Just Curious..are there any RUSH teams out there?

[usernamezrhardtodo]

The reason I ask that is because I hear "we don't want to be just a rush team" all the time. Ok...so now everyone is playing the same dump and chase style with cycling the puck? so now everyone (teams) get a 50% corsi and what difference is there in play between teams?

I am going to go out on a limb here and say even though we were a "rush" team...if we had a better coach teaching the team how to get out of our zone properly by not just chipping it off the glass...we might actually have been kinda good.

I think there was an article back in December that showed what % of our goals were scored off the rush..and it was crazy high..like 70%+ were scored by rush. That just shows that we should have embraced that aspect and tuned it a bit instead of trying to make them a cycle team that did not have the forwards to do it properly.

I dunno anymore...I am just curious if there are any teams out there that actually play's as a rush team and are successful at it. I think we could have been half decent if not for the stupid "collapse"defense that RC used. It was just too hard to get anything going after they chased the puck around for 45 seconds because of that stupid system.

I am not saying it is the way to go, but at the same time, if that is the best way to utilize your talents...maybe you go that route until you can get better players to fit the system you want to use vs the system that works now.

Click to read more...

 

[number72]

Boudreau on the ducks is more up tempo in his approach. Ron Wilson while he coached the leafs was more generating rush based offence. That is how the team would look like but with different players.

 

[Stephen]

I'm not sure when the term rush team turned into such a negative. If you're a good and deep rush team with great wing depth, I imagine you could see a team that's always causing turnovers in the neutral zone and pushing the pace up the ice towards the opposition's end. The Leafs problem is they're lazy. They rush once and they don't have the inclination to get back into position or work hard enough to create a second or third rush opportunity and are very inconsistent with their pace after the payload has been delivered.

 

[Faltorvo]

a RUSH team is just a polite way of saying they can't cycle worth a sht.

polite term for a one and done offence.

 

[Cap'n Flavour]

a RUSH team is just a polite way of saying they can't cycle worth a sht.

polite term for a one and done offence.

Hah. That sounds about right.

The reason I ask that is because I hear "we don't want to be just a rush team" all the time. Ok...so now everyone is playing the same dump and chase style with cycling the puck? so now everyone (teams) get a 50% corsi and what difference is there in play between teams?

You don't have to dump and chase to be a good possession team. All dump and chase refers to is the zone entry. You can carry the puck into the zone and maintain a strong cycle too.

 

[StuckOutHere]

Just this one

Yeaaaaaaaahhhhh!!!!!

 

[MSG*]

You have to be able to cycle. It wears the other team down, keeps the puck 200 ft from your own net etc. The "rush" is relatively easy to combat by clogging up the neutral zone and is a one-and-done approach. It's also prone to turn overs and when you lose the puck it's hard to get it back.

The other problem is that really only the Kessel line can pull off this rush style offense. It takes a lot of talent and speed. Even then it can be combatted easier than a team that can handle the puck down down, win battles etc.

Having said that I am not sure if a team that has Kessel as it's offensive pillar can be anything but a so called rush team.

 

[Commander Clueless]

I'm not sure when the term rush team turned into such a negative. If you're a good and deep rush team with great wing depth, I imagine you could see a team that's always causing turnovers in the neutral zone and pushing the pace up the ice towards the opposition's end. The Leafs problem is they're lazy. They rush once and they don't have the inclination to get back into position or work hard enough to create a second or third rush opportunity and are very inconsistent with their pace after the payload has been delivered.

There's nothing wrong with scoring off the rush, but it can't be your only trick. For the Leafs, it's their greatest strength but pretty much their only trick.

A good rush team also needs to have a cycle game and a defensive system to fall back on. The Leafs don't have those.

So really, nothing wrong with a team that's good off the rush, as long as they have other moves. A cycle team still needs to be able to score off the rush, for example.

The negative of the term "rush team" comes when people assume that's the only thing you can do, rather than it being your strength with other things to back it up. For example, Washington a few years ago was a powerhouse rush team, but the lack of other aspects of their game as caught up with them.

 

[Tak7]

Dallas are a good team on the rush. But they can also cycle and move the puck.

 

[indigobuffalo]

Colorado, Anaheim, Dallas are good examples.

A lot of teams are fast. Winnipeg is another example.

Leafs also do dump and chase plays but every time I've seen them do it it's like watching minor pee-wee kids. Like... by the time you make the NHL, you should understand how the puck will interact with the boards instinctively... but not the Leafs...

 

[nsleaf]

Rush, cycle, whatever. If your team does not have enough skill to do either or both then you are the Leafs.

 

[Purity*]

Our first line is a rush line, and Gardiner/Rielly enjoy joining the rush, that's about all. Beyond that, we have players that could probably do a half-decent cycle game. Defense was our worst problem this year, and secondary scoring was our next worst.

 

[HockeyThoughts]

Dallas are a good team on the rush. But they can also cycle and move the puck.

Dallas is a pretty terrible team that was very much carried by two forwards. Imagine if JVR put up Phil Kessel type numbers - - we'd have probably made the postseason too .

 

[666]

Just this one

http://i61.tinypic.com/5ank2p.jpg

Yeaaaaaaaahhhhh!!!!!

That's not Rush, this is.

 

[MakeTheIronSing]

It's an interesting question. Historically, some of the most successful teams were built on the rush/transition game. The Red Wings being a great example of this. The Penguins and Flyers were also rush teams.

Ultimately though, the best teams in the league this year are heavy, cycle and possession teams. It's hard not to agree with results.

 

[rdawg1234]

No team is a pure rush team nowadays.

but the Penguins, Colorado and Anaheim are probably the most run and gun teams of the league.

problem is run and gun teams usually get dominated by the hard cycle teams like Boston, St Louis, SJ, LA.

The game has become much more structured now, and usually the cup winning teams are high possession teams that grind you out in the cycle, run and gun is becoming a thing of the past unless you have very high end talent(i.e Malkin+Crosby).

 

[Bardown warrior]

Avs for sure !

 

[Ricky Bobby]

Nonis is aware of this.

He brought in Bolland, Clarkson, Gleason to change the lock of the team by adding cycle-board battlers well shipping out Grabo, CMac, Liles who are "rush players".

It's great to say we should cycle more but Clarkson was awful this year and Bolland was hurt.

Guys like Kadri + Lupul + Raymond simply don't have that element to their game.

 

[likeabosski]

Our first line is a rush line, and Gardiner/Rielly enjoy joining the rush, that's about all. Beyond that, we have players that could probably do a half-decent cycle game. Defense was our worst problem this year, and secondary scoring was our next worst.

The whole "Leafs lack secondary scoring" bit is a myth on hfboards. Raymond-Kadri-Lupul get it done on the power play. But the Leafs 2nd scoring line is a bit light on even-strength scoring. And our bottom 6 scoring is a ****ing joke.

Nazem Kadri in 5v5 play scores about what you would expect an AVERAGE 2nd liner would score (Tied for 133rd in 5v5 point rate is almost smack dab in the middle between the top 91-180 forwards). AVERAGE is good enough to land a wild card spot in the Eastern conference. But it's not good enough to contend for the Cup. If an average 2nd liner is your best 2nd liner, you have problems. And that's just offense. Nazem Kadri has little if any defensive upside. Joffrey Lupul and Mason Raymond's 5v5 point production is on the level with a 2C (below average 2nd liner).

Troy Bodie scores at a 3A pace. I'm impressed with this guy. Peter Holland scores at a 3C+ pace. His production has really dropped off after a hot start with the Leafs. Kulemin scores at a 4A+ pace. David Clarkson doesn't even belong in the NHL. Poor offensive production. Not good defensively either. Jay McClement has no offense and hugely overrated defensively here for a guy who captains the ship of one of the worst PKs in the NHL. He should be shown the door. Colton Orr holds the dubious distinction of being the only NHL forward who played 41+ games last season who hasn't scored a single point. Get rid of this bum.

http://www.extraskater.com/players_all/standard?type=rate&pos=F&sit=5v5&min_gp=50&season=2013

Even-strength 5v5 scoring

First Line
Phil Kessel: 2.46 pts/60 5v5 mins (Tied for 13th among NHL forwards with 41+ GP)
Tyler Bozak: 2.32 pts/60 5v5 mins (T-22nd. With Patrick Kane )
James van Riemsdyk: 1.96 pts/60 5v5 mins (T-78th)

Second Line
Nazem Kadri: 1.71 pts/60 5v5 mins (T-133rd)
Joffrey Lupul: 1.58 pts/60 5v5 mins (T-166th)
Mason Raymond: 1.58 pts/60 5v5 mins (T-166th)

Bottom 6
Troy Bodie: 1.49 pts/60 5v5 mins (T-194th)
Peter Holland: 1.30 pts/60 5v5 mins (T-248th)
Nikolai Kulemin: 1.18 pts/60 5v5 mins (T-276th)
David Clarkson: 0.66 pts/60 5v5 mins (T-357th)
Jay McClement: 0.55 pts/60 5v5 mins (366th)
Colton Orr: 0 pts/60 5v5 mins (376th)Buffalo goon John Scott is 375th with 0.16/60

What to do moving forward?

Trade Joffrey Lupul. Get his $21m/4 year contract off the books. Joffrey Lupul is yet another skilled NHL player who is great on the power play but is a bit of a liability on the 5v5 due to sub-par skating, forechecking and backchecking. He's also great at the shootout. Not everyone is supposed to be a two-way forward. Joffrey Lupul has a lot to offer in the NHL. Just not at $21m/4 years.

Talk Mason Raymond into taking a hometown discount (yea right) or trade him. $1 million/yr is superb value for Mason Raymond. And I don't expect the Leafs to get him to sign that cheaply again. But he's probably going to ask for $3 million+/yr this time. And at that price, I would let Mason walk and try to find another bargain or tap on the shoulder of some hungry kid in the Marlies. The Boston Bruins call up AHL guys all the time.

Re-sign Troy Bodie and Peter Holland to reasonable contracts (modest raise for Bodie). I would give Dutch the bare minimum qualifying offer and absolutely no more than $925k/year (fully buriable contract). Maybe Peter Holland is a humble guy but if he's the type of kid who allows a bit of success to get to his head or his agent is a *******, I can see this going to arbitration. And the Leafs should win in arbitration. Hfboards overrates the hell out of Peter Holland. He hasn't done much but yet Leaf fans want to overpay him based on his performance at the beginning of the season.

Let Kulemin walk. He'll probably play on the 2nd line and 2nd power play unit with some other NHL team, score 20+ goals and 50+ points and get the last laugh. It's been 3 years since his 30+ goal/50+ point season. Giving him a raise would be risky. If I as a GM re-sign Kulemin to $3.5 million/yr, put him on the 2nd scoring line and 2nd power play unit and he drops a deuce on the ice, I'm going to look like an idiot.

Trade David Clarkson (salary retention) and get some of his $31.5 million/6 yrs off the books.

Let Jay McClement, Dave Bolland (yes I said it) walk

Trade Colton Orr, Frazer McLaren and James Reimer

Trading Phil Kessel is a maybe. The bottom line is that superstar players tend not to be cost efficient. And for good reason. It's difficult to replace the goals and the wins that a superstar player generates. You could make the case either way for Kessel. I think I lean more towards keeping him around.

Dion Phaneuf, Cody Franson, Tim Gleason (salary retention deal maybe?), Carl Gunnarsson, Jake Gardiner (if he asks for too much), I want them all gone. Keep Morgan Rielly. Re-sign Paul Ranger to a reasonable deal. Provides some good depth at D. Find some new guys and call up some Marlies and guys in our system. Granberg. Finn. Percy.

 

[MastuhNinks]

Rush team and cycle team aren't mutually exclusive, the Anaheim Ducks are lethal off the rush if you give them the chance, but they are also terrific at cycling the puck.

Thing is, if you rush the puck up the ice and don't score (which is going to happen most of the time obviously), chances are you're going to have to win a puck battle to gain solid possession of the puck back. The Leafs don't support eachother well and battle hard enough for the puck in these situations, they're too comfortable just trying to score off the rush then going back the other way.

 

[cookie]

Lindy Ruff's Buffalo Sabres were pretty good at transitioning the puck and scoring via rush.

 

[ECanuck]

There is no bigger rush team than the leafs. You can feel the rush building up like a wave amplifying over time. The sound! The Force!

It is well know; this Epic event. Begins sometime around the glorious months of February or March and ends very quickly.