FireGerardGallant
The Artist Formerly known as FireDavidQuinn
- Mar 19, 2016
- 6,646
- 7,555
He was doing pretty good till the wheels starting falling off at the end of the game. 3-1 goal sucked the life out of the team
Post-Game Talk: We lose
- Thread starter EdJovanovski
- Start date
Tob
Registered User
- Sep 16, 2017
- 16,126
- 35,636
I'm not sure GG is going to be a fan of the Strome/Panarin combo. He already made a comment about the cutesy passing which happened to get worse once he returned to the lineup. I want the Panarin that played under Torts. Maybe he gets less points but I want the wins. Also, once again we get crushed against a team that is playing playoff hockey. Vally mentioned this as well. Don't make the same mistakes Quinn made last season GG. This team is not good enough to play unstructured hockey. They need to work for it.
When Gallant was hired, I wondered how our top lines would fare -- especially Zib, Panny, Strome and, to a lesser degree, Kreider. The first three are not physical players and their "game" is the total opposite of what Gallant wants; they prefer the tic-tac-toe, highlight reel plays. The league knows this and have adjusted accordingly. Most (if not all) of the goals we scored in the early games were the result of work in the trenches and players going to the net AND shooting the puck. I noticed in recent games that the top guys have begun to revert to the pass first mentality that has plagued this team for years. Of the 4, Kreider has been the surprise -- Gallant has said and done the right thing to get him going (so far).
Gr8CornHolio
Registered User
- Feb 20, 2020
- 174
- 177
Get rid of skill and have trouble scoring who would of thought?
The team just has zero. This is to be expected with new pieces and a new coach.
hopefully it comes together
The team just has zero. This is to be expected with new pieces and a new coach.
hopefully it comes together
blue425
Registered User
Chimpradamus
Registered User
JHS
Registered User
- Oct 11, 2013
- 1,690
- 1,288
But successful. Please can fans just enjoy a team that can win games.
JHS
Registered User
- Oct 11, 2013
- 1,690
- 1,288
Chytil should not be long for center ice on this team and my hunch is will soon be out the door. He was abysmal last night and can be directly held responsible for 2 goals against last night. He’s been brutal all season and any chance this guy had to impress the new coaching staff has got to be diminishing quickly. I’d really like to see him moved to the wing once Kappo comes back and move Goodrow to center on that third line.
JHS
Registered User
- Oct 11, 2013
- 1,690
- 1,288
Wait so coming back from 2-0 down in Ottawa to win is not playing like a playoff team? Going 4-0 on a road trip is not playing like a playoff team?
Sometimes I think I’m pessimistic and then I come to this forum after a loss and realize there are a lot of people WAY worse than I am!
A few things:
1. Even if individual players can, should and will be called out -- offensively we have bigger issues than Panarin and Ziba not firing on all cylinders. In fact, our lack of offense is mainly not referable to them.
2. Fundamentally, what creating offense in the NHL is about is not rocket science. You must be able to create havoc in the offensive zone. From time to time, there are numbers about like how X% of the goals in hockey are scored within 3 seconds of a giveaway and so forth. What like 98% of the 5 on 5 goals in hockey have in common is that they are created after some kind of havoc is created forcing a mistake defensively. Besides a clean FO win and a direct slapper, its extremely uncommon that a goal is scored against a calm and collected D that is in control of the situation.
3. Goals have gone down at a steady pace for long stints of the modern history of the NHL, unless the game has been disrupted by rule changes or large expansions opening things up. But the last years we have seen goals per game increase instead. The reason for that is very obvious, coaches and teams felt the scale tilting and it made it worth it for teams to take risks. And this is one of the key points with this post. Because there are no obvious way to create offense, i.e. creating havoc in the attacking zone and offensively, that aren't explored by all teams -- that does not include an element of taking risks.
How does these risks display themselves? A few examples
* Pre I don't know, 2015?, if one defender had jointed the attacking and the other defender jumped into the attack too, it was jaw-dropping, it was 'you are running home behind the buss', it was simply unthinkable and a complete no-go. The following 5 years it has to different degrees with different teams becomes a regular event.
* Pre 05' you didn't stickhandle on the offensive blueline, its a horrible place to lose the puck. Gradually for a good 10 years that rule of thumb has been removed more or less, and in addition, players being great at stickhandling in those areas have seen their roles increase. If someone beats their guy, criss-cross inside the blueline, backhand drop passes, the defending team can lose their coverage and it creates havoc.
* Pre 05', all systems were designed to cut down on giveaways around your own defensive blueline (between the redline and the defensive blueline). In fact, the trap was designed to create turnovers in these areas. Give the puck away, let the other team come at you, then you have 3 guys at the redline and 1 guy steering the attacking team towards either side of the ice, and you shut the trap when they come up over the defensive blueline. This is the "trap" in all essence:
Torts claimed to be in favor of safe-is-death hockey, but it was a truth with modification. In relation to Renney he let the players lose more on the forecheck and he let defenders join the rush more -- but he was and is super conservative in the transition game. Remember Girardi just throwing pucks up the ice all the time? That is how you beat the trap. If you just flip the puck high up ice and put pressure on the other team, you won't make any turnovers. All the pre-05' top coaches, Torts, Hartley and Crawford especially, kept this accept of their game -- i.e. take no risks in the transition game -- and it killed them in the post 05' NHL.
Coaches that lets their defenders move the puck up ice, try low percentage passes that can open things up, can open things up, but it comes at a risk. This have changed a lot the last decade.
* One of the bigger changes lately, that still is ongoing, is that attackers have -- genuinely -- started to challenge defenders 1 on 1. I think this especially is what has increased scoring the most just the last handful of years. Nobody should beat a defender in a good position, that isn't on his heels or whatever, clean with a 1 on 1 move. As a result, many one on one challenges have for a long time just been about pressuring the defender back a bit, and the guy with the puck often circles back looking for a trailer or use the open ice to snap a shot between the legs of the defender. What these new offensively gifted players does is just that. I mean lets say that a forward fearlessly tries to split two defender and gets sandwhiched -- what could create more havoc? Bodies are flying, if you hit someone with the puck it can go flying in any direction. When a line knows that they will challenge a defender 1 on 1, they provide more support, are prepared to go looking for that puck that will end up in some random spot. Its seen all the time when like the Swedish U20 team plays, Raymond and co. but also look at the perfection line. How often doesn't they score a goal after either Pasternak or Marchand have engaged with a D, perhaps been taken out of the way, but 2 of the others get a hold of the puck, the defense is scrambling, and they just make a simple pass to someone infront of the net for a one-timer.
That puck that goes flying, that is also a risk not only an opportunity.
4. Under Gallant we play in straighter lines, we are simply more predictable. It helps the team confidence because we are less volatile as a team, more in control, but we are also more easy to control. Its hear that it takes "fingerspitzengefühl" from Gallant. We need to find ways to create more havoc offensively and be less predictable, while also not losing the stability we have gained as a team. I keep referring to this, but Tampa won 3 elimination games in the POs last season 2-0, 1-0 and 1-0. And some games 8-0. It cannot be all offense or all defense. You must be capable of both. My biggest objection against DQ was that he was all over the place, and went from one extreme to the other. Neither suits this team. But -- there are a ton of room for improvement for us. If you ask Tampa what they learned the most and what put them over the top, they will 100% say that it was their decision making. Deciding as a team, getting it into their DNA, to make the right call on when to take a risk and when to not take a risk. That is one thing we must work on, but also simple execution.
I think all this is on the agenda for sure. I would expect improvements over the year.
1. Even if individual players can, should and will be called out -- offensively we have bigger issues than Panarin and Ziba not firing on all cylinders. In fact, our lack of offense is mainly not referable to them.
2. Fundamentally, what creating offense in the NHL is about is not rocket science. You must be able to create havoc in the offensive zone. From time to time, there are numbers about like how X% of the goals in hockey are scored within 3 seconds of a giveaway and so forth. What like 98% of the 5 on 5 goals in hockey have in common is that they are created after some kind of havoc is created forcing a mistake defensively. Besides a clean FO win and a direct slapper, its extremely uncommon that a goal is scored against a calm and collected D that is in control of the situation.
3. Goals have gone down at a steady pace for long stints of the modern history of the NHL, unless the game has been disrupted by rule changes or large expansions opening things up. But the last years we have seen goals per game increase instead. The reason for that is very obvious, coaches and teams felt the scale tilting and it made it worth it for teams to take risks. And this is one of the key points with this post. Because there are no obvious way to create offense, i.e. creating havoc in the attacking zone and offensively, that aren't explored by all teams -- that does not include an element of taking risks.
How does these risks display themselves? A few examples
* Pre I don't know, 2015?, if one defender had jointed the attacking and the other defender jumped into the attack too, it was jaw-dropping, it was 'you are running home behind the buss', it was simply unthinkable and a complete no-go. The following 5 years it has to different degrees with different teams becomes a regular event.
* Pre 05' you didn't stickhandle on the offensive blueline, its a horrible place to lose the puck. Gradually for a good 10 years that rule of thumb has been removed more or less, and in addition, players being great at stickhandling in those areas have seen their roles increase. If someone beats their guy, criss-cross inside the blueline, backhand drop passes, the defending team can lose their coverage and it creates havoc.
* Pre 05', all systems were designed to cut down on giveaways around your own defensive blueline (between the redline and the defensive blueline). In fact, the trap was designed to create turnovers in these areas. Give the puck away, let the other team come at you, then you have 3 guys at the redline and 1 guy steering the attacking team towards either side of the ice, and you shut the trap when they come up over the defensive blueline. This is the "trap" in all essence:
Torts claimed to be in favor of safe-is-death hockey, but it was a truth with modification. In relation to Renney he let the players lose more on the forecheck and he let defenders join the rush more -- but he was and is super conservative in the transition game. Remember Girardi just throwing pucks up the ice all the time? That is how you beat the trap. If you just flip the puck high up ice and put pressure on the other team, you won't make any turnovers. All the pre-05' top coaches, Torts, Hartley and Crawford especially, kept this accept of their game -- i.e. take no risks in the transition game -- and it killed them in the post 05' NHL.
Coaches that lets their defenders move the puck up ice, try low percentage passes that can open things up, can open things up, but it comes at a risk. This have changed a lot the last decade.
* One of the bigger changes lately, that still is ongoing, is that attackers have -- genuinely -- started to challenge defenders 1 on 1. I think this especially is what has increased scoring the most just the last handful of years. Nobody should beat a defender in a good position, that isn't on his heels or whatever, clean with a 1 on 1 move. As a result, many one on one challenges have for a long time just been about pressuring the defender back a bit, and the guy with the puck often circles back looking for a trailer or use the open ice to snap a shot between the legs of the defender. What these new offensively gifted players does is just that. I mean lets say that a forward fearlessly tries to split two defender and gets sandwhiched -- what could create more havoc? Bodies are flying, if you hit someone with the puck it can go flying in any direction. When a line knows that they will challenge a defender 1 on 1, they provide more support, are prepared to go looking for that puck that will end up in some random spot. Its seen all the time when like the Swedish U20 team plays, Raymond and co. but also look at the perfection line. How often doesn't they score a goal after either Pasternak or Marchand have engaged with a D, perhaps been taken out of the way, but 2 of the others get a hold of the puck, the defense is scrambling, and they just make a simple pass to someone infront of the net for a one-timer.
That puck that goes flying, that is also a risk not only an opportunity.
4. Under Gallant we play in straighter lines, we are simply more predictable. It helps the team confidence because we are less volatile as a team, more in control, but we are also more easy to control. Its hear that it takes "fingerspitzengefühl" from Gallant. We need to find ways to create more havoc offensively and be less predictable, while also not losing the stability we have gained as a team. I keep referring to this, but Tampa won 3 elimination games in the POs last season 2-0, 1-0 and 1-0. And some games 8-0. It cannot be all offense or all defense. You must be capable of both. My biggest objection against DQ was that he was all over the place, and went from one extreme to the other. Neither suits this team. But -- there are a ton of room for improvement for us. If you ask Tampa what they learned the most and what put them over the top, they will 100% say that it was their decision making. Deciding as a team, getting it into their DNA, to make the right call on when to take a risk and when to not take a risk. That is one thing we must work on, but also simple execution.
I think all this is on the agenda for sure. I would expect improvements over the year.
Cmox
Registered User
Can’t wait til they play the isles. We’ll be asleep 1/2 through the first if this keeps up.
How the hell do you get on Kreider when he's literally scored like a third of the teams goals?
Half of the stuff rings somewhat true, the other is just HFboards caliber sensationalism
Chytilmania
Registered User
- Dec 31, 2017
- 4,128
- 6,268
Yes but last year we lost/blew these games and that cost us a playoff spot. We aren't going to be this bad all year long and this could go a long way towards a playoff push.
Chytilmania
Registered User
- Dec 31, 2017
- 4,128
- 6,268
His team's record's were around .500 in October and November then after Thanksgiving every single season they took off. Like 8-3, 9-2 immediately after if I'm remembering correctly.
Chytilmania
Registered User
- Dec 31, 2017
- 4,128
- 6,268
We got rid of Buch and Blackwell.
The team obviously isn't gelling. They will get there eventually.
I think the same thing AFTER A WIN. lol it's not even the losses that bother me. The team has a crap ton of talent that will win them games alone, in some cases way more talent than even teams that are going to finish ahead of them (mostly in the West). But that hasn't been enough for the past few years with our veteran group.
I do like a lot how Miller seems to be much better than the way he ended last year. This should be another growth year, hopefully Laf is next.
Riche16
McCready guitar god
Time to sit Laf... he's been awful. Let him watch 2 from the press box.
I hope KK is back but I'm not sure this is a "combo" situation where it can be sorted out via juggling.
I hope KK is back but I'm not sure this is a "combo" situation where it can be sorted out via juggling.
KevinFinnerty
I bomb atomically...
Megustaelhockey
"I like hockey" in Spanish
- Apr 29, 2011
- 21,902
- 14,848
In the world's most (adjective) arena in front of their own fans minus 4400 empty seats. Just run out of the building.
I don't care about the Flames. I care about players that show up for work and do *that*.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
BET ON ONLY ONE HORSE WATCH LIVE - FINGER LAKES RACE 1 - Farmington, NYWagers: 2Staked: $540.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-