October 14 morning skate quotes: John Stevens

On whether he’s willing to accept additional turnovers in the name of an improved offense:
I don’t think we ever want to sacrifice turnovers. I think we felt that the second, third and fourth goals [Wednesday] came from situations where we had control of the puck – just a little better execution in those areas. I think there’s always going to have to be recognition from our team when teams have done a good job of getting numbers over top of you where there’s space in behind where we want to use our speed to get in behind teams, and then there are times where we’ve got a numerical advantage where we can make plays. But the deal with our guys is you execute when you have the puck and then work really hard to get it back when you don’t. But clearly the other night we had some situations where it was probably a poor decision with the puck that ended up in our net that not only was poor execution with the puck that ended up in our net, and then there was another when where we got out-competed probably on a puck that ended up in our net. There are lots of different ways when a puck’s turned over, and those are all things that we’d like to cut down on that number and be as low as possible.

On an assertion that a strong penalty kill statistically is more useful than a strong power play:
There are just some statistics out there that can prove that top power plays aren’t always indicative of success or championships. It’s how defenses are. I think it’s your five-on-five play that makes a big difference. If you can keep teams off the board in penalty kill situations, just numerically the way it’s proven in terms of winning percentage, it’s got a bigger impact on the outcome of hockey games. I don’t have those exact metrics, but there have been several articles written where one has more weight than the other. It’s not to say that power plays aren’t important, but to me, if a power play’s important, it’s got to outwork the opposition and I think there’s got to be a reflection of your team game in it. I think there’s got to be some accountability. It’s not just a privilege to go out and play on the power play. I mean, you’re going to see top guys and highly skilled guys in those situations, but it those teams that play with the most pace and work the hardest to have a difference, so I don’t think your power play should ever undermine how valuable your five-on-five play is.

On whether Andy Andreoff is a good complement to Nick Shore’s line with Kyle Clifford out:
Yeah, I think if you’re talking about a profile of a player, I mean they’re both guys that skate well, they have some physicality to their game in toughness and are both really good complementary players. Andy’s a little different where he has the ability to take faceoffs and play center and wing, but in terms of the element that they bring to that line – getting in on the forecheck and getting plays stopped and being focused on getting in and around the net – I think they’re both similar in those respects. We like that element on that line. Shoresy and Lewie have been really good in pretty much all situations for us. They’ve created a lot of offense and have done a good job killing penalties, and that element seems to be good with them, but quite honestly, it didn’t matter who we put there with those guys. Kempe played there a little bit, Cammy played there a little bit. [Nick Shore and Trevor Lewis] have good chemistry together and they’re real workers, so I think the third guy on that line seems to thrive just from the chemistry they bring.

-Two quotes have been withheld for a story to come this afternoon. One quote was omitted because it was used in the morning skate notes.

-Lead photo via Juan Ocampo/NHLI