Saturday Development Camp Open Thread
And so the final scrimmage of Development Camp is nearly upon us. Follow the Tweets (after the jump) and chime in with your own thoughts on the game and a week of mid-July hockey that has flown by and is about to leave us with "hazy, hot and humid" where there was briefly that fourth "h" - hockey.
54 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Digging the mobile site… Just saw Brooks here, made my day :) Dubuc is a beast.
by kellobellow on Jul 18, 2009 10:44 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
From TEB: “Veteran Brooks Laich stopped by rookie camp this morning. He met informally with some of the prospects and took a few of youngsters to lunch.” awwwwwwwwwww.
Agreed.
Whenever Clark’s gone, how about Brooks with the C and Ovie and Backie with the A’s?
ZING! ZANG! ZUNG!
Ovie’s got next ‘C.’ He’s already done all of this with the Russian contingent many times over. I honestly don’t see why Laich is any better served at being the Captain before AO unless it’s the language thing.
by DrinkingPartner on Jul 18, 2009 10:28 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I’m in complete agreement with you. Look, we all know and love what Brooks stands for. He is clearly an excellent leader and Captain material. But Ovie has shown an amazing willingness to become the face/ambassador of everything: the Caps, the NHL, and his country. He is also a proven leader in the locker room, inspires his teammates by setting the example, and arguably, as he goes so goes the Caps. Also, historically, it is very rare someone this phenomenally gifted, who is the face of the league and the sport, and who has multiple MVPs has NOT been their team’s captain. Speaking non-goalies of course.
I know there are folks out there who argue that just because someone is the team’s best player doesn’t mean that they would be the best captain. Ovie has proven that not only is he the team’s best player (by a laughable margin), but also an outstanding young man with character, charisma, and an ability to inspire and lead by example. That is the definition of leader.
Give him the “C”.
Ovechkin has an invisible C on his jersey already, and I’d have no problem with him getting the C. I think the argument for giving it to Laich instead is that Laich is the kind of guy that might elevate his game by wearing it, or it might be a more effective motivational tactic to give it to a guy who can only produce if he gets his nose dirty and is otherwise not superhuman.
But yeah, I think no matter who wears the C, everyone in the world knows that Ovechkin is the heart and soul of the team. If people doubted that before the playoffs, I don’t think they do now.
It’s OV. I can’t say it better than Shaone Morrisonn did.
"Alex, it’s amazing what he can do. He’s a great leader on the ice. He sparks the team. He believes, so we believe."
On the ice. I think off the ice there’s enough reasons for debate.
If you’re Bruce Boudreau, who do you want organizing the players getting to DC before camp and skating with Locker (or whoever they’d have running things for them)? It’s off ice stuff like that, the unsexy stuff, that the captain has to be able to run smoothly.
Further confirming my theory that everyone on earth who cared about that game was either in the building and/or will catch up later. Who’s gonna waste an 80-degree Saturday in mid-July reading some pseudo play-by-play of a prospect scrimmage?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I had a fantastic time, even if watching 59 try to poke Holtby in the face while the goalie was down on all fours on the ice, AFTER the action was over. Cousens stood up to him though.
And oh my god…who let Ted out of the house in a brown long sleeve shirt and LIME GREEN BOARD SHORTS?? The photographer next to me took a LOT of photos of that, shook her head and said, “Oh…Ted.”
There's always more to learn about Hockey.
twitter widget
Is there a way to make the widget work on a blackberry?
You can't reason someone out of something they weren't reasoned into.
by ChrisAm on Jul 18, 2009 2:27 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
This Finley at F idea sounds nuts. How did he really look out there?
from the house that Red Jesus built
He’s a beast. He could be good, but as I said above, I didn’t like how he and Cousens got into a little shoving match after the action was over and then Finley poked at Holtby’s face with his stick – while the goalie was still down on all fours on the ice. Classless move.
There's always more to learn about Hockey.
I thought he looked better as a F than a D, myself. He used his size to bull to the net and stay there, and created a scoring chance in the process. He certainly seemed at least as comfortable up front as he did in the back.
"It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." - Delores Ibarruri
I’ve seen a little bit of Finley at UND but not much so I don’t have anything too concrete to back this up, but here is my speculation. The questions about Finley have been about his foot speed and lateral movement. If a D gets beat wide with speed it’s a breakaway, or at least an odd-man rush. If Finley has good “straight line” speed and likes to take the body he can at least be an effective forechecker. A forward that gets beat laterally with speed still has D to back him up (and a backchecking C) so it doesn’t hurt the team as much. I think these are some of the considerations that went into the move. It’s also nice to have a big physical presence in front of the net in your offensive zone, I’ve seen Pronger, Chara and D. Hatcher all stand in front of the net on the PP (although Pronger and Chara have such good shots they usually play the point). Finally, if the Caps think Finley is going to have to be a fighter to move up then it makes sense to put him at F. There was a bit of discussion about this in the playoffs and several people pointed out that if your fighter is a D then you run the risk of putting your D pairs out of alignment for 5 minutes if the guy has to fight. It’s easier to fill in for a 4W than a D.
Echoing your thoughts on Finley, I have to say I was pleasantly surprised watching him at forward. The clumsiness he showed on D seemed to be gone at the forward spot. And with his size, you could clearly see the opposing D rushing to get rid of the puck as he bore down on them. As you said, if he’s going to be something of an enforcer, I think he could do it a lot better as a forward where his being in the penalty box for five minutes wouldn’t screw up the defensive pairings. And by the way, I thought Bouchard looked a lot better today as well.
I’m not sure how effective an enforcer he could be, at least not soon. There’s no evidence that he’s a good fighter (some evidence to the contrary), and he’s coming out of a league that doesn’t even allow fighting.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
You don’t have to be a great, or even good, fighter to be an enforcer, though it obviously helps your face if you are good at it. The impact from fighting comes from standing up and taking a guy not, not necessarily winning (See Matt Bradley, Max Talbot, even though I know they aren’t enforcers). I think with time he’ll get better at fighting but even if he doesn’t he can still keep other guys from having to fight.
Right, but those guys can actually play hockey. Name a six-minutes-per-night guy (which is suddenly Finley’s upside in the move to F) who loses the vast majority of his bouts.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
An enforcer really only works as a deterrent if you’re afraid to fight them. Otherwise they’re more of a nuisance.
The Brashear Fallacy
Fear is not the important factor. Bravery is. Players get pumped seeing their teammates go toe to toe with another guy, even if they take a beating. It takes a lot of stones to stand in there with those guys and that’s what the players respond to. Talbot gets credit for turning a playoff series clinching game around because he took a beating. The team has responded very well to some of Bradley’s bloody noses. Fans get caught up in the W-L thing but that’s not the point of fighting within a game. It also helps/lets some of the more aggressive guys be more aggressive when they know they won’t have to be the guy to answer the bell. If Finley is out there answering the bell, that means another guy doesn’t have to. Obviously if he’s so bad at it that it’s a serious threat to his health then you can’t let him be doing that but I’d be shocked if he can’t figure out how to use his size at least to his defensive advantage after a few fights.
Agreed about wins and losses, but the reason Talbot fired his team up is b/c they saw a 3rd/4th-line guy who doesn’t fight, fight. Similar with Bradley, but to a lesser extent – it’s not his job to do it, but when he does, players take notice.
By contrast, I don’t think Riley Cote dropping ‘em and getting dropped does much enforcing or rallying of the troops. You either have an enforcer who’s a deterrent or a bunch of guys who can play and will throw when necessary, in my opinion. Guys like Riley Cote are a waste of a sweater.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Riley Cote doesn’t even know there’s a puck out there!
by NHL Observer on Jul 19, 2009 1:35 AM EDT up reply actions
aggreed, enforcer should do it on the ice, with gloves on, within the rules.
A fighter—or a fight is something else entirely.
I agree with what F&B is saying though, someone donates blood for the team, the team steps it up. A losing fight particularly against a known aggressor seems to do more than the opposite.
"You will remember the night you were struck by the sight of [18] thousand fists in the air" -Disturbed
Is there any way to read the move other than an admission that he isn’t ready to be a top six D in Hershey but they need to put him somewhere? For an organization ostensibly starved for bruising stay-at-home blueliners, the move looks like a pretty clear indication to me that they don’t think Finley can be that guy, at least not yet.
Boo, 2005 Draft.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I think that you can definitely make that case but I’m not sure that is the whole story. I think the Caps organization may legitimately think he’d be a more effective forward, like if they don’t think his footspeed/lateral movement will ever allow him to be an NHL D. If they don’t think he is ready to play in Hershey they could still keep him at D in the ECHL, like they did with Godfrey.
Related, didn’t they have to move Pokie to F on a few occasions because he wasn’t cutting it at D. Boo, 2005 Draft.
It occurs to me that Finley moving to F may make him more marketable in a trade, too…
from the house that Red Jesus built
Kugryshev is eligible to play in Hershey, like Carlson, since he hadn’t played in the Q before he was drafted, right? If he had already played a season in the Q would he have to stay there, even though he is a foreign player (does the CHL restriction only apply to Canadians is essentially the question)? Did anyone who watched the camp even think he’s ready to play in the A or does his game need some more work in the Q?
He’s eligible. I don’t know if the team is going to put him there, though, since they’ve got so many contract already.
I have a hunch it’ll be between him and Broda in camp, only one of the two making the Bears, and Broda’s going to be an overager…
I forgot about Broda, I know the Bears are losing a few Forwards to FA and probably/hopefully the Caps so there will be a couple spots. The only guys I could think of filling them are Dubuc and Angus. I think you’re right Broda and Cougar fight for that last spot, I don’t know that Hershey wants 4 rookie Fs to go with a handful of rookie D and a rookie G. Then they still have at least 3 second year Fs and a second year D. It’s going to be a very young team if they want to make spots for all these Cap prospects. I don’t know if they can make the 6/6/6 rule work this year.
Btw, Perreault impressed the hell out of me today.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
The fact that he is being praised for his work ethic and toughness is what has me excited. The guy really seems like he wants to make the big club and knows what he has to do to get there. I can’t wait to see him with my own eyes.
I think he needs to get more selfish with the puck – he’s always looking to pass, and has good vision, but he needs to dangle a little less, dish a little less and shoot some more.
But the skill is there – the puck follows him and he follows it.
Sidenote: might have to be a winger – hard to envision him winning a ton of draws at the NHL level with his size (but see Cliff Ronning and other small centers).
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
While I think Perreault had a strong camp, I can’t say I’m impressed as much as I can say I expected it.
He’s coming off a full year in the AHL and is playing against prospects from juniors and recent college grads. He looked great out there, but considering his experience and his competition, I think it’s time to judge his talent with the big boys, because that’s where we want him.
He’s a great skilled player who will be more exciting to follow at training camp, but he certainly was impressive all week long. I just want to see him do that in September.
Capitals Kremlin the second line center of the Caps blogosphere.
by CapitalsKremlin on Jul 19, 2009 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions
I think Perrault’s two-year window starts now.
I think Chris Bourque’s is halfway through…
by Gould Old Days on Jul 19, 2009 12:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Agreed – he came to a camp he should have dominated and dominated… which makes Bouchard’s week all the more disappointing.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I was impressed with him too. He never gives up on the play. Check out the 0:12 mark. Who does that?
by RED503 on Jul 18, 2009 6:07 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs




































