Follow @james_tanner123 The Coyotes played an entertaining and excellent game last night, defeating the Jets 4-1 for their 16th win of the season.
Oliver Ekman-Larsson scored a beauty and Shane Doan had three points, all on the power-play and they were the first three goals of the game.
Most importantly for the Coyotes was that Mike Smith played a great game, stopping 36 and generally playing much better than it seems like he has in weeks, although, I for one won't pile on his as much as others are doing since the team itself has been terrible and I don't think any goalie, for example, would have fared any better than Smith did the other night when he let in six.
While the Coyotes definitely played better than usual, this really was a 1-1 game that the Coyotes won on the special teams. They went 3/5 with the extra man while the Jets were 0/8.
The thing that really struck me about last night was watching Boedker play. The guy has some of the best wheels in hockey and if you don't watch the Coyotes play a lot, you might not realize that he's one of the most talented players in the NHL. The problem with him is that he doesn't always seem to utilize his massive level of talent and sometimes you barely realize he's on the ice.
If Boedker could take what he did last night and do it every game, the Coyotes would be a way, way better team. He currently has 25 points (two off the team lead) in 40 games, which is terrible. There's no other way about it. He has SEVEN multi-point games which would be good, except that there's only eight games where he has one point. Meaning that he has scored in only 15 out of 40 games this year - a total that is staggering when you consider that in the games he does score, he looks like a super-star.
Tomorrow night: The Senators.
----------------------
Dispelling Myths in the NHL: Myth #1
Leadership is important
Sure, I agree with you: leadership is important. it is a key component in many things, I think. I just can't be sure because it's intangible and cannot be measured.
However, I do really and honestly believe that leadership could be the difference between two otherwise equally matched teams in a playoff series: that makes sense.
But tell me this: Why is the only time I ever hear about leadership in regards to really crappy, god-awful hockey teams?
Watch any random the-coach-just-got-fired press conference and, invariably, someone will ask if the team's leaders were/are good enough. Why does no one ever call this what it is: a stupid question.
There has never been a team that fired it's coach due to the leadership of the players involved. Coaches get fired because of two reasons 1) the team is terrible or 2) There's eight games left in the season and Lou Lamoriello feels like it.
I saw people question both the Leafs and Oilers about their leadership groups, when in fact it should be obvious to anyone and everyone that those teams are missing basically the same things: Depth at centre and a top pairing defenseman.
If there weren't actual reasons that are easy to point to, statistically demonstrable and universally agreed upon, then maybe asking the GM about leadership would make sense.
I would ask why this happens, but we all know: questioning the likes of Phil Kessel and Taylor Hall sells newspapers and gets people to pay attention.
I mean what's a better story "Hall/Kessel Are Losers," or "Misguided GM Fails to Recognize that No Team Wins Cup by Building Team Around Winger?"
Gimme me a break.