Jump to content

Eichel and Reinhart: The Dynamic Duo

DR HOLLIDAY

By DR HOLLIDAY
in The Aud Club

 Share

Recommended Posts

... All Star

...

Posted
Posted

I like Z, he's a fine fellow.  But, what has Z done this season to earn a chance?  The cut-throat in me thinks the only rational reason to put Z with Samson and Eichel is to try and increase his trade value by the end of the season.  I think someone up above said something to that effect.

 

It's a ridiculous move.  You know what's going to happen?  The team is going to start from square one next October.  Not one line was/is allowed to develop chemistry this season.  Z is a place-holder. ROR and Kane will be a brand new experiment with not enough time to produce reliable data, especially if DD keeps rotating the third man.

 

I think a better move would be to establish permanent lines for the rest of the season, and work on refining the entries and possession.  Work on the PP and D zone breakouts.  Come up with an Alamo Mode that also allows for capitalizing on offensive opportunities.  Or, find a way to replace Alamo Mode altogether.

dudacek Hall of Famer

dudacek

Posted
Posted (edited)

I like Z, he's a fine fellow.  But, what has Z done this season to earn a chance?  The cut-throat in me thinks the only rational reason to put Z with Samson and Eichel is to try and increase his trade value by the end of the season.  I think someone up above said something to that effect.

 

It's a ridiculous move.  You know what's going to happen?  The team is going to start from square one next October.  Not one line was/is allowed to develop chemistry this season.  Z is a place-holder. ROR and Kane will be a brand new experiment with not enough time to produce reliable data, especially if DD keeps rotating the third man.

 

I think a better move would be to establish permanent lines for the rest of the season, and work on refining the entries and possession.  Work on the PP and D zone breakouts.  Come up with an Alamo Mode that also allows for capitalizing on offensive opportunities.  Or, find a way to replace Alamo Mode altogether.

 

Or, as someone posted a week or so ago, this entire season has been a science experiment in testing out matching parts as the coaching staff drums its system into the team again, and again and again until it becomes second nature, no matter who you are playing with.

 

What the organization learns this year feeds:

a) what players they go after this summer, and

b) how they start next season when the goal actually is to make the playoffs.

Edited by dudacek
Thorner Hall of Famer

Thorner

Posted
Posted

I think there are certain skills where the development that can be achieved is limited because they require a high natural aptitude. Hockey sense and vision fall into that category for me. A similar comparison in another sport would be a quarterback's pocket presence. So it's not that I don't think he can improve, I just think there's an upper limit (a relatively low one, in this case) on what we should expect. Reinhart doesn't even have a full season under his belt and he's already consistently making good decisions, whereas Kane is not. I don't think that's due to any difference in effort.

 

While you may think I'm quick to write Kane off, I think I'm actively trying to avoid recency bias with the hot streak that line is on. The observations from 'Peg fans, that two different 'Peg coaches thought he fit better getting heavy minutes on a 3rd line, what many of us saw with our own eyes the great majority of their (Kane-Eichel) time together, Bylsma's own words in the offseason about why the combo may not work, and the stats all point to the Kane-Eichel combo being suboptimal. Maybe in an effort to avoid recency bias I'm introducing a healthy dose of confirmation bias which is leading me to be more firm in my stance than I might otherwise be, I think there's a lot more support to the notion that Kane and Eichel are better off apart than there is support for them being together. I'm open to changing my position, but I need more than a couple week hot streak to get me there, whereas I feel many are perfectly willing to dive head first at the first sign that this may work out long term.

 

I also feel my evaluation of Kane in general may be getting a little obscured by the fact I dislike the Kane-Eichel pairing. I love Kane, he can play on my team any day--I'll find room for a 20-25 goal forechecking monster who can play on the PK with his physical skills. I just think there are some shortcomings to his game and skill set that make it better for the team for him to be the offensive catalyst on his line rather than the running mate to a bigger star.

 

 

 

Mmm.  Well, I see "hockey sense" as a combination of intellect/wit, coaching/teaching, maturity/wisdom, and innate abilities.  I don't disagree that he may be at his natural ability ceiling.  I definitely do not think he is at his ceiling with maturity, which feeds into the remaining two factors.

 

Yes, he may make a poor decision off the walls at times...this doesn't happen all of the time.  I remember years ago after complaining about Ennis or someone like him (maybe Roy..?) that he seems to always lose the puck, and the response was that he may seem to lose the puck a lot but that's only because he's generating a lot of chances.  Okay.  Present day Kane could fit that description. 

 

But we have seen with out own eyes, recently, yes, that his instincts also swing the opposite way.  His instincts helped make that tic-tac-toe-tic play happen.  His instincts made that glorious Eichel 1-second-left goal happen. 

 

When I see stuff like that, and in Evander's case, being clearly maturity-challenged coming into the organization, but being a smart person who is, in my view, motivated to contribute positively to the team (and, by extension, his career), I see a guy whose "hockey sense" can evolve into something that utilizes his talent better.

 

This isn't a case like Stafford, who seemed not very motivated in general, not quite as smart, and not quite as skilled, where those flashes were obvious anomalies.  I believe Kane has more to give, and is willing to try and get there.

 

Eichel makes similar "hockey sense" errors at times, yet it's said he's still "learning the game".  I don't understand why Kane can't still be learning the game.

 

Do we need to point out the elite players who make mistakes?  I mean, you don't get Kane's production if he's always making "hockey sense" errors, yet, here he is, handicapped because of his hockey IQ. 

 

I believe, in the case of someone like Kane, there can be improvements to the mental game.  I don't believe this would apply to everyone (like Stafford), but it can be true for some.

 

I guess we'll see!  I could be wrong.

 

Great discussion here, these two posts in particular presented two sides to a coin. I agree with a lot of the ideas on both sides.

 

I will say True that it's all well and good to listen to what Jets fans have to say about Kane, but a lot of it is post trade, when some would obviously be more inclined to point out perceived negatives than they normally would. I have maintained all along that Kane's hockey sense, while not great, is somewhat underrated, and I saw him play in Winnipeg a lot first hand. He did have more assists than goals heading into this year, and if you go through his highlights you can see quite a few great plays by him, showcasing good vision. Obviously the highlights are cherry picked, but the majority of players will make multiple questionable decisions a game if you are watching them enough.

 

My main source for hope, for him to improve beyond even the valuable player he has already demonstrated he can consistently be, is actually something you mention as a negative in this next post:

 

What I'm hung up on isn't that he's 24, it's that he's 24 and in his 7th season. If he were 24 and in year 2 or 3, I'd be quite a bit more optimistic about his hockey sense evolving in a major way.

 

 

I certainly hope you're right--if he learns to play nicely in the top-6 that's a huge win for the team.

 

That just points to the fact that he was probably in the league too soon, on bad teams, learning bad habits, and leads me to believe he has had plenty of time to stack on bad habits and inefficient muscle memory when it comes to decision making, and that it can take some time to work that stuff out of his system. Perhaps wishful thinking, but also plausible. The talent is there. He has the ability to pull off what he needs to on the ice, he's just not consistently (until more recently) choosing to make those plays. He's never going to be able to see the ice like Reinhart. He's not going to develop a top tier hockey sense. But perhaps seeing the ice on an average level, which I believe he can do, combined with the natural gifts he does have, would combine to make him very good player, and not just a good one.

 

A little better than Evander? Different but I'm not sure if better is the right word.

 

I love Girgensons, but Evander Kane is more naturally talented.

GoPre Second Liner

GoPre

Posted
Posted

You could lose the support of ROR if he doesn't think he is being put in a position to excel. Your correct that a piece or two is needed, but Kane ROR can take heat off of EICHEL, Sam and Girgs.

 

Good post. One of the reasons ROR is glad to be in Buffalo is he knows the team/coaching staff have faith in him as a first liner. ROR is loving the ice time and responsibility he's having in Buffalo. ROR didn't have this in Colorado. Glad Eichel and Reinhart were kept together. Girgonsens is not up to Kane's level, but there is one thing he'll do that Kane does night in and night out. And that's being aggressive for pucks deep in the opposing zone. 

  • 6 months later...
  • 11 months later...
Pokey Jones Top Prospect

Pokey Jones

Posted
Posted

Wow. Reading this thread from before I got here just boggles my mind. Comparing Eichel & Reinhart  to  Toews & Kane  or Perreault & Martin are such ridiculous fan-atic comparisons as to be laughable. I'm sorry guys, but this is a ridonculous thread. Not only is Reinhart nowhere near the skill level of either of those players, he is nowhere near Eichel's skill level. So the Batman Robin comparison is closer, in that Batman really never needed Robin and Robin should have just stayed in school.  

He may still turn out to be a decent mid-level player (although I still say he's David Legwand v2), but imo Reinhart isn't even comparable to Robert unless he takes a huge leap forward this year. 

dudacek Hall of Famer

dudacek

Posted
Posted

That video is priceless.

Those whispers that jack was speaking about Sam when he was mad about teammates not taking hockey seriously enough

All true.

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...