Post-Game Talk: Kraken def. Canucks - 5-3 (Rathbone, Boeser, Hoglander)

[MS]

I like looking at analytics, but..

I think there’s still some merit to the size bias, especially during the playoffs when charging and throwing hits one second later than usual often go uncalled unless it’s a headshot. Smaller defensemen are more likely to get worn down on the forecheck.

Are they? Or are smaller, quicker players facing less physical wear and tear because they move the puck quicker and are being hit less often? There is an argument both ways.

Just play your best players who are going to result in scoring more goals than you allow. If they're big, great. If they're small, equally great. Just don't force bad players ahead of better players because of misguided theories about how a roster should be constructed.

 

[flying v 604]

Shaw is apparently running the PP, Baumer is still running the D.

Trying to use last nights game to gauge any changes is odd considering we iced none of the top 5 d and 3 forwards that are locks.

As for roles by the coaches, Green has already said Shaw will have input on the D systems and baumer will have less say as both Green and Shaw will be more involved.
Regardless, doesn't it make more sense to wait until we start playing real games with our full lineup before making assumptions?
Nick fans here on HF have always been divided but the nay sayers seem to let their jaded views get the best of them.

 

[Iron Mike Sharpe]

Is it strange that I'm kinda excited to see this all in action? I'm not a person that enjoys disaster, but its going to be like 80s hockey, except only the Canucks will be playing it.

It will be like the 80s Canucks, for sure: decent top 6 forwards that can create some offense, with a mediocre defense group that can only succeed with tight systems play (Neilson) or a goalie playing out of his mind for a while (Brodeur 81-83) but are dragged down by an incompetent ownership/management group. Will miss the playoffs if divisional competitors (Oilers, Flames, Hawerchuk-led Jets) surge forward. Green isn't Neilson, however, and Benning is a lesser manager than Milford, arguably worse than Neale. Demko will be better than Brodeur, but, like the Canucks with Brodeur, they will lean on him far too much, and will hang him out to dry too often.

 

[Iron Mike Sharpe]

Trying to use last nights game to gauge any changes is odd considering we iced none of the top 5 d and 3 forwards that are locks.

As for roles by the coaches, Green has already said Shaw will have input on the D systems and baumer will have less say as both Green and Shaw will be more involved.
Regardless, doesn't it make more sense to wait until we start playing real games with our full lineup before making assumptions?
Nick fans here on HF have always been divided but the nay sayers seem to let their jaded views get the best of them.

When Shaw was hired on, they made it clear what the roles were going to be. I didn't see the game last night, I'm not making assumptions. If they have reported something different in the media about Shaw's role since then, I guess I missed it. I think the real assumption people have made is that, since he was supposedly a D specialist in Columbus, that was going to be his role here, but it isn't. He's replacing Brown.

 

[F A N]

The conversation here isn't even about the Canucks' breakouts. It's about defending the rush. People are correctly pointing out that the Canucks rush defense problems start in the offensive zone, where they play a very heavy forecheck/OZP system. This often causes 3 forwards to be caught deep in the offensive zone when the opposing team breaks out. There's rarely F1 back pressure to disrupt the rush or funnel the opposition into the walls. This leaves the Canucks' defensemen in a tough position, having to play a pretty loose gap rather than pressuring at either the red or blue line.

This is in sharp contrast to a team like TB that essentially plays a 2-3 OZP scheme, with one forward playing high. The high forward can provide immediate back pressure and/or disrupt the opposition when they attempt a breakout. And in the event of a turnover, are in a good position to attack downhill.

Exactly. And to make matters worse, because of the lack of forward support in the NZ, d back in and the opposing forwards establish position before our forwards do, essentially setting up a beach head. Then we’re in a grueling struggle to battle our way back out of the zone, often resulting in a mini PK formation to hope to knock the puck loose.

This all but guarantees that we’re exhausted heading into the 3rd. If we’re lucky enough to be holding the lead, it sets the stage for a collapse. If we’re trailing, the other team can just coast and contain because we’re too tired from unnecessarily expending all that energy in our own end.

That's Green's system though. His players are expected to outwork the other team in all three zones every night. It may be why he puts so much stalk into conditioning.

 

[bbud]

I think the concern is we don’t have a partner for Hughes if Hamonic is going to be a dumbass regarding the vaccine. Hughes with Myers will get buried. Hughes with Poolman? So the only guy left is Schenn and if he is going to be Hughes’ partner, then expect that paring to die.

Possible but some of Hughes best play was when partnered with Schenn id say a stay at home d man who can be physical clear net leaves Hughes chances to use his smarts and speed better , Schenn may not be worst option if they have similar success time will tell.

 

[bossram]

That's Green's system though. His players are expected to outwork the other team in all three zones every night. It may be why he puts so much stalk into conditioning.

And that's the problem.

 

[MS]

That's Green's system though. His players are expected to outwork the other team in all three zones every night. It may be why he puts so much stalk into conditioning.

Except we almost never outwork the opposition and have been one of the slower, softer teams in the NHL on his watch.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

Tommi Santala scored a goal for the Canucks.

The best fourth line center in Canucks history!

 

[F A N]

Except we almost never outwork the opposition and have been one of the slower, softer teams in the NHL on his watch.

Well yes. Every team tries to outwork the other team.