To avoid just sounding negative, I want to elaborate a bit on my coaching criticisms, so bear with the long post. When you are a coach, you draw things up based on theory. Something that sounds like it will work in your head. Example: 3-on-3 OT, put out a shifty, elusive, good puck-handler. Then you apply in practical tests (ie game situations). If it doesn't work at first, you can tweak or try again. If it continues to fail and you continue to do so, you're just being stubborn. And at some point, the repeated tries morph into stupidity.
I would expect a coach at this level to identify why it's not working. To start any OT period, every single team in the OHL has some high end players and each and every coach is going to put on their top centre, who usually is bigger, stronger, better on the faceoffs and faster than a kid like Garreffa. With 3-on-3 being a total possession game, losing the opening draw in OT is critical. You simply can't have Garreffa take that draw and that has been proven time and again. He can play in OT, but it should be the second or third shift against a lesser wave of attackers, and ideally a change on the fly so no draw is involved.
Then, on the plan to use two D. Again, in theory it may sound worthwhile. We have some solid D and we try to shut down their top guys. However, playing two stay-at-home D is by design a passive, preventative mind-set. Trust me, the top offensive forwards on the opposing teams will sniff this out every time. I have played and coached enough hockey to know that offensive players salivate at the sight of a cautious, conservative opponent. It's full attack mode, using the open ice to full advantage. The only way to truly prevent those offensive players from tap dancing on you in a 3-on-3 situation is to push the throttle on your counter-punching. A D like Vallati who can strip a puck and turn it back with speed would work. Or some aggressive, fast forwards like McHugh or even Hugg who can jump on your mistake and leave you in the dust. You have to put a shadow of doubt and concern in the heads of those opposing players. If you play it safe, you hand them the win.
My big disappointment is not in the fact our coaches tried these things out. It's in the fact our coaching staff continue to go back to these ploys and seemingly fail to recognize why it doesn't work. If I'm a player on that bench, it makes me lose faith in my coach's abilities and that's a deadly thing to happen.
