Can someone tell me what our defensive scheme is?

[phxblue]

A bit distracted?

Copy paste error?

Typing practice?

Micro-seizures?

Time loop?




I need to know.

None of the above. It was a Remix actually.

 

[Dbrownss]

So if they are attempting man to man, which isnt working. Yeo's zone system wasn't great either. Teams that could utilize the points shredded the Blues as the collapsing system just gave their artillery free reign....Nashville. Our forwards were too slow to get to the points to keep the dman from teeing up a shot.

When I watch other teams play against us, it looks like they use a zone but 2 guys pressure the puck carrier and usually gain possession. Our defense also can't get shots away as the other teams low to high coverage reads it and gets to the dman as soon as they get the puck. What gives?

 

[The Note in MI]

The athletic article is fantastic.

It’s essentially a former defenseman doing all the talking and analysis and it’s great.

 

[Thallis]

The athletic article is fantastic.

It’s essentially a former defenseman doing all the talking and analysis and it’s great.

It's a pretty giant indictment of the coaching staff too, for more or less the exact things we've been complaining about.

 

[TruBlu]

Wait, so some people are starting to admit that the D scheme has been our biggest problem so far this year, instead of dropping back on the good ol' goalie sucks?

 

[Thallis]

Wait, so some people are starting to admit that the D scheme has been our biggest problem so far this year, instead of dropping back on the good ol' goalie sucks?

Everyone has been saying that the scheme is a problem. The goaltending has also not been good enough, as the article mentions that the Blues are last in the league in HDSV%, but nobody has denied that the scheme is also stupid. There can be more than one problem at a time, and it's seriously old to hear people defend Jake by saying "this is a different problem!"

 

[PiggySmalls]

A bit distracted?

Copy paste error?

Typing practice?

Micro-seizures?

Time loop?




I need to know.

Well almost pulled a Rob, so I cut my comment. Went to post it here, but when I tried to paste it, the text was not showing up. So after a few times of pasting it was unsuccessful. I just re-typed it.

As Paul Harvey use to say, "Now you know, the rest of the story."

 

[TruBlu]

Everyone has been saying that the scheme is a problem. The goaltending has also not been good enough, as the article mentions that the Blues are last in the league in HDSV%, but nobody has denied that the scheme is also stupid. There can be more than one problem at a time, and it's seriously old to hear people defend Jake by saying "this is a different problem!"

I made no mention of Jake, nor did I say there can't be more than one issue at a time. I merely hate the "goalie sucks" argument (which many on this board are still stating) when several goals going in are when I'm watching this team give an abnormally high number of breakaways, odd man breaks, and allowing guys to just stand in front of the crease without fear of being hammered. That is not consistent with anything you would have seen out of this team two years ago, nor is it consistent with other teams in the top tiers of the league.

 

[Dbrownss]

I made no mention of Jake, nor did I say there can't be more than one issue at a time. I merely hate the "goalie sucks" argument (which many on this board are still stating) when several goals going in are when I'm watching this team give an abnormally high number of breakaways, odd man breaks, and allowing guys to just stand in front of the crease without fear of being hammered. That is not consistent with anything you would have seen out of this team two years ago, nor is it consistent with other teams in the top tiers of the league.

I agree. To simplify it, that argument says....well the defense isnt even doing their basic job, but let's also focus on the goalies not going above and beyond their job. Imo the issue is the defense, then the goaltending. Minimize those high danger chances then critique the goalie on not making that 1 or 2 saves they shouldn't. You can't get mad when they make 8 out of 10 ridiculous saves.

Btw...I'm not defending Allen, even though he's been ok, his body language doesn't inspire confidence.

 

[WeWentBlues]

The article really puts Bouwmeester on blast. His name is mentioned 28 times in the article. I'd disagree on Schmaltz. He was only mentioned for mistakes he made on one shift and for not burying that opportunity against Anaheim. But Pietrangelo, Steen, Schenn, O'Reilly also get mentioned for various miscues.

Some of my favorite quotes

"It’s an awful read by Bouwmeester on the Chicago forecheck, basically a free giveaway, and then the fire drill begins"
"That leaves Sammy Blais with two guys high. Manson gets the point shot and Bouwmeester doesn’t take the stick on Street, and the end result is a goal against the man-to-man."
“It’s a 2-3, Bouwmeester gets walked and panic ensues"
"I don’t know if the Blues’ pre-scout is wrong, but Bouwmeester’s puck decision is horrendous"
"Bouwmeester had no reason to leave the front of the net. Ryan Kesler is actually outside the danger area"

#Sit19 #Waive19

 

[EastonBlues22]

I made no mention of Jake, nor did I say there can't be more than one issue at a time. I merely hate the "goalie sucks" argument (which many on this board are still stating) when several goals going in are when I'm watching this team give an abnormally high number of breakaways, odd man breaks, and allowing guys to just stand in front of the crease without fear of being hammered. That is not consistent with anything you would have seen out of this team two years ago, nor is it consistent with other teams in the top tiers of the league.

Do you really have the context to say that, or do you just feel that way because it feels like they're giving up more than they should?

Every team gives up odd-man breaks and breakaways every single game. Every team has players on the other team successfully camp in front of their net every single game. What would you consider "normal" numbers for those occurrences, and how much higher are the Blues in relation?

 

[TruBlu]

Do you really have the context to say that, or do you just feel that way because it feels like they're giving up more than they should?

Every team gives up odd-man breaks and breakaways every single game. Every team has players on the other team successfully camp in front of their net every single game. What would you consider "normal" numbers for those occurrences, and how much higher are the Blues in relation?

I'm using the eye test. It started the second half of last year. Surely you've noticed that teams have been able to transition with numbers on us far more often over the last year than before. I don't have time to go back and count, but imo it has been night and day from what I used to see.

 

[EastonBlues22]

I'm using the eye test. It started the second half of last year. Surely you've noticed that teams have been able to transition with numbers on us far more often over the last year than before. I don't have time to go back and count, but imo it has been night and day from what I used to see.

What we used to see under Hitchcock wasn't league average, it was far superior to league average. Even last year the Blues came in well above average.

So, I guess what I'm saying is that worse than what we're seeing isn't necessarily awful as it relates to the rest of the league.

That's not to say that we shouldn't expect better from them as a group, but it's also not to say that it's so darn bad that we shouldn't expect better from our goalies, either.

Both are issues that need attention.

 

[TruBlu]

I agree that both need work. My original post was just basically stating surprise that people were giving more creed to the fact that the defensive scheme is in fact the big issue right now. Many were going right back to the "goalie sucks" mantra after the first couple of games. It has only been in the last week or so, when major sports media started to highlight the defensive deficiencies, that minds were changed. Some still aren't.