Montgomery and Sweeney Responsible for This Adversity Together

For the fans defending Jim Montgomery’s coaching abilities by citing the roster that Sweeney handed him this season, remember the interaction above. Whether you believe that moment was just for content or not, Montgomery knew what he was going into the season with — and he was complacent about it.

Did I anticipate additions like Nikita Zadorov and Elias Lindholm being better fits? Yes. But if anything, that speaks to Montgomery’s inability to utilize their skillsets effectively. This team is plagued with hesitancy when it comes to clearing and shooting the puck, and Montgomery’s “quality of chances” mindset is clogging things up, preventing a more downhill, consistent approach.

If this team claims to preach a north-south attack — meaning, for simplicity’s sake, a straightforward offensive strategy — then players need to be instructed to prioritize getting more pucks on net. Could Montgomery still be emphasizing this while the players simply aren’t receptive? Maybe. But if that’s the case, it demands a big and obvious move from Sweeney.

All this can be true while also recognizing that the team’s offseason did need to include the addition of more skilled forwards — especially if Montgomery wasn’t planning to embrace a simple, direct style of play. I’m still holding off on the idea that Lindholm has to be a 1B to a superior center, as more of a look should be given to a Marchand–Lindholm–Pastrnak line. That said, I do recognize the sporadic and reckless tendencies in Zadorov’s game defensively.

Regardless: this team would be good — easily even great — if a shot-first and decisively physical mentality were being coached and emphasized.

Response

  1. “Easily even great” is a bit of an exaggeration there.

    If coaching this team was as simple as “shoot more, defend more” then I think we’d be in a better spot.

    Your letting the players off too easily. Too bad the playoffs aren’t played during pride month

    Like

Leave a comment