GDT: 2-4-6 can we score 8? CBJ vs Chi 2.13-21

Double-Shift Lasse

Just post better
Dec 22, 2004
33,355
14,030
Exurban Cbus
The team looks tired physically. Seems like they’re starting to shake off the mental exhaustion but a lot of the guys look slow and there is a lot of reaching, especially late, and there are guys who look like they want to engage along the boards and fight for pucks but just don’t have the energy to maintain.

Obviously this could be a misread. I often used to say the team’s late-game struggles were mental and lack of confidence, but it just looks overall like they’re physically tired.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VeseleTlacovky

Iron Balls McGinty

Registered User
Aug 5, 2005
8,498
6,368
I know winning face offs are important but I feel like we make them too important in OT.

Foligno is out there to win a face off because Roslovic can’t. Even still, it’s a 50/50 crapshoot to win the face off. You lose those odds and then you still have a boat anchor on the ice.

Next time I propose we put the most talented players on the ice and just hope the face off odds go our way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I3LI3

Xoggz22

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
7,433
2,643
Columbus, Ohio
I know winning face offs are important but I feel like we make them too important in OT.

Foligno is out there to win a face off because Roslovic can’t. Even still, it’s a 50/50 crapshoot to win the face off. You lose those odds and then you still have a boat anchor on the ice.

Next time I propose we put the most talented players on the ice and just hope the face off odds go our way.
If you want a faceoff win I was thinking Jenner was our best option. with the changes in which dot, etc. I'm not sure it matters with this team. Just seeing brain farts right now. I'm wondering if a system change is creating indecisiveness or confusion. two years ago it was safe is death, last year was pack all 5 in our zone and wait for breakout, this year is some mix of the two. Seems to be having the most effect on Jones and Werenski... although I'm not sure Savvy and Gav have looked all that consistent either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Double-Shift Lasse

Iron Balls McGinty

Registered User
Aug 5, 2005
8,498
6,368
If you want a faceoff win I was thinking Jenner was our best option. with the changes in which dot, etc. I'm not sure it matters with this team. Just seeing brain farts right now. I'm wondering if a system change is creating indecisiveness or confusion. two years ago it was safe is death, last year was pack all 5 in our zone and wait for breakout, this year is some mix of the two. Seems to be having the most effect on Jones and Werenski... although I'm not sure Savvy and Gav have looked all that consistent either.
Probably true but I'm thinking that if you get overly worried about winning the faceoffs you are playing not to lose instead of trying to win the game. They don't have anyone strong in winning faceoffs at a Patrice Bergeron level and even he loses them 40% of the time.

I'm starting to believe when it goes to OT that if you try to have a "faceoff specialist" out there 1 of 2 things are destined to happen.

1. You win the faceoff and you waste offensive time getting that person off the ice so someone with more offensive talents can get on the ice. This creates a temporary shorthanded situation where the other team can set up defensively while we immediately change out a player.
or
2. You lose the faceoff and you get someone out there who is a boat anchor playing defensive hockey praying you don't get scored on or the other team makes a mistake you hope to capitalize on even though you best offensive players are not on the ice.

3 on 3 is really run and shoot playground basketball hockey and we seem to very defensive and not aggressive in OT. It seems to allow other teams to take control.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KJ Dangler

LetsGOJackets!!

Registered User
Mar 23, 2004
4,788
1,150
Columbus Ohio
I hate that he sniped that beauty early, even stood up for Roslo and we got the Cam goal too and still lost the game in the final 4:00 minutes. that really peaves me. Kane & Cat are lethal - we knew it was coming and couldn't stop it Joonas cannot give up that rebound to a guy driving the net
 

KJ Dangler

Registered User
Oct 21, 2006
8,277
4,943
Columbus
I like this kid .. our media needs to hold this team accountable .. usually it’s questions like it looked like this , or tell me about ... Team gets held back by prehistoric coaching .. same reason Foligno / Jenner consistently are among leaders in ice time . Constantly trying to win one goal games and playing defense the whole period in the 3rd , happens way too often under Torts ... starting overtime with Foligno on ice is just stupid ...

 

Cowumbus

Registered User
Mar 1, 2014
11,502
6,319
Arena District - Columbus
For those of you that think 3 of 4 is acceptable, keep in mind that there are no out of division or out of conference games so the points are more critical this year. Not to mention fumbling away a point is never a consolation in my book. Yes, it happens but it's been too often and can ill afford this year. Getting 3 off 4 against Chicago this year, is not ok for me
Spot on.

The team hasn’t been able to string together more than 2 wins in a row.. that’s not a good sign.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KJ Dangler

KCbus

Registered User
Jan 3, 2010
2,204
2,471
Reynoldsburg, OH
A couple of topics have been brought up here that I have thoughts on.

One, anytime you have one of these two-game sets, and you offer me 3 points out of 4, I'll take it. Do that all season, and you're going to make the playoffs easily. The disappointment comes because you had 4 points out of 4 with about four minutes to go in the second game, with the opponent getting zero. And two lackadaisical plays wind up turning a +4 point differential into only a +1.

Two, I disagree with the theory that faceoffs shouldn't get extra attention in overtime. OT is 100% geared for offense. Possession of the puck is paramount in OT. There's so much empty space, and so many options for how to play the puck that it's about five times more difficult to play defense and re-gain possession. I assume that the team with the puck in OT is going to win the game until proven otherwise. So as far as I'm concerned, you put the guy out there that you think it most likely to win it and go from there. I don't think trying to win a faceoff is "playing not to lose." It's trying to win possession and start the shift on offense, because offense thrives.
 

KJ Dangler

Registered User
Oct 21, 2006
8,277
4,943
Columbus
Spot on.

The team hasn’t been able to string together more than 2 wins in a row.. that’s not a good sign.
It’s our fanbases mentality ... we sucked for so long that just being competitive for the past 5yrs is seen as an accomplishment . Meanwhile we’ve blown 2-0 leads against the Caps taking both games on road .. we had no business losing the Boston series . Torts has had a bad power play his whole coaching career, his player utilization has always been questionable .. the league has changed and you don’t consistently win abandoning what got you the lead , and trying to play defense first hockey an entire period . Where is his accountability ? We’ve blown 3 ot games this season , he was asked if they will practice 3 vs 3, he said no .. I mean why practice game scenarios right ?
 

Cowumbus

Registered User
Mar 1, 2014
11,502
6,319
Arena District - Columbus
It’s our fanbases mentality ... we sucked for so long that just being competitive for the past 5yrs is seen as an accomplishment . Meanwhile we’ve blown 2-0 leads against the Caps taking both games on road .. we had no business losing the Boston series.

Hey man, you’re preaching to the choir here. I think very few feel the way we do though.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: KJ Dangler

KJ Dangler

Registered User
Oct 21, 2006
8,277
4,943
Columbus
A couple of topics have been brought up here that I have thoughts on.

One, anytime you have one of these two-game sets, and you offer me 3 points out of 4, I'll take it. Do that all season, and you're going to make the playoffs easily. The disappointment comes because you had 4 points out of 4 with about four minutes to go in the second game, with the opponent getting zero. And two lackadaisical plays wind up turning a +4 point differential into only a +1.

Two, I disagree with the theory that faceoffs shouldn't get extra attention in overtime. OT is 100% geared for offense. Possession of the puck is paramount in OT. There's so much empty space, and so many options for how to play the puck that it's about five times more difficult to play defense and re-gain possession. I assume that the team with the puck in OT is going to win the game until proven otherwise. So as far as I'm concerned, you put the guy out there that you think it most likely to win it and go from there. I don't think trying to win a faceoff is "playing not to lose." It's trying to win possession and start the shift on offense, because offense thrives.
Face offs matter for sure .. but how often is the game won on that initial face off on 3 vs 3 ?

Also , in hockey it takes one play to score .. doesn’t matter if you play great for period if you have a lapse .. mistakes happen . How about keeping your foot on the gas instead of trying to win games 2 to 1 ? You haven’t noticed it always seems to happen to the CBJ ? Perhaps keep playing your game until the final horn . It’s all a mentality that comes from the top
 

KCbus

Registered User
Jan 3, 2010
2,204
2,471
Reynoldsburg, OH
Face offs matter for sure .. but how often is the game won on that initial face off on 3 vs 3 ?
I've seen plenty of times when exactly that happened.

Also , in hockey it takes one play to score .. doesn’t matter if you play great for period if you have a lapse .. mistakes happen . How about keeping your foot on the gas instead of trying to win games 2 to 1 ? You haven’t noticed it always seems to happen to the CBJ ? Perhaps keep playing your game until the final horn . It’s all a mentality that comes from the top
Now you're arguing something I didn't say. I agree with you on this -- you have to play 60 minutes. Or more.
 

KCbus

Registered User
Jan 3, 2010
2,204
2,471
Reynoldsburg, OH
It’s our fanbases mentality ... we sucked for so long that just being competitive for the past 5yrs is seen as an accomplishment . Meanwhile we’ve blown 2-0 leads against the Caps taking both games on road .. we had no business losing the Boston series .
Wait...
What.gif

You had me on the first one. When you win the first two games of a best-of-seven ON THE ROAD, you have to find a way to finish that off. But if you think we had "no business losing the Boston series," you're myopic. The Boston Bruins were a pretty damn good team that season, with elite goaltending and star players with a lot of playoff experience.

Being disappointed in that result is fine. But we didn't lose to freakin' Ottawa.
 

KJ Dangler

Registered User
Oct 21, 2006
8,277
4,943
Columbus
Wait...
View attachment 396293
You had me on the first one. When you win the first two games of a best-of-seven ON THE ROAD, you have to find a way to finish that off. But if you think we had "no business losing the Boston series," you're myopic. The Boston Bruins were a pretty damn good team that season, with elite goaltending and star players with a lot of playoff experience.

Being disappointed in that result is fine. But we didn't lose to freakin' Ottawa.
We had the better team , had the lead in the series the other staff made adjustments . Common theme .. I didn’t even go there ,but what coach switches his offensive and defensive coaches for the first 1/4 of the season to get a different voice and piss away the first quarter of the season ? And gets a pass from our fans/ media ? Stuff like that is why you play Tampa in first round , and Boston in 2nd round .Imagine Ryan Day taking Brian Hartline and saying your going to coach the linebackers to start this season , and they lose the first 3 games of the season because they can’t catch the ball, and now they can’t tackle either :help:
 

CBJWerenski8

Formerly CBJWennberg10 (RIP Kivi)
Jun 13, 2009
42,085
24,009
Came to see what we were talking about. Saw the same copy and paste rhetoric, and now a conversation about the Boston series two years ago from a team thats entirely different.

HF CBJ is an amazing place.
 

KCbus

Registered User
Jan 3, 2010
2,204
2,471
Reynoldsburg, OH
We had the better team , had the lead in the series the other staff made adjustments .
1. No we didn't.
2. Having a one-game lead in a series isn't a big deal. Unless it's 3-2.
3. Even if I DID concede that we were the better team (which we weren't), being the better team doesn't equate to "having no business losing" to the opponent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CBJWerenski8

Iron Balls McGinty

Registered User
Aug 5, 2005
8,498
6,368
A couple of topics have been brought up here that I have thoughts on.

One, anytime you have one of these two-game sets, and you offer me 3 points out of 4, I'll take it. Do that all season, and you're going to make the playoffs easily. The disappointment comes because you had 4 points out of 4 with about four minutes to go in the second game, with the opponent getting zero. And two lackadaisical plays wind up turning a +4 point differential into only a +1.

Two, I disagree with the theory that faceoffs shouldn't get extra attention in overtime. OT is 100% geared for offense. Possession of the puck is paramount in OT. There's so much empty space, and so many options for how to play the puck that it's about five times more difficult to play defense and re-gain possession. I assume that the team with the puck in OT is going to win the game until proven otherwise. So as far as I'm concerned, you put the guy out there that you think it most likely to win it and go from there. I don't think trying to win a faceoff is "playing not to lose." It's trying to win possession and start the shift on offense, because offense thrives.
Playing to win a face off isn’t playing to lose. Player selection in OT is playing to lose. When faceoffs are a skill on the team nobody excels in and you don’t have your best players on the ice you are playing to not lose the game. If you want to win the game you put your best performers out there.

EDIT: Here is a coincidental snippet from Portzline's latest Atheltic article on how the CBJ miss Panarin in OT. It isn't about winning and losing faceoffs, it is about having a dynamic player on the ice. I like Nick Foligno but he is far from being a dynamic player on the ice. Foligno being out there to win a faceoff prevented someone far more talented offensively from being on the ice.

"Of all the departures from Columbus in recent seasons, the one that hurts the most is still Artemi Panarin. The point of this nugget is not to rip the scab off that wound, just to provide some perspective.
In Panarin’s two seasons with the Blue Jackets, they were an astounding 17-6 in games that ended in overtime, by far the highest winning percentage in the league. Only Pittsburgh (17) won as many OT games in those two seasons.
Since Panarin left, the Jackets are just 8-14 when games are settled in OT, including 0-3 this season, including Saturday’s loss to Chicago after only 35 seconds. Those 14 losses are more than any other team. Anaheim is second with 10.
Panarin had five OT game-winners with the Blue Jackets, but his greatest gift as a player was making everybody around him better by drawing so much attention when he had the puck. Seth Jones had four OT winners in those two seasons."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tchigo

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->