Caution and O/A's

A funny thing happens around the time of training camp. Fans start making their annual trek over to Showare Center where they pick apart each and every single play and event. They pick every moment apart as if there is a hidden scoreboard that keeps track of positive plays and negative plays and by the end of camp the players who make the team are the ones who simply played the best over a 3-4 day period.

So let me get this straight... we're going to evaluate players based on a few short days rather than evaluating them based on the dozens of games they played in front of scouts last year in addition to the 3 or 4 days of training camp?

I would have to hope that the coaching staff had largely already decided who they wanted to make the roster this season prior to camp. That doesn't mean that a player with an extremely strong camp can't crack the roster but I would hope their evaluations are based on a whole lot more than a small handful of scrimmages.

This relates very directly to what I believe the Thunderbirds should do with their Over Age situation.  The decision on whether to keep Brad Deagle, Luke Lockhart, Chance Lund or Brendan Rouse to round out the two remaining 20 year old spots on the roster should probably be based on their body of work and not just a few days of camp.

In my mind, I think Deagle probably has to make this roster, leaving the choice down to Lockhart, Lund or Rouse. Deagle was the most solid and reliable defender last year, including Theodore. 

I've seen some claim to believe that the team has "plenty of D" with the acquisition of Jesse Forsberg. They believe that adding Forsberg makes Deagle redundant on the roster... or something to that effect.

For the sake of entertainment... let's see what that would look like:

Let's say Deagle isn't on this roster.  Your top pairing is probably Forsberg and Shea Theodore. Your second pairing is likely to look something like Evan Wardley and Jared Hauf.  No disrespect to either of those players (both of whom I like on various levels) but I think you are taking a major risk if you're going into the season asking those guys to play 20-25 minutes a game.  Phil Pietroniro might fit into that equation somewhere and so might Jarret Smith or Kevin Wolf or Reid Fritzke or Taylor Green. None of those players have been battle tested within the WHL.

So, do you feel comfortable with those guys as your top 4 after surrendering 292 goals in 72 games last year? At a rate of just over 4 goals a game? Quite frankly, I don't.  And again, that isn't a knock on Wardley or Hauf. I really like what I've seen from Wardley and I think Hauf has a chance to eventually turn into a very good player.

If you get rid of Deagle, you're keeping two of Lockhart, Lund and Rouse. For the sake of argument I'll group Lund and Rouse together. Look how many forwards this team might have (in no particular order):

Sheen

Honey

Elliot

Hickman

Alos

Sanvido

Lockhart

Lund/Rouse

Lipsbergs

Delnov

Swenson

Troock

Holub

Low(?)

Wray(?)

Folk/Ross (?)

That makes 18 possible forwards. You have established depth at the forward position, something you don't really have on the blue line.

If you keep Deagle and go with Lockhart (or Lund/Rouse, whatever) as your final OA spot.... You now look like this:

Forsberg - Theodore

Deagle - Wardley

Hauf - (whoever)

I suddenly feel a lot more comfortable about a defense where Hauf/Wardley are getting 15-20 minutes a night with Deagle, Forsberg, Hauf and Wardley eating up PK minutes to free up Theodore to play a ton of PP minutes to go with his normal minutes.

While the offensive "potential" of guys like Lockhart, Rouse and Lund are enticing the problem comes down to positional scarcity. Those guys don't play defense and Deagle does.