The Olympics, injuries, coaching, inconsistency in goal, sluggish offensive effort by key players. The excuse of lack-of-acquisitions at the deadline, however, is the weakest excuse of them all and the most misplaced excuse as well. If the league has shown us anything during 2009-10, it's that single points would have made all the difference.
Those single points were squandered earlier in the season, by way of last minute losses (including overtime and the shootout). The Bolts are 12-10-12 in one-goal games, that's a deceptive number that should be presented as 12-22. A dismal .353 winning percentage. They were squandered by the team coming in and playing uninspired hockey for 40+ minutes a night, instead of competing for an entire 60 minutes.
Having a puck-moving defenseman would be a nice addition to the roster (and should be a goal for the off-season), but it would not have put the Lightning over the top. With the immediate uncertainty in the direction of the club's future, selling the farm for a half-baked, last-ditch effort to compete this season just wouldn't have cut it.
0 recs |
13 comments
|
Comments
Agreed
If Phoenix isn’t a perfect example of what a good coach can do with a mediocre team, than I don’t know what else is. I don’t think that our team is mediocre, they just play like it.
best review i've come across
With the good, quality players we have on the team, and all of the games we have won, it’s easy (for me) to start forgetting about the wealth of games we lost early on in the season. So when the main guys stop scoring, and we start losing, it’s natural to associate correlation with causation.
I’ll add that it seems like we’ve burned out all of our resources. The big guys we relied on just aren’t getting us wins anymore (Marty, Niitty, Stammers).
Moral of the story: if you don’t do your homework (i.e. get the points), you don’t get the grade.
"they’re big. they’ve got big man bodies." lovingthelightning.wordpress.com
by Meredith Qualls on Mar 22, 2010 4:11 PM EDT reply actions
The blame falls squarely on Tocchet and the OK ownership group. In its zeal to move Vinny, OK made life miserable for V4 through their proxy Tocchet. Vinny has been given some ugly linemates and has had minimal power play time. This caused locker room dissension the entire season. Besides being an ownership lackey and an admitted felon who can’t command player respect, Tocchet is not even a good X’s and O’s coach.
I won’t argue with his X’s and O’s – he flips through lines way to rapidly for my taste, but I will point out that Vinny is third on the team in power play ice time (4.03 per game- trailing only St Louis’ 4.44 per game and Stamkos’ 4.32 per game).
Vinny has had his chances this year and hasn’t delivered until lately. Putting St Louis or Stamkos on his line would have broken up the only productive line the team has had for most of the season.
by Lightningfan7609 on Mar 22, 2010 9:33 PM EDT up reply actions
For once we can't blame injuries.
If I had to place blame for them not being in the playoffs I would put it on the goaltenders, and by association the ownership for not securing better talent between the pipes.
A coach is only as good as his goaltender, case in point Torts. While he has a lot of support on this site there were those who wanted to run him out of town once the team fell out of the playoffs.
Dave Tippett is most likely going to win the Jack Adams and he can thank Ilya Bryzgalov who among the top 10 in all the major goaltending stats (including shots against).
As good as Nitti has been, he hasn’t stolen many games as of late (the last one being Vancover on 2/9 when he made 40 saves in a 3-1 win). Any team that is going to make the playoffs needs a netminder that can win a game on his own on occaison.
If Mike Smith had turned out to be a number one goalie then everything is different. There’s enough blame to go around, but for me it all starts in the net – a team doesn’t win a Cup in today’s NHL without a solid goaltender.
by Lightningfan7609 on Mar 22, 2010 9:30 PM EDT reply actions
There is only so much a goalie can do, though
How many chances have we given up like Ovechkin’s goal at the weekend, where the D has pinched in and no forward has tracked back to cover? Niittymaki’s showing he’s not a number one (not this close to all those surgeries, at least) and Smitty lost it mentally after being run over by Brooks Laich, but there hasn’t been too much defensive emphasis on this team, and we aren’t clicking enough offensively to be able to overcome defensive frailties…. and we’re taking way way waaaay too many penalties (that are either plain bad, or just badly timed)
Drifting slowly, lower and lower, until we reach the front row in Los Angeles come June...
Penalties is another point to bring up: the careless ones that have not gotten the wrath of coaching like we’ve seen in the past.
9:12. Lights out. Raw Charge.
by John Fontana on Mar 23, 2010 10:04 AM EDT up reply actions
Let's blame the referees!
No, no… of course I’m just kidding.
Seriously, I pretty much agree with what you’ve written John. All the games that we lost in last minutes or even seconds of the game. Not being able to keep our lead ‘till the end and play hard for 60 minutes. That’s been happening last season and it’s been happening this season as well. This is, I believe, what cost us most of the points. This and Tocchet’s ‘line mixer’. I didn’t like it, it annoyed me. How can you ask for some consistency from the team when your players have different linemates every other game.
by Katchis on Mar 23, 2010 8:12 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
all good comments
easy to sum up the season – 5 or 6 guys busting their butts most of the season, the rest playing like crap.
- GM and Coach that have NO CLUE! Lawton got rid of ALL the D we had, and replaced them with the current crew. Ohland is almost over the hill, Hedman will be good, but is young.
Toccet got the head coach job by default.
Please, Mr Vinink – get rid of both of them and start over with hockey people that know what they are doing.
I take it I’m the only who think Lawton unfairly gets a bad rep then? Of all the bad moves he’s made, how many have come since the league had to step in and remove the interfering owners? I can’t think of one. Sure, he could have been more active at the deadline, but without having been a fly on the wall we’ll never know if he was constantly working the phones, trying to get that elusive piece and decided the price for short term “success” was too steep.
Of course, he can’t hide behind OK Hockey for much longer, but I wouldn’t complain if Lawton was given a bit longer to prove me wrong.
Drifting slowly, lower and lower, until we reach the front row in Los Angeles come June...
Well, it wasn’t Lawton specifically who gutted the Lightning defense in teh 2008 off-season, ownership was intimately involved with that (forcing the Dan Boyle Trade, etc). Lawton has been the guy who re-constructed the defense during the 2009 off season though.
And while Ohlund may almost be “Over the hill”, lets remember that Dave Andreychuk was over the hill by the time he joined the Lightning. He still played a major part with this team in a leadership role.
9:12. Lights out. Raw Charge.
by John Fontana on Mar 23, 2010 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions
Puhl-eeeeze!!!! Let’s not confuse Ohlund and Andreychuk, their defined roles and their performance. Ohlund was brought in to mentor Hedman. They both look awful. Andy was brought in for clubhouse leadership. He delivered that and goal scoring in spades. Lawton has proven himself untrustworthy, both within the Bolts franchise and around the league. With the exception of Nitti, his free agent signings and drafting (Stamkos was a first pick no-brainer) are nothing to write home about.





















