How to Fix the Canadiens Power Play Woes

[Account Terminated]

----N/A----

----N/A----

Click to read more...

 

[Rapala]

With those numbers radical is good...

CS these guys just reading our board and creating articles out of them?

 

[PricePkPatch*]

I am still wondering why they make subban start on the right

 

[Account Terminated]

----N/A----

 

[Rapala]

Neither one of them are members of HF, so I sincerely doubt it.

Window shopping?

 

[Account Terminated]

----N/A----

 

[Rapala]

You're right we never once came up with too many passes on our board.
As a matter of fact we were diametrically opposite ie unable to complete enough quality passes before loosing the cookie.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Why is our bad PP suddenly such a big issue ?

Out of 3 main facets of the game, PK, PP and 5v5 I'd say that PP is by far the least important to be good at.

I don't know how much effort MT puts into fixing the PP but he shouldn't really worry about it too much.

We're scoring 5v5 and that's what's important.

EDIT:

Also, consider that putting certain players on the PP means once the PP is over we gotta go with other lines who didn't play on the PP. So while you might wanna remove the DD line from our PP, then he'd have to play the next shift against the opposition best elements because most teams will go with their best elements after killing a PP. So it's something to think about as well.

 

[Andy]

Why is our bad PP suddenly such a big issue ?

Out of 3 main facets of the game, PK, PP and 5v5 I'd say that PP is by far the least important to be good at.

I don't know how much effort MT puts into fixing the PP but he shouldn't really worry about it too much.

We're scoring 5v5 and that's what's important.

Well he should worry about it, improving the PP makes the team that much better if they are THAT good currently on 5 on 5. No coach should be happy with a PP that finished bottom 3rd last year and that was a major disappointement in the POs.

Being good on 5 on 5 doesn't mean you can overlook improving your PP.

 

[Habs]

Nothing to panic about, this team is more than deep enough on the PP unit to get things done. My god, 5 games in people... enough 'tactical input' until the team gets settled into a routine.

 

[Rapala]

Why is our bad PP suddenly such a big issue ?

Out of 3 main facets of the game, PK, PP and 5v5 I'd say that PP is by far the least important to be good at.

I don't know how much effort MT puts into fixing the PP but he shouldn't really worry about it too much.

We're scoring 5v5 and that's what's important.

I agree up to a certain point.
We have lost momentum on more than one occasion with a horrid PP.
strong puck movement and pressure don't have to result in a goal,
but it helps provide a continuation when you do have good Mo.
Conversely a bad PP just breaks everthing the game starts draaagging...

 

[Apoplectic Habs Fan]

Why is our bad PP suddenly such a big issue ?

Out of 3 main facets of the game, PK, PP and 5v5 I'd say that PP is by far the least important to be good at.

I don't know how much effort MT puts into fixing the PP but he shouldn't really worry about it too much.

We're scoring 5v5 and that's what's important.

Suddenly? People have been discussing it since January

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Well he should worry about it, improving the PP makes the team that much better if they are THAT good currently on 5 on 5. No coach should be happy with a PP that finished bottom 3rd last year and that was a major disappointement in the POs.

Being good on 5 on 5 doesn't mean you can overlook improving your PP.

Tell that to the bruins who won the cup with barely any PP goals.

In the playoffs the amount of PP dry up, and with such low % of efficacity (between 15 and 25%), this means that we can go on dry spell during a 4-7 games series quite easily and produce abnormally low.

Having a good PP is a nice thing to have but the nature of it means it's highly unreliable. I remember the year we finished 1st with Carbonneau we had a sick PP but sucked 5v5. That doesn't tend to produce good results in the playoffs.

All I'm saying is that I'd much rather see the coaching staff put more time on the other aspects of the game.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Suddenly? People have been discussing it since January

It's been talked about but now these articles and threads are popping up (how to fix the PP... ) like it's now become a big issue... it's really not. Yes I'd prefer to have a good PP, but it's not a big deal.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Tell that to the bruins who won the cup with barely any PP goals.

So because they won the cup we should strive to have a terrible power play...

In the playoffs the amount of PP dry up, and with such low % of efficacity (between 15 and 25%), this means that we can go on dry spell during a 4-7 games series quite easily and produce abnormally low.

Having a good PP is a nice thing to have but the nature of it means it's highly unreliable. I remember the year we finished 1st with Carbonneau we had a sick PP but sucked 5v5. That doesn't tend to produce good results in the playoffs.

All I'm saying is that I'd much rather see the coaching staff put more time on the other aspects of the game.

I'd like to see a new coaching staff...

A lot of folks on this board sound like the Leaf fans we've listened to when they're on a hot streak. Don't worry about the play, all that matters is the record.

Their play on the ice matters. If you want to win a cup, it matters a lot. Sooner or later that play is going to catch up to you.

 

[Andy]

Tell that to the bruins who won the cup with barely any PP goals.

How is this an excuse? Even though they won the cup with a terrible PP, it still didn't stop the Bruins from striving to make it better. In fact they have taken several measures to try and improve it since. This such flawed reasoning.

In the playoffs the amount of PP dry up, and with such low % of efficacity (between 15 and 25%), this means that we can go on dry spell during a 4-7 games series quite easily and produce abnormally low.

Sure, but the Habs PP was drying up long before that. It's an issue that goes back to last December. With Markov, Subban and Pacioretty as personnel, it's inexcusable for the Habs PP to be in the bottom 3rd. Just ear-plugging so that you don't actually have to think critically.

Having a good PP is a nice thing to have but the nature of it means it's highly unreliable. I remember the year we finished 1st with Carbonneau we had a sick PP but sucked 5v5. That doesn't tend to produce good results in the playoffs.

So what? I don't understand your logic. Why wouldn't you want to improve? Why can't the Canadiens be good at 5 on 5 and on the PP? Would this not make them a better and much more dynamic team? I really don't get what you are arguing for. It's not like the Habs don't have the guns to make the PP work. Your arguments in favor complacency are plain stupid.

All I'm saying is that I'd much rather see the coaching staff put more time on the other aspects of the game.

The coaches should improve any aspect that needs improving. The PP is one of them and there is 0 reason not to aim higher.

 

[Rapala]

I remember the Bruins doing everything but score...

 

[Cole Caulifield]

So because they won the cup we should strive to have a terrible power play...

That's such bad faith. Is that really the conclusion you're drawing from what I said ?

I'd like to see a new coaching staff...

We know... but you can complain about it or accept the reality that MT is gonna be our coach for at least another year and a half.

This board is gonna be unbearable once Babcock signs his new contract wherever that is.. (spoiler alert: it won't be with the habs, so better get used to it).

A lot of folks on this board sound like the Leaf fans we've listened to when they're on a hot streak. Don't worry about the play, all that matters is the record.

I honestly don't see the relevance with the maple leafs. There really isn't any. Are we being carried by incredible performances from Price and Pacioretty like the leafs were with their goalies and Kessel ?

Last year MB made ill advised choices with his roster. Bouillon should not have been re-signed, Briere, Murray and Parros should have not have been acquired. This dragged us down all year and Price bailed us out until the trade deadline. That was not MT's fault. He actually managed the mistakes of his GM perfectly. All the moves which were made at the deadline helped fix that bad summer. And all the moves made this summer showed that MB/MT understood what our problems were. We're going to be battling for 1st in our division with TB. If Price and Subban starts playing better it won't be much of a battle either.

Their play on the ice matters. If you want to win a cup, it matters a lot. Sooner or later that play is going to catch up to you.

Yes, like the LA kings the year of their first cup when they were absolutely terrible all year long and only squeaked into the playoffs because of Quick's miracles?

 

[Cole Caulifield]

How is this an excuse? Even though they won the cup with a terrible PP, it still didn't stop the Bruins from striving to make it better. In fact they have taken several measures to try and improve it since. This such flawed reasoning.


Sure, but the Habs PP was drying up long before that. It's an issue that goes back to last December. With Markov, Subban and Pacioretty as personnel, it's inexcusable for the Habs PP to be in the bottom 3rd. Just ear-plugging so that you don't actually have to think critically.



So what? I don't understand your logic. Why wouldn't you want to improve? Why can't the Canadiens be good at 5 on 5 and on the PP? Would this not make them a better and much more dynamic team? I really don't get what you are arguing for. It's not like the Habs don't have the guns to make the PP work. Your arguments in favor complacency are plain stupid.



The coaches should improve any aspect that needs improving. The PP is one of them and there is 0 reason not to aim higher.

I'm not saying I want our PP to be bad.... perhaps it's my fault for not expressing myself properly...

 

[Rapala]

I'm not saying I want our PP to be bad.... perhaps it's my fault for not expressing myself properly...

Did you have your second cup this morning...

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Did you have your second cup this morning...

I thought my point was pretty clear but perhaps it wasn't I will give it one last kick at the can for Andy and Lafleur's guy.

The coaching staff has a limited amount of time to practice and teach everything.
Any time devoted to one thing is time not devoted to something else.
Time devoted to 5v5 yields a higher return on the investment than time spent teaching/practicing PP.
Time devoted to PK yields a higher return on the investment than time spent teaching/practicing PP.
It's been proven in the past you can be a highly successful team with a bad PP as long as you're good 5v5 and on the PK.
I'm not suggesting we abandon all hope about our PP and completely stop working on it, I'm just saying that as long as there are things to teach and practice in other areas then the PP shouldn't be our main concern.

It would be nice to see you guys stop saying I want us to have a bad PP. You are both not that stupid and are both capable of understanding a perfectly simple and valid argument.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Things to work on in order of priority
Defensive system
Break outs
Zone entries
PP
PK (more important than PP but not an issue ATM)

 

[Rapala]

The basics of a good PP can be incorporated into just about any phase of the game except maybe goaltending.
In our case there are what?
Three four birds to kill.
Strong Communication, puck movement and perpetual positioning...
That last bit is tough to accomplish if anyone is lazy...
LOL

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

That's such bad faith. Is that really the conclusion you're drawing from what I said ?

It's the same line of argument I always see from apologists... They defend our weaknesses by pointing to exceptions who went all the way. If we say the team doesn't score enough, invitbably there will be some guy who comes out and says well look at this team that managed to do it...

The Bruins had the worst power play of any cup winner and they were one of the weakest teams to ever win. Just because it can be done doesn't mean that it's not important or that we shouldn't worry about it.

We know... but you can complain about it or accept the reality that MT is gonna be our coach for at least another year and a half.

If the topic of coaching is raised, I'm going to be critical about it. Unless MT changes his ways or we fire him that's the way it is. He sucks. I'm not going to pretend that he doesn't. If you don't want to hear it, then stop raising the issue.

This board is gonna be unbearable once Babcock signs his new contract wherever that is.. (spoiler alert: it won't be with the habs, so better get used to it).

Spoiler alert for you: It will be with the Leafs. Not sure why this board will be unbearable since everyone knows that's where he's going.

I honestly don't see the relevance with the maple leafs. There really isn't any. Are we being carried by incredible performances from Price and Pacioretty like the leafs were with their goalies and Kessel ?

Last year MB made ill advised choices with his roster. Bouillon should not have been re-signed, Briere, Murray and Parros should have not have been acquired. This dragged us down all year and Price bailed us out until the trade deadline. That was not MT's fault. He actually managed the mistakes of his GM perfectly. All the moves which were made at the deadline helped fix that bad summer. And all the moves made this summer showed that MB/MT understood what our problems were. We're going to be battling for 1st in our division with TB. If Price and Subban starts playing better it won't be much of a battle either.

Make excuses all you want, this team didn't play well. But you and a bunch of others only look at the standings. It's a direct parallel that we see with Leaf fans when they're team is winning. Then their play catches up with them and they wonder what went wrong. We play like crap and we get 100 points it's: "Wow what a great coach!" But when asked about the numbers beneath the standings its the same old circular reasoning... He's a great coach 'cause we got 100 points and we got 100 points 'cause he's a great coach!

Yes, like the LA kings the year of their first cup when they were absolutely terrible all year long and only squeaked into the playoffs because of Quick's miracles?

And once again you try to use the exception for the rule. "Look a team finished 8th and won! See it can be done! See!"


What's really funny here though is that you've actually helped make my case for me by raising the Kings. The Kings of 2012 didn't play terribly. Their place in the standings didn't reflect how good a team they were or how well they were playing. Last year for example they were near the bottom in scoring. But they generated tons of shots and were stellar defensively. They played well just like they did the year they won their first cup. They are a perfect example of what I've been trying to tell you about - better play is more important than the standings are!

Your problem is that you think the standings automatically = how well a team is playing. And that's not always the case. I know you hate Advanced stats so: In 2012 the Kings allowed the fewest shots on net in the league and were 10th in shots for. This doesn't factor in time on the PP or the PK but it shows you that they were in control of most of their games. They couldn't finish - just like they couldn't finish last year - but they played really well. It's not really that big a surprise that they won the cup that year dude.

If you actually did pay attention to Advanced stats their FF% was 4th in the league. CF% was 2nd. Advanced stats are a better predictor of playoff success than the standings are btw. I'd actually rather play well throughout the year and finish lower in the standings going into the playoffs rather than play poorly and finish high in the standings. Because the odds are that you're going to go farther in the long run.

 

[Kriss E]

Tell that to the bruins who won the cup with barely any PP goals.

In the playoffs the amount of PP dry up, and with such low % of efficacity (between 15 and 25%), this means that we can go on dry spell during a 4-7 games series quite easily and produce abnormally low.

Having a good PP is a nice thing to have but the nature of it means it's highly unreliable. I remember the year we finished 1st with Carbonneau we had a sick PP but sucked 5v5. That doesn't tend to produce good results in the playoffs.

All I'm saying is that I'd much rather see the coaching staff put more time on the other aspects of the game.

Yes, it's not impossible to win without a PP. Chicago had a terrible PP efficiency 2 years ago when they won too. I understand your point and agree. We should be focusing more on our defensive zone coverage and structure.
I don't understand working on the PP much, I mean, they pass the puck around with nobody defending them. Seems rather useless to me. They need to stop forcing the point shot and should also change their lines. As simple as it sounds, I'm sure it would be better.

I don't like our ES play much, it's similar to last year. It's still early, so we'll see but I think we should be a lot more solid than what we've shown.

I don't have much faith in Therrien though. It's clear he's not really the structure coach and a lot more the cheerleading type. Not the kind I like.