Martin Marincin good, too much else bad

Jonathan Willis
January 24 2014 10:55PM

 

Martin Marincin continues to impress just over 100 games into his professional career. He was asked to take on heavy minutes in the Oilers' 4-3 loss to Phoenix on Friday, and unlike so many others on the team he didn't disappoint. 

Marincin picked up his first career NHL point against the Coyotes and played a career-high 23:53, the third time in the last six games that the rookie has topped the 20:00 mark. He finished the game plus-one, which makes him one of very few Oilers to be a plus on the season. The Oilers were excellent with him on the ice, out-chancing Phoenix 8-3 when he skated at even-strength. He was a bright spot in a loss, and he's been a bright spot in a losing season. 

Scoring Chances & Brief Thoughts

  • The Oilers' top line had a pretty good evening, all things considered. Or, at least, they did at even-strength - those kids also powered a misfiring power play that failed to manage even one chance per opportunity and went 0-for-6 in the goals department.
  • The second line was a problem. Ryan Smyth has been good in a third line role and showed flashes, but his foot speed is a problem on a scoring line and without any kind of shot he seems better off in the bottom-six. This is particularly so when Sam Gagner continues to flounder.
  • Matt Hendricks took three penalties but looked good when he wasn't offending the officials. The third line overall, as it has been for much of this season, was a strength. 
  • It was a mixed night from the fourth line. Mark Arcobello is a favourite but had a quiet evening, while both Nail Yakupov and Jesse Joensuu had nice offensive moments and bad defensive moments.
  • Andrew Ference left the game early and Justin Schultz's transition to low-event play in major minutes continues. Mostly, the defence wasn't terrible against Phoenix - though Anton Belov sticks out like a sore thumb, doesn't he?
  • Ilya Bryzgalov was awful. He faced 11 scoring chances total on the night and surrendered four goals and two posts. The Oilers made quite a few mistakes against the Coyotes but if they'd had even semi-competent goaltending they would likely have earned at least a point.
  • Also: be sure to check out Lowetide's look this evening at Aaron Ekblad. 

Recently by Jonathan Willis

74b7cedc5d8bfbe88cf071309e98d2c3
Jonathan Willis is a freelance writer. He currently works for Oilers Nation, the Edmonton Journal and Bleacher Report. He's co-written three books and worked for myriad websites, including Grantland, ESPN, The Score, and Hockey Prospectus. He was previously the founder and managing editor of Copper & Blue.
Avatar
#101 MessyEH
January 25 2014, 03:55PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/puck-daddy-presents-kiss-lowe-frustrated-oilers-fans-201608374--nhl.html

Check it out. It's funny cause it's true.

Avatar
#102 hankthetank
January 25 2014, 04:38PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

Holy. Can we get a write up on Gazzers 100mph slapshot yet?

Avatar
#103 Ed in Edmonton
January 25 2014, 04:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers

Someone put a bug in my ear yesterday about Eakins intense aerobic program for the players may be having a negative impact. The players are apparently doing a lot of off ice work to increase their aerobic capacity and stamina. On first blush this seems like a good thing. However, the theory proposed to me is that exercises designed to improve stamina are great for marathon runners but counter-productive for hockey players. Quick reflex muscles regress is such programs and therefore hockey performance regresses. If games were 6 periods long you might see a benefit.

Does anyone know if there is any validity to this? Could this explain why so many players seem off tis year?

Avatar
#104 Serious Gord
January 25 2014, 06:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
5
cheers
Ed in Edmonton wrote:

Someone put a bug in my ear yesterday about Eakins intense aerobic program for the players may be having a negative impact. The players are apparently doing a lot of off ice work to increase their aerobic capacity and stamina. On first blush this seems like a good thing. However, the theory proposed to me is that exercises designed to improve stamina are great for marathon runners but counter-productive for hockey players. Quick reflex muscles regress is such programs and therefore hockey performance regresses. If games were 6 periods long you might see a benefit.

Does anyone know if there is any validity to this? Could this explain why so many players seem off tis year?

This is something that I and others have been musing about ever since he was hired. How a coach can consider himself a conditioning expert is the height of arrogance and ignorance.

Avatar
#105 S cottV
January 25 2014, 06:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
7
cheers
@Oilanderp wrote:
To those who have tied themselves to the rhetorical mast that we have fired so many that to fire another is counterproductive I ask: you would fire him if that wasn't the situation because he is incompetent, why would you keep because it is the situation? In either circumstance he is incompetent.

Your argument here seems to be:

1. Eakins is incompetent.

2. One should fire an incompetent coach regardless of past coach performance.

3. Eakins should be fired.

While I completely agree with #2, I really don't know about the truth of #1, and you've done nothing to show me that this is the case. However, there is at least a bit of evidence that #1 is NOT the case.

Assume P=Players, C=Coach.

If P+C1 = fail, P+C2=fail, P+C3=fail, P+C4=fail, P+C5=fail ....

Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting to me that P + C6 = success?!?!?!? It seems to me that any reasonable person would have a look at 'P'.

Look at a game and tell me with a straight face there isn't a problem with P, or am I just 'P'ing in the wind here?

At a certain point it doesn't matter about the P, because the C - must reach the P, no matter whether or not the P is in the right or in the wrong.

The C must win over the P - period.

A reasonable time to accomplish this is a given and by anyones standards you really have to be thinking that present conditions warrant that time is just about up.

I am the first to acknowledge that this player group must be a major challenge. Young core of hot shot first overalls and first round draft picks that don't know how to play yet and have big egos. Too many small skill forwards. A weak d corp and weak goaltending. Frustration amongst the group from several years of failure and big time pressure to turn it around. It's all very tough - no question.

Still - the Coaches job is to win them over, take what is handed to him and extract over achievement.

Over achievement is subjective, but I really believe that even the most favourable to Eakins, would be hard pressed to identify even a morsel that qualifies. Those harshest to Eakins would declare that there is not a damn thing that represents any indication of over achievement with this player group.

It did not take Paul Maurice - more than a week and a half to produce some evidence of over achievement from the Jets player group. We have had Dallas Eakins for 6 months and I really cant point to anything that comes close to a comparison.

The C is a very tough job, given the P that is in place. Only the very best of the C stands a chance. Our C - is not even close to being one of the very best C's out there.

He has no chance.

Avatar
#106 Rod from Viking
January 25 2014, 07:17PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers
MessyEH wrote:

Before they fire Eakins, they should fire Bucky, Smith and the damn goalie coach. Let Eakins hire his own assistants.

The only way that ever happens is when Lowe is removed from this operation.

I'll give MacT and Eakins a fair chance.

But Lowes gotta go.

I agree, Eakins and Mac T were brought in to try to change the culture, and it seems like the "core" have had their way with the previous coaches and management by being involved in decision 's they shouldn't have been. This along with premature 7 year contracts handed out by management has the room in a turmoil. I have faith in Hall and Nuge but I think Eberle and Gagner need to traded to shake up the core and more importantly bring in a player or two that will improve this team. I am so disappointed that Mac T, Katz and some of the Edmonton. Media I are telling us how critical K Lowe is to the teams future. If Kevin Lowe wants to call the hounds off he needs to be a man and tell the fans he has made a lot of mistakes and has learned by them and 06' and the rings he got as a player have nothing to do with 2014, he is not a good presser person because of his temper and competitiveness so even doing it on Oilers Now would work. This would be far from perfect but even a long time season ticket holder li e my self doesn't,t feel it is right for his family to be run out of town.

Avatar
#107 oilersd
January 25 2014, 09:38PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
6
cheers
Serious Gord wrote:

This is something that I and others have been musing about ever since he was hired. How a coach can consider himself a conditioning expert is the height of arrogance and ignorance.

I think this is a bit of a reach. The issues the team has is with their lack of size and an inability to manage puck possession. It's genetics and between the ears that's the problem. Not quick reflex muscles.

Avatar
#108 oilersd
January 25 2014, 09:45PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers
S cottV wrote:

At a certain point it doesn't matter about the P, because the C - must reach the P, no matter whether or not the P is in the right or in the wrong.

The C must win over the P - period.

A reasonable time to accomplish this is a given and by anyones standards you really have to be thinking that present conditions warrant that time is just about up.

I am the first to acknowledge that this player group must be a major challenge. Young core of hot shot first overalls and first round draft picks that don't know how to play yet and have big egos. Too many small skill forwards. A weak d corp and weak goaltending. Frustration amongst the group from several years of failure and big time pressure to turn it around. It's all very tough - no question.

Still - the Coaches job is to win them over, take what is handed to him and extract over achievement.

Over achievement is subjective, but I really believe that even the most favourable to Eakins, would be hard pressed to identify even a morsel that qualifies. Those harshest to Eakins would declare that there is not a damn thing that represents any indication of over achievement with this player group.

It did not take Paul Maurice - more than a week and a half to produce some evidence of over achievement from the Jets player group. We have had Dallas Eakins for 6 months and I really cant point to anything that comes close to a comparison.

The C is a very tough job, given the P that is in place. Only the very best of the C stands a chance. Our C - is not even close to being one of the very best C's out there.

He has no chance.

We live in an instant gratification world and this is a good example. Let's roast one guy after half a season and anoint another after one week.

Avatar
#109 Dave
January 25 2014, 09:53PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
5
cheers

Shouldn't the Oilers with all of their "talent" have a better power play ? Does the poor power play the result of poor coaching ? I think it does.

Avatar
#110 S cottV
January 25 2014, 10:09PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers

@oilersd

At least Maurice has produced a morsel of over achievement. Name something Eakins has produced?

Comments are closed for this article.