The Defensive unit
- Thread starter Huskie442
- Start date
Well - Tyson will be hard to replace. Romfo looks to not be a direct replacement for him. Neither is Richardson.
I think we are gaining a bit though. Both Romfo and Richardson are solid defencemen (I look forward to seeing Richardson develop) - but both look more offensive than McIver.
Overall, we may have a slightly more offensive D - but don't look to be sacrificing too much at the back.
Plus, Richardson is a Brit - so he bring offence and another import elsewhere in the team.
I think we are gaining a bit though. Both Romfo and Richardson are solid defencemen (I look forward to seeing Richardson develop) - but both look more offensive than McIver.
Overall, we may have a slightly more offensive D - but don't look to be sacrificing too much at the back.
Plus, Richardson is a Brit - so he bring offence and another import elsewhere in the team.
I think Tyson is almost irreplacable without blowing our whole wage budget.
I do like the look of our defence though. People forget that Jarvis actually scored more goals than Tyson last season (19!) and whilst neither Richardson or Romfo are likely to score as many as Tyson - I think combined they will add more of an offensive threat.
And of course we still have Adams on the 3rd line who can drop back if needed.
I do like the look of our defence though. People forget that Jarvis actually scored more goals than Tyson last season (19!) and whilst neither Richardson or Romfo are likely to score as many as Tyson - I think combined they will add more of an offensive threat.
And of course we still have Adams on the 3rd line who can drop back if needed.
It is hard to compare the two players because tyson is irreplacable but on the whole i would say the D is better this year. A better offensive unit that can still keep the puck away from the net. With only 1 more signing that we don't really know about (unless miller is wrong) its going to be a very exciting new season, bring on september 
To be honest, I think a Richardson + Romfo = Tyson. Or that is probably G's thinking.
But, it does spread the offensive threat.
This season should be a treat. We should be solid at the back, but a lot more free scoring. With three strong forward lines, we will be splitting the defence of the other teams, giving Jarvis, Richardson and Romfo a chance to unload some big shots. Think Greene and Ovechkin on the Washington Capitals - the opposition D spend so long trying to close down Ovechkin, it allows one of the most lethal blue liners to unload at the goal.
Our powerplay should be interesting too
But, it does spread the offensive threat.
This season should be a treat. We should be solid at the back, but a lot more free scoring. With three strong forward lines, we will be splitting the defence of the other teams, giving Jarvis, Richardson and Romfo a chance to unload some big shots. Think Greene and Ovechkin on the Washington Capitals - the opposition D spend so long trying to close down Ovechkin, it allows one of the most lethal blue liners to unload at the goal.
Our powerplay should be interesting too
this year we have Hartwick who can get forward as well as stay at the back same with wes and Romfo and Richardson, it will give us great depth on the PP, not over using one D man like having Tyson on PP, Penalty kill etc, we can definatly spread them accross the botK units, they dont individually have the points and forward ability Tyson had but we now have 4 D men who can get forward when needed, unlike having Stoney and MacIver who rarely get forward,
as long as they dont all go forward at the same time and leave the back empty and free for oposition to glide through then it looks a good strong D unit for the up coming season
as long as they dont all go forward at the same time and leave the back empty and free for oposition to glide through then it looks a good strong D unit for the up coming season
You might not like this but I'll be fair!
Your D unit is pretty short, especially compared to last year losing MacIver. 4 of your 6 D is 5'11 which is generally a diddy unit, compared to 1 of 5 last year (Stone). Might be interesting to see if teams can create a bit of traffic in front of Lyle and capitalise that way. Are they going to struggle to clear the crease, as per MacIver's job? Hmm. If Adams plays a regular shift on D then maybe it'll be less of an issue, but I can't see him being more than the 5th/6th D pairing, with less ice time than Richie.
Man for man, i think the D is slightly weaker as a unit. Is Lyle as good as Aubry? Hmm I don't think he'll win quite as many games standing on his head, but will give you a decent chance to win every night. He is a proven winner.
Romfo for Teplitsky could be a gamble. Is he #1 Dman quality? Will he be as good as Tyson defensively? It's a bit of an unknown with him new to the country. He has some massive boots to fill, that's for sure, as Tyson carried the last 2 D's at times IMO.
Richardson for MacIver is a bit of a down grade for physicality, but he's a much better skater and his speed could get him out of trouble (and he'll be able to jump over the bench! :lol. He's an up and coming Brit with a lot of promise. Will give you more going forward, so maybe Tyson's points could be split between Romfo and Richie.
Plenty of questions to answer, and there's always the curse of the knees! :lol: Even though your D could be slightly weaker, your forwards and your depth is far stronger, so I guess it all balances out.
Your D unit is pretty short, especially compared to last year losing MacIver. 4 of your 6 D is 5'11 which is generally a diddy unit, compared to 1 of 5 last year (Stone). Might be interesting to see if teams can create a bit of traffic in front of Lyle and capitalise that way. Are they going to struggle to clear the crease, as per MacIver's job? Hmm. If Adams plays a regular shift on D then maybe it'll be less of an issue, but I can't see him being more than the 5th/6th D pairing, with less ice time than Richie.
Man for man, i think the D is slightly weaker as a unit. Is Lyle as good as Aubry? Hmm I don't think he'll win quite as many games standing on his head, but will give you a decent chance to win every night. He is a proven winner.
Romfo for Teplitsky could be a gamble. Is he #1 Dman quality? Will he be as good as Tyson defensively? It's a bit of an unknown with him new to the country. He has some massive boots to fill, that's for sure, as Tyson carried the last 2 D's at times IMO.
Richardson for MacIver is a bit of a down grade for physicality, but he's a much better skater and his speed could get him out of trouble (and he'll be able to jump over the bench! :lol
. He's an up and coming Brit with a lot of promise. Will give you more going forward, so maybe Tyson's points could be split between Romfo and Richie. Plenty of questions to answer, and there's always the curse of the knees! :lol: Even though your D could be slightly weaker, your forwards and your depth is far stronger, so I guess it all balances out.
Holl_5 said:
You might not like this but I'll be fair!
Your D unit is pretty short, especially compared to last year losing MacIver. 4 of your 6 D is 5'11 which is generally a diddy unit, compared to 1 of 5 last year (Stone). Might be interesting to see if teams can create a bit of traffic in front of Lyle and capitalise that way.
Your D unit is pretty short, especially compared to last year losing MacIver. 4 of your 6 D is 5'11 which is generally a diddy unit, compared to 1 of 5 last year (Stone). Might be interesting to see if teams can create a bit of traffic in front of Lyle and capitalise that way.
Are you counting Lyle?
I'm guessing Hartwick and Jarvis will be split and act as the physical, crease clearing defenceman on their line. Whilst short, Romfo looks quite stocky - similar to Stoney.
We have lost a bit of height in our D, but then the best form of defence is attack and I'm hoping we will be doing a lot more of that this year.
Thread starter
#9
Having thought about this now, I think that its a better unit. We have Stoney and Hartwick who should be effective at clearing traffic from infront of the net and can play "Stay at home" roles and then we have a very mobile unit that can move the puck and share around the points.
We are Certainly smaller, but the defence hasn't changed that much, the diference is that we dont have the enforcer at the back.
But personally I think that is no bad thing, we have G to step in and Jarvis has shown himself to be capable off playing a physical game, while Hartwick definately has the size.
I hope that one of the 2 forwards has some toughness, if only to take some pressure of Brad, as our re-shaped defence has placed the enforcing back on him, but so far Im very pleased with the look of this team.
We are Certainly smaller, but the defence hasn't changed that much, the diference is that we dont have the enforcer at the back.
But personally I think that is no bad thing, we have G to step in and Jarvis has shown himself to be capable off playing a physical game, while Hartwick definately has the size.
I hope that one of the 2 forwards has some toughness, if only to take some pressure of Brad, as our re-shaped defence has placed the enforcing back on him, but so far Im very pleased with the look of this team.
I can't understand the height thing either! I always thought it was skill not height that determined your effectiveness! If the query is about height, Stoney has not done too badly in 20 years! :?
Like some of the other guys on here, I think next season is going to be really exciting. G's signings this year take the d-unit in a different direction and reflects his whole intention of the style of play i.e. creative, offensive but general team toughness.
I don't think Ritchie or Scott have been signed as direct replacements for Tyson and McIver in style of play - they can't be compared. There is much more flexibility in the d-unit this year -2 or 3 of the guys are two-way defence men. Jarvo, Mike and Ritchie are all capable of setting up goals, scoring goals and defending the crease. Stoney and Scott are rock solid stay-at-homes. The Devils will not need to rely too much on one guy for offensive play, they will not compromise their d-unit with the chance of one guy being binned for penalties (like McIver) and they have the option of G dropping back if needs be. Penalty unit will be stronger this season.
Like some of the other guys on here, I think next season is going to be really exciting.
G's signings this year take the d-unit in a different direction and reflects his whole intention of the style of play i.e. creative, offensive but general team toughness.I don't think Ritchie or Scott have been signed as direct replacements for Tyson and McIver in style of play - they can't be compared. There is much more flexibility in the d-unit this year -2 or 3 of the guys are two-way defence men. Jarvo, Mike and Ritchie are all capable of setting up goals, scoring goals and defending the crease. Stoney and Scott are rock solid stay-at-homes. The Devils will not need to rely too much on one guy for offensive play, they will not compromise their d-unit with the chance of one guy being binned for penalties (like McIver) and they have the option of G dropping back if needs be. Penalty unit will be stronger this season.
Thread starter
#13
Surelly its Stoney and Hartwick that are the staya at home, clear the crease types.
A few people seem to have Romfo down as a defensive D man, but compare him stats to Tysons's
Tyson
NCAA
Played 4 years 151 games 10+52 and 72 Pms
ECHL 72 games 9+26 and 35 Pims
Romfo
NCAA
Played 4 years 123 Games 8+37 and 138 Pims
ECHL 167 Games 21+65 and 206 Pims
My maths isnt great but those are pretty comparable averages arent they and they only have 1 AHL game between them.
Im pretty sure Romfo will be a very rounded defenceman with a more agressive style to Tyson, not sure if he will rush as effectively, but I think his alround points production could be close.
A few people seem to have Romfo down as a defensive D man, but compare him stats to Tysons's
Tyson
NCAA
Played 4 years 151 games 10+52 and 72 Pms
ECHL 72 games 9+26 and 35 Pims
Romfo
NCAA
Played 4 years 123 Games 8+37 and 138 Pims
ECHL 167 Games 21+65 and 206 Pims
My maths isnt great but those are pretty comparable averages arent they and they only have 1 AHL game between them.
Im pretty sure Romfo will be a very rounded defenceman with a more agressive style to Tyson, not sure if he will rush as effectively, but I think his alround points production could be close.
Romfo, Stone, Richardson, Adams and then Jarvis and Hartwick.
It's so much easier to clear a Voth, McMorrow, Bergin, Cruikshank (even though he's short), from in front if you're taller. Those types of players who'll come in at speed are so strong and could quite easily brush off a short guys challenge. I don't think players will fear going into the crease or giving Lyle a cheeky slash because they know they can get there without being 'stood up' like a Munn, Dagenais, Basiuk, MacIver did. Lehman did so well because he could see everything and players couldn't get to the rebounds because they'd been already been 'stood up'. There seems to be less presence than before and I know that's important for defences in most sports. I hope Lyle holds onto those rebounds...
Sticking to your football then...I find it much easier being a 5'10 centre half in the women's game just for the sheer presence it gives me against an average (5'6/5'7) sized striker. Even though they might be a bit quicker, they're still scared to turn as they know what's coming! :lol: If I was 5'6 I bet they wouldn't even think twice! And that's one of the things I'd want from my D - presence.
McAllister > Hinks. Favourite defensive moment of the season.
It's so much easier to clear a Voth, McMorrow, Bergin, Cruikshank (even though he's short), from in front if you're taller. Those types of players who'll come in at speed are so strong and could quite easily brush off a short guys challenge. I don't think players will fear going into the crease or giving Lyle a cheeky slash because they know they can get there without being 'stood up' like a Munn, Dagenais, Basiuk, MacIver did. Lehman did so well because he could see everything and players couldn't get to the rebounds because they'd been already been 'stood up'. There seems to be less presence than before and I know that's important for defences in most sports. I hope Lyle holds onto those rebounds...
Sticking to your football then...I find it much easier being a 5'10 centre half in the women's game just for the sheer presence it gives me against an average (5'6/5'7) sized striker. Even though they might be a bit quicker, they're still scared to turn as they know what's coming! :lol: If I was 5'6 I bet they wouldn't even think twice! And that's one of the things I'd want from my D - presence.
McAllister > Hinks.
Favourite defensive moment of the season.Holl, I take your point, as always you back up your points with reasonable arguments, however I think you're underestimating Jarvis and Hartwick in the physical department. Jarvis was a rock last year and certainly had no problem with bulkier players blowing past him. Plus he will drop the gloves if needs be. I don't really understand why you think Munn is much bigger than Hartwick, I certainly don't think there is much difference in size, granted Hartwick might not use his size all the time but I'm sure with the emphasis on team toughness this year Adams will be looking to Hartwick to start using his size more.
The Penguins just won the Lord Stanley with a (Gill apart) lightweight Defence and many considered Gill to be the worst D man as he was too big and slow. Ultimately I agree with you and I hope Adams plays on D all year. Our D is likely not to be as good as it was last year, however there has to be a balance with the forward in the wage cap era and I think this year we have got the balance closer than in previous years.
The Penguins just won the Lord Stanley with a (Gill apart) lightweight Defence and many considered Gill to be the worst D man as he was too big and slow. Ultimately I agree with you and I hope Adams plays on D all year. Our D is likely not to be as good as it was last year, however there has to be a balance with the forward in the wage cap era and I think this year we have got the balance closer than in previous years.
you say our D is small but we had a very big D last year and look where it got us, as much as the D played great we lacked the offensive needed to win the games. So having a big D doesn't always work, its the stability and balance of the entire team that needs to be looked at not just how strong/big the defence is. I think G has done an excellent job with the team and the devils will be one to look out for this season.
I agree that Jarvis is a very good player. He came in with a poor reputation from Bison fans as a big guy who didn't use his height/ weight but proved his critics wrong and was a rock, I agree. He also stopped jumping into the play at inappropriate times so there were less odd man rushes against the defence. But can he create that defensive presence all on his own? I can see him being your number 1 Dman this season to be honest, if he carries over from last year.
Technically Munner is only 6'2 but the way he plays you always know he's there, finishes his checks and gives the odd dig. I didn't always feel that with Hartwick, or that he always used his 6'3 to his advantage. Maybe now he has to then he will. It's the same with Sarich. You can say he's 6'3 but he hardly uses it and there's no presence there. Doesn't stop him being a good Dman either.
I remember Bergin saying that Ndur made the Panthers players feel taller and bigger on the ice, purely because of his presence. Surely that's an advantage to play with, rather than against. I always felt that, even though he wasn't technically great all the time, MacIver made the rest of the D look inches taller than it actually was.
If a forward looks up and sees a McAllister/ MacIver/ Munn waiting for him on the blue line, it must make them more concerned than seeing a Soderstream/ Howells/ Boothroyd?!
Technically Munner is only 6'2 but the way he plays you always know he's there, finishes his checks and gives the odd dig. I didn't always feel that with Hartwick, or that he always used his 6'3 to his advantage. Maybe now he has to then he will. It's the same with Sarich. You can say he's 6'3 but he hardly uses it and there's no presence there. Doesn't stop him being a good Dman either.
I remember Bergin saying that Ndur made the Panthers players feel taller and bigger on the ice, purely because of his presence. Surely that's an advantage to play with, rather than against. I always felt that, even though he wasn't technically great all the time, MacIver made the rest of the D look inches taller than it actually was.
If a forward looks up and sees a McAllister/ MacIver/ Munn waiting for him on the blue line, it must make them more concerned than seeing a Soderstream/ Howells/ Boothroyd?!
There was nothing wrong with your D last year IMO. You had the second best defensive record in the league. It was your first line (and injuries) that let you down. You were about 30 goals short of competing at the top and for the honours. If Elich had come in earlier and Campbell hadn't got injured then you'd probaby have had a much better finish.
If a forward looks up and sees a McAllister/ MacIver/ Munn waiting for him on the blue line, it must make them more concerned than seeing a Soderstream/ Howells/ Boothroyd?!
But fortunately we dont have those players in our D.myself i will leave the debate about whether we are weaker in D until we are into the season, as i have a sneeky feeling we wont be. For all we know Scott will be a very good replacement for the excellent Tyson, and Richardson will more than be a good replacement for Doug, although not as tough obviously. The key to all this will be how good these guys will blend together, and i think that is exactly where G will get it spot on, anyway time will tell. Myself i think its looking very very good.
HAPPY HOCKEY DAYS.
But fortunately we dont have those players in our D.myself i will leave the debate about whether we are weaker in D until we are into the season, as i have a sneeky feeling we wont be. For all we know Scott will be a very good replacement for the excellent Tyson, and Richardson will more than be a good replacement for Doug, although not as tough obviously. The key to all this will be how good these guys will blend together, and i think that is exactly where G will get it spot on, anyway time will tell. Myself i think its looking very very good.
HAPPY HOCKEY DAYS.