Also appreciate, as always, N.O.’s argument about the nebulous “shut down” term – I’ve been wondering about that. I think my closest idea resembles Racki’s definition, influencing the play such that the other team’s offense is stifled, rather than scrambling/blocking shots/playing from behind. If that makes any sense. I can see your point N.O. about the term being redundant, but I think Racki’s on to something as well. I like the debate.

(sorry for the late comment on the 1/4 report, I’m behind reading posts)

We absolutely need big help on D, but I would suggest a skilled puck possesion D man is just as effective in a “shut down role” as a guy who is just a stay at home guy. Whitney or Niedermeyer are good examples. At the end of the day, you want guys, who by whatever skills they posses, to either keep the puck away from the oposition or are skilled in stripping the puck and getting it to his own team with solid skills in his own zone.

NorwegianOiler:
And lastly, should I define it, “shut down” is never one single player, defenseman or forward. It must, it its essence, be a team job.

When I think of shutdown defender Chris Pronger is Still (Puke) the first thing that comes to mind. Sure it is a something the the who team should be doing but having one guy that does it really really well makes everyone around him do better as well. An elite shutdown guy usually acts as a calming influence for the rest of the team. The forwards are less concerned about making mistakes because they know they have a guy that back them up and the other defenders may be inclined to pinching in more and pushing the play. Having just one of these shut down Chris Pronger types(puke again) has a ripple effect down the whole lineup and if this guy can play 30 or so minutes a game then everything is gravy,