GDT: Game 16: Coyotes @ Canucks - 8PM - FSAZ

[cobra427]

It's funny, isn't it - going in to this season we were all so high on our forward talent and quite concerned about our back end. 12 games in, we have a very solid back end and our forward corps are soiling the bed.

I agree. I think our primary problem is our forward play without the puck. Not enough of a consistent forecheck/back check and not enough support especially for the first pass out of our zone. It seems like our D is left hanging. We have less chances because of it too.

 

[kihekah19*]

I agree. I think our primary problem is our forward play without the puck. Not enough of a consistent forecheck/back check and not enough support especially for the first pass out of our zone. It seems like our D is left hanging. We have less chances because of it too.

This has indeed been the story of the season, thus far.

 

[Vinny Boombatz]

This has indeed been the story of the season, thus far.

Extremely difficult to have a good forecheck unless you are fast through the neutral zone, and we aren't fast.

The defense knows we like to keep it wide, and they are shadowing our forwards, leaving us to do multiple regroups before we send it it with likely a single forechecker.

With that, our F2 (2nd forward in) has to choose between opposite D or winger, as he can't cover both and F3 is no where to be found, rendering a full and complete forecheck useless. F2 generally tries to get to the winger to disrupt the pass, but with so much time to move the puck, the Dman typically hits the opposite Dman w/the pass and then they've got multiple options to move the puck up the ice.

If we could get through the neutral zone with speed, we can get 2 on the puck, eliminating the first pass, therefore hemming them in the zone, but those times are rare and when it does happen, we generally try to cycle it to death while no one goes to the net. <sigh>

Our best opportunities are on the rush when the puck-handler just keeps it entering the zone, it provides way more creative options, with criss-cross and give & go opportunites, not to mention a drop pass to the D who then can swing it or shoot it on goal.

<btw, how many times have we seen an opposing winger skate the puck into our zone deep to the half-wall and then wait for the high-slot to open up with a trailing player, it happens all the time, but we rarely use this strategy even though it works often, another sigh>

i'd rather we just try and carry the puck into the zone 90% of the time, we'd create far more offense that way. Now granted, we will turnover the puck much more than way, but with the skating quality of our defense, it is a risk worth taking IMHO, it opens up the game and enhances the skill set up our team I think.

 

[moosemeister]

i'd rather we just try and carry the puck into the zone 90% of the time, we'd create far more offense that way. Now granted, we will turnover the puck much more than way, but with the skating quality of our defense, it is a risk worth taking IMHO, it opens up the game and enhances the skill set up our team I think.

Bingo.

 

[PhoPhan]

Extremely difficult to have a good forecheck unless you are fast through the neutral zone, and we aren't fast.

The defense knows we like to keep it wide, and they are shadowing our forwards, leaving us to do multiple regroups before we send it it with likely a single forechecker.

With that, our F2 (2nd forward in) has to choose between opposite D or winger, as he can't cover both and F3 is no where to be found, rendering a full and complete forecheck useless. F2 generally tries to get to the winger to disrupt the pass, but with so much time to move the puck, the Dman typically hits the opposite Dman w/the pass and then they've got multiple options to move the puck up the ice.

If we could get through the neutral zone with speed, we can get 2 on the puck, eliminating the first pass, therefore hemming them in the zone, but those times are rare and when it does happen, we generally try to cycle it to death while no one goes to the net. <sigh>

Our best opportunities are on the rush when the puck-handler just keeps it entering the zone, it provides way more creative options, with criss-cross and give & go opportunites, not to mention a drop pass to the D who then can swing it or shoot it on goal.

<btw, how many times have we seen an opposing winger skate the puck into our zone deep to the half-wall and then wait for the high-slot to open up with a trailing player, it happens all the time, but we rarely use this strategy even though it works often, another sigh>

i'd rather we just try and carry the puck into the zone 90% of the time, we'd create far more offense that way. Now granted, we will turnover the puck much more than way, but with the skating quality of our defense, it is a risk worth taking IMHO, it opens up the game and enhances the skill set up our team I think.

The problems start before the zone entries, though. They're really weak in transition, especially when it's the forwards carrying the puck. You can't make a clean zone entry if you don't have solid control of the puck already. Domi and Duclair (and occasionally Rieder) are the only forwards who have the skills to do it. No one else can really rush the puck, and as a group, they're always a little too distant to pass well.

 

[Vinny Boombatz]

The problems start before the zone entries, though. They're really weak in transition, especially when it's the forwards carrying the puck. You can't make a clean zone entry if you don't have solid control of the puck already. Domi and Duclair (and occasionally Rieder) are the only forwards who have the skills to do it. No one else can really rush the puck, and as a group, they're always a little too distant to pass well.

That's what I said, we are "slow" through the neutral zone...because other teams don't let us pass it up like we do to them.

Next game, just count how many times the other team hits a "wide open" player in the neutral zone (it's often), then count how many times we hit a "wide open" player in the neutral zone (it's rare), because the D or winger is shadowing our players, they know where they are going to be and they arrive as the puck arrives and then there is a battle for the puck.

Which then generally leads to some form of scrum and we win the scrum, we either dump it in or do another regroup. I'm just saying that our guys are never open.

 

[Vinny Boombatz]

and yes, the time we can actually get the puck through is generally when our puck carrier makes the 1st man miss.

 

[PhoPhan]

That's what I said, we are "slow" through the neutral zone...because other teams don't let us pass it up like we do to them.

Next game, just count how many times the other team hits a "wide open" player in the neutral zone (it's often), then count how many times we hit a "wide open" player in the neutral zone (it's rare), because the D or winger is shadowing our players, they know where they are going to be and they arrive as the puck arrives and then there is a battle for the puck.

Which then generally leads to some form of scrum and we win the scrum, we either dump it in or do another regroup. I'm just saying that our guys are never open.

For sure. Skating it through the neutral zone with speed can be just as effective, though. It's what I miss most about Yandle, and why I'm excited about DeAngelo (and why I'm just fine with losing Stone or Schenn). They need more forwards who are capable of that sort of play, though.

 

[kihekah19*]

Extremely difficult to have a good forecheck unless you are fast through the neutral zone, and we aren't fast.

The defense knows we like to keep it wide, and they are shadowing our forwards, leaving us to do multiple regroups before we send it it with likely a single forechecker.

With that, our F2 (2nd forward in) has to choose between opposite D or winger, as he can't cover both and F3 is no where to be found, rendering a full and complete forecheck useless. F2 generally tries to get to the winger to disrupt the pass, but with so much time to move the puck, the Dman typically hits the opposite Dman w/the pass and then they've got multiple options to move the puck up the ice.

If we could get through the neutral zone with speed, we can get 2 on the puck, eliminating the first pass, therefore hemming them in the zone, but those times are rare and when it does happen, we generally try to cycle it to death while no one goes to the net. <sigh>

Our best opportunities are on the rush when the puck-handler just keeps it entering the zone, it provides way more creative options, with criss-cross and give & go opportunites, not to mention a drop pass to the D who then can swing it or shoot it on goal.

<btw, how many times have we seen an opposing winger skate the puck into our zone deep to the half-wall and then wait for the high-slot to open up with a trailing player, it happens all the time, but we rarely use this strategy even though it works often, another sigh>

i'd rather we just try and carry the puck into the zone 90% of the time, we'd create far more offense that way. Now granted, we will turnover the puck much more than way, but with the skating quality of our defense, it is a risk worth taking IMHO, it opens up the game and enhances the skill set up our team I think.

What you've just described is a lack of an ability to read and react, which is also execution.

An NHL coach doesn't tell the boys "we're goin to run a 2-1-2, or a 1-2-2 etc. this season, this period, or even this shift, like a coach may direct your kids team. For that matter a good youth coach implements a structure that allows players to adapt and read and react as situations arise on the ice, as player development warrants such implementation.

However, your dissertation ignores the sorely lacking support of the forwards on the breakout. Too often the only support the D has is their defensive partner and this is why we see so much D circling and D to D passes. A perfect example was during the game tonight VS the Sharks: as lousy as Duclair played most the game, he still decided to loaf his happy ass back to offer a breakout option for his defensemen, so we got a forced pass by a defender to a lazy out of position forward that results in a turnover and yet another scoring opportunity for a turnover. Often players are just trying to stretch the breakout too far, I just happen to remember this particular Duclair incident because it really pisses me off when a player is struggling and seems to refuse to work hard in less than glamorous situations.

 

[Vinny Boombatz]

What you've just described is a lack of an ability to read and react, which is also execution.
.

and that is what I'm trying to say is that Tippett has put the boys on a tighter system scheme than just telling them a normal 1-2-2 or 2-1-2.

Doesn't it seem odd how "tight" our team looks all the time? How rigid the players play?

 

[kihekah19*]

and that is what I'm trying to say is that Tippett has put the boys on a tighter system scheme than just telling them a normal 1-2-2 or 2-1-2.

Doesn't it seem odd how "tight" our team looks all the time? How rigid the players play?

No it doesn't, I don't see it that way whatsoever. If I see anything that I can directly attribute to coaching (in regard to this subject/conversation), it would be the repeated attempts at stretch passes. They can be a thing of beauty (think when Dvorak was sprung last night) when executed, but the problem is your reducing your chance of success in breaking out, as well as heading up ice as a cohesive unit. It's hardly a way for a team with the poorest possession in the NHL to go about business. It all starts on the backend and I have never seen a group of forwards offer such poor alternatives for their defensemen.

 

[Jakey53]

What you've just described is a lack of an ability to read and react, which is also execution.

An NHL coach doesn't tell the boys "we're goin to run a 2-1-2, or a 1-2-2 etc. this season, this period, or even this shift, like a coach may direct your kids team. For that matter a good youth coach implements a structure that allows players to adapt and read and react as situations arise on the ice, as player development warrants such implementation.

However, your dissertation ignores the sorely lacking support of the forwards on the breakout. Too often the only support the D has is their defensive partner and this is why we see so much D circling and D to D passes. A perfect example was during the game tonight VS the Sharks: as lousy as Duclair played most the game, he still decided to loaf his happy ass back to offer a breakout option for his defensemen, so we got a forced pass by a defender to a lazy out of position forward that results in a turnover and yet another scoring opportunity for a turnover. Often players are just trying to stretch the breakout too far, I just happen to remember this particular Duclair incident because it really pisses me off when a player is struggling and seems to refuse to work hard in less than glamorous situations.

Bingo!. What the hell happened to Duclair the last 3 or 4 games. I thought his two game was much improved over last year, but was still skating and creating chances and then bang, everything went south.

 

[cobra427]

What you've just described is a lack of an ability to read and react, which is also execution.

An NHL coach doesn't tell the boys "we're goin to run a 2-1-2, or a 1-2-2 etc. this season, this period, or even this shift, like a coach may direct your kids team. For that matter a good youth coach implements a structure that allows players to adapt and read and react as situations arise on the ice, as player development warrants such implementation.

However, your dissertation ignores the sorely lacking support of the forwards on the breakout. Too often the only support the D has is their defensive partner and this is why we see so much D circling and D to D passes. A perfect example was during the game tonight VS the Sharks: as lousy as Duclair played most the game, he still decided to loaf his happy ass back to offer a breakout option for his defensemen, so we got a forced pass by a defender to a lazy out of position forward that results in a turnover and yet another scoring opportunity for a turnover. Often players are just trying to stretch the breakout too far, I just happen to remember this particular Duclair incident because it really pisses me off when a player is struggling and seems to refuse to work hard in less than glamorous situations.

Agreed. The forwards are not supporting the D enough on the back check, so the D have to lay back and zone entries are easier. If their is a dump, our D have not made the first quick pass consistently partly because the forwards are not in the right position. Going the other way, the opposite was happening last night forcing us to dump it more because of the D being played by San Jose forwards. Our D had plenty of bobbles with the puck, forwards to, but that was coming from pressure and forwards out of position.