GDT: 10/9/14 Game #1: St. Louis Blues vs. New York Rangers

[Thallis]

I still thing Tarasenko defers to other players too much at times. I want him to take charge and be the "go-to" guy on his line. God knows he's good enough to.

He does, but he also knows that by now his name is circled before every game and defense are looking out for him. That opens up your teammates a lot.

 

[bleedblue1223]

i guess we should have listened to the canes fans, sounds like one of our weaknesses was just pushed even further

Nah, it was always going to take time. We should wait until the quarter mark or so to get a good feeling for where our PP is at. At the start of last season, our powerplay was simply deadly, but in reality, it was just a hot streak.

 

[WalterSobchak]

Not sure why Tarasenko's goal is credited to Stastny, btw. I've rewatched it like 10 times, and to me Stastny didn't touch it. Not that it's a very important issue, but for the greater truth sake...

and for my fantasy team!

 

[2 Minute Minor]

Should give credit to the Ranger PK, too. They were 3rd best in the league last year, and were blocking a lot of shots out there.

 

[rumrokh]

Nah, it was always going to take time. We should wait until the quarter mark or so to get a good feeling for where our PP is at. At the start of last season, our powerplay was simply deadly, but in reality, it was just a hot streak.

Nevermind the fact that Muller didn't run the powerplay in Carolina and when he was an assistant coach who ran the powerplay for Montreal, their powerplay rocked. I think last night was a lot more about execution than anything. They showed some completely different looks and good movement on the powerplay in the preseason. It might take a while, but I think we'll see good things in the regular season, too.

 

[Thallis]

Nevermind the fact that Muller didn't run the powerplay in Carolina and when he was an assistant coach who ran the powerplay for Montreal, their powerplay rocked. I think last night was a lot more about execution than anything. They showed some completely different looks and good movement on the powerplay in the preseason. It might take a while, but I think we'll see good things in the regular season, too.

They also had a some pretty good movement and pressure on the last two.

 

[BlueWorks]

Backes was disappointing, but at least no PIMs.
Lehtera is a plus addition.
Didn't know that Oshie had it in him, but on the flip side....hope it's not a repeat, our luck...a busted hand.

Ells give up an early softie, then stands on his head the rest of the first. Didn't like the breakaway goal either, but again it's a breakaway.

I'm a Hitch fan, but just don't understand how you can ignore the chemistry that osh, steen, backes had in previous years and tank and jaden last year. At least he put tank and jaden back together in the 3rd.

How can an NHL team have a power play that looks worse than high school hockey...

Gosh I forgot how much Panger and John drive me nuts.

 

[medkit]

Nevermind the fact that Muller didn't run the powerplay in Carolina

Yes he did. Absolutely. He was heavily involved with it, couldn't figure it out, and it's a primary reason why he was fired. Whitewash if you want; time will make this problem more glaring.

 

[rumrokh]

Yes he did. Absolutely. He was heavily involved with it, couldn't figure it out, and it's a primary reason why he was fired. Whitewash if you want; time will make this problem more glaring.

If that's the case, then I was mistaken. Of course every head coach is involved, they don't just blindly defer to their assistants, but I thought they had an assistant coach in charge of special teams. For example, now that Muller, MacLean, and Lewis are gone, Steve Smith and Brind'Amour handle their PK and powerplay. Is there an article or something like that you can refer me to that details the situation last year?

 

[medkit]

It was his system that he brought with him. Every article I've read has said that Kirk Muller was the one changing it and running it. I do believe MacLean was the assistant giving him some help with it day-to-day. I agree that every head coach has his hand in all facets, but I think similar to the NFL they each have areas that they specialize in a bit more. Kirk came up as a special teams guy and that was his focus in Carolina.

Honestly, this Bourne article is the best overall summation of the powerplay situation there: http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/576526

Funny enough, the .gifs he illustrates with have the Blues on defense.

They rotated between a few different ideas over the year and none of them worked. One of them was a dump-and-chase thing and so that was a bit alarming to see us doing on our first PP.

 

[bluemandan]

putting ott on the power play is beyond me. i expected our pp to be sloppy as it usually is and it was the first game back, tough loss but onto the next one!

Pretty sure was covering for Oshie who was serving his fighting major at the time.

That's the role Ott was signed for: The "super-utility" roll.

 

[rumrokh]

Pretty sure was covering for Oshie who was serving his fighting major at the time.

That's the role Ott was signed for: The "super-utility" roll.

No, it was the second period when Ott was out. With about 50 seconds to go in the 5-on-4 just after the 5-on-3. They were probably looking to change things up, and it was the first game, so I think the general response here is an overreaction, but I tend to agree that he's precisely the 10th forward you choose to put out there no matter what you want them to do.

 

[EastonBlues22]

It was his system that he brought with him. Every article I've read has said that Kirk Muller was the one changing it and running it. I do believe MacLean was the assistant giving him some help with it day-to-day. I agree that every head coach has his hand in all facets, but I think similar to the NFL they each have areas that they specialize in a bit more. Kirk came up as a special teams guy and that was his focus in Carolina.

Honestly, this Bourne article is the best overall summation of the powerplay situation there: http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/576526

Funny enough, the .gifs he illustrates with have the Blues on defense.

They rotated between a few different ideas over the year and none of them worked. One of them was a dump-and-chase thing and so that was a bit alarming to see us doing on our first PP.

That zone setup isn't what we saw the Blues using in this game, either in the first two periods or in the third after they made a few adjustments.

I think a PP needs two basic things to have a chance at being effective:

1) An effective strategy for entering the zone. What I'm seeing from the Blues here is reasonable layering through the neutral zone, but everything jams up at the blue line as the decision to carry or dump is delayed until the puck carrier hits the line. Unfortunately, all his support has usually come to a screeching halt by the time the decision is made, so neither option is particularly effective. The puck carrier needs to make a decision earlier after crossing the red line. If the defense is standing up, dump it deep while your forwards still have the speed and skating line combo to win the race to it. If the defense is hanging back, the support forwards need to start moving laterally across the blue line with some momentum as the puck carrier approaches it. This forces the defense to either back off a bit to respect their speed if they're staying still laterally, or move with the man laterally which creates gaps in the defense that the puck carrier can use to cross the line. If the defense does neither, a quick pass to one of the moving forwards should net him an easy entry and potential scoring chance. Last ditch option should be a soft half-wall dump to an open area that one of the moving forwards can reach quickly.

2) A zone setup that applies pressure to the defense in multiple ways while playing to the strengths of the offensive personnel. There are a lot of ways to do this. The basic tools in the offensive toolbox are one-timers, cross-ice passes, charges to the middle from the half-wall, screens, intentional shot redirections, changing the attack angle from high-to-low or side-to-side quickly (i.e. sharp puck movement to create defensive gaps in coverage or open shooting lanes), backdoor plays, rotational movement, etc. The big question then becomes what sort of personnel groupings and positionings maximize those options while playing to the strengths of the individual players?

Generally, I like having a two player presence in the slot (one medium/high, and one low) when the puck is on a half-wall or in the corner (threatening to carry it into the middle if the opportunity is there), with the weak side point applying backside pressure and the other point providing an outlet that allows him a one-time opportunity. When the puck is high, I like an umbrella formation with two forwards rotating around in the low slot/around the net. We saw some of this from the Blues in the first two periods, but the personnel was not optimized to take advantage of the opportunities these formations provide. An example was Steen on the left point. His most dangerous weapon is his shot, but this is not a position that allows him to shoot quickly before the defense can rotate. In the third period he was moved to the right point/half-wall position, and this was fine.

There are a lot of things to nitpick here depending on personal preference, and I don't have time to go into all of them. I do think that the rapid diagnosis of some of the problems and willingness to adjust bodes well moving forward. To me the biggest concern is the zone entry strategy as outline above.

 

[LongLiveTheNote]

That zone setup isn't what we saw the Blues using in this game, either in the first two periods or in the third after they made a few adjustments.

I think a PP needs two basic things to have a chance at being effective:

1) An effective strategy for entering the zone. What I'm seeing from the Blues here is reasonable layering through the neutral zone, but everything jams up at the blue line as the decision to carry or dump is delayed until the puck carrier hits the line. Unfortunately, all his support has usually come to a screeching halt by the time the decision is made, so neither option is particularly effective. The puck carrier needs to make a decision earlier after crossing the red line. If the defense is standing up, dump it deep while your forwards still have the speed and skating line combo to win the race to it. If the defense is hanging back, the support forwards need to start moving laterally across the blue line with some momentum as the puck carrier approaches it. This forces the defense to either back off a bit to respect their speed if they're staying still laterally, or move with the man laterally which creates gaps in the defense that the puck carrier can use to cross the line. If the defense does neither, a quick pass to one of the moving forwards should net him an easy entry and potential scoring chance. Last ditch option should be a soft half-wall dump to an open area that one of the moving forwards can reach quickly.

2) A zone setup that applies pressure to the defense in multiple ways while playing to the strengths of the offensive personnel. There are a lot of ways to do this. The basic tools in the offensive toolbox are one-timers, cross-ice passes, charges to the middle from the half-wall, screens, intentional shot redirections, changing the attack angle from high-to-low or side-to-side quickly (i.e. sharp puck movement to create defensive gaps in coverage or open shooting lanes), backdoor plays, rotational movement, etc. The big question then becomes what sort of personnel groupings and positionings maximize those options while playing to the strengths of the individual players?

Generally, I like having a two player presence in the slot (one medium/high, and one low) when the puck is on a half-wall or in the corner (threatening to carry it into the middle if the opportunity is there), with the weak side point applying backside pressure and the other point providing an outlet that allows him a one-time opportunity. When the puck is high, I like an umbrella formation with two forwards rotating around in the low slot/around the net. We saw some of this from the Blues in the first two periods, but the personnel was not optimized to take advantage of the opportunities these formations provide. An example was Steen on the left point. His most dangerous weapon is his shot, but this is not a position that allows him to shoot quickly before the defense can rotate. In the third period he was moved to the right point/half-wall position, and this was fine.

There are a lot of things to nitpick here depending on personal preference, and I don't have time to go into all of them. I do think that the rapid diagnosis of some of the problems and willingness to adjust bodes well moving forward. To me the biggest concern is the zone entry strategy as outline above.

How much do we need to pay you to quit HFBoards moderating and coach the Blues PP? Couldn't of said it better myself.

 

[Mike Liut]

Oshie, "My baby daughter had me up all night and I was really crabby"


When asked why he beat Zucherello's ass

 

[BlueDream]

I don't get what's really the point of complaining about Ott on the powerplay. He's not there to be skilled and handle the puck. He's there to stand in front of the goalie and block his view, which he does a fine job at.

The powerplay not scoring really doesn't have much to do with Ott.

Hopefully the Blues play a more energetic, physical game against Calgary. I saw Reaves hit John Moore but other than that... not much.