I was never a fan of Yeo and that opinion has only been reinforced.
His management of our goaltenders was pretty poor. He is loyal to a fault. The ride or die, then sabbatical approach was bizarre with Jake.
This goes without saying, but the PP was horrendous. This has been a problem throughout his career. Why force a scheme that requires a strong RHS as a main contributor? Why force people into positions where they aren’t as successful (see Tarasenko’s usage). Finally, if the PP isn’t working, then why not change the structure?
The defensive scheme has been statistically strong in shot suppression (3rd in the league), but in scoring chances allowed we were 10th. So we are allowing a greater number of scoring chances as a percentage of shots allowed. The strange thing is we were 4th in high danger scoring chance suppression. So our scoring chances allowed being higher must be a result of rush chances or as a result of our forwards doing something to allow this to occur otherwise our high danger chances would be higher. I would also ask how much if our success is based on the personnel versus coaching strategy? We have a top defensive D group and we have a solid cast of forwards who are relatively strong defensively. So, again our defensemen are doing well. Regardless of these questions, defense isn’t a problem.
Offensively, Yeo was given a flawed team, but it wasn’t so bad that we would be 23rd in scoring. It’s not like we weren’t getting shots either. We were tenth there. Our scoring chances were 13th and our high scoring chances were 28th. So apparently we are not going to the net. This seems to be a coached strategy given how little we do it. I am guessing our shot generation was largely from the point given how well our defensemen scored.