Pred303
Registered User
hey mike, didn't know you were a BC guy, what got you interested in the preds?
Fangs! great to see you old friend, hope things are going well
Fangs! great to see you old friend, hope things are going well
Observations, Part VI
- Thread starter PredsV82
- Start date
- Status
Pred303
Registered User
Last season our defensemen scored 55 goals out of the 226 we scored. The highest percentage of total goals scored and once again right at the top of defensemen goals in the league.
This is often overlooked by many outsiders 'evaluating' our roster and thinking from looking at our forwards to evaluate offensive capabilities that we are too offensively challenged to really compete. Actually defense scoring was sort of our 'secret' weapon last year i thought. Especially showed i thought in 4 on 4 type situations when our defensemen were free to roam one on one. It was no accident that our d-men led the team in game winning goals in OT. I actually worry about this a little in 3 on 3 as it will sort of take away a real advantage we had on other teams because one would think that one d-man in the new OT will have to play more conservative.
But. i look at our d-men and think with another year of experience for all the young ones and a healthy weber all year (fingers crossed), that we could actually score as many as 60 goals from the backend this year.
weber 15, josi 15, ellis 10, eckholm 10, jones 10, jackman 3 all seem like achievable goals to me if they stay healthy. That would be 63 and would almost surely lead the league. We know weber is capable of even scoring 20 if the pp actually works decently.
what do you guys think?
This is often overlooked by many outsiders 'evaluating' our roster and thinking from looking at our forwards to evaluate offensive capabilities that we are too offensively challenged to really compete. Actually defense scoring was sort of our 'secret' weapon last year i thought. Especially showed i thought in 4 on 4 type situations when our defensemen were free to roam one on one. It was no accident that our d-men led the team in game winning goals in OT. I actually worry about this a little in 3 on 3 as it will sort of take away a real advantage we had on other teams because one would think that one d-man in the new OT will have to play more conservative.
But. i look at our d-men and think with another year of experience for all the young ones and a healthy weber all year (fingers crossed), that we could actually score as many as 60 goals from the backend this year.
weber 15, josi 15, ellis 10, eckholm 10, jones 10, jackman 3 all seem like achievable goals to me if they stay healthy. That would be 63 and would almost surely lead the league. We know weber is capable of even scoring 20 if the pp actually works decently.
what do you guys think?
Short version is that the raw love of hockey got me interested in the Preds. Long version is that I loved *my* Canucks up to a few years ago, back when Linden was still on the ice, but his last year the crowds seemed to change and the average joe fan mentality here became a total turn-off. So, I began following former-Canucks (you know, the guys who every Canucks fan adores while they're on the team but once he's been traded then suddenly bashes senseless on these boards for every flaw, real or imagined ;-)), Hodgson among them. He's not my total fav type of player (doesn't play his size enough), but he's had the raw end of the bashing stick and I keep following hoping he'll make good on his rookie projections.
So, Hodgson ended up here and now I'm "here". The thing about following individual players the last few years is that I've become more of a all-out fan of the game itself - and bonus, I don't get many withdrawal symptoms as I typically have at least one team a night that's playing.
Thing about learning more of the Preds this summer is that it's actually a pretty interesting team make-up. Power on the d end, a seemingly great mix of still-relevant vets, proven youth that has yet to even hit their prime years, and some likely prospects... Almost a Detroit model? It's a make-up that doesn't require the goalie to be Vezina winner for the team to be a SC contender. I'll be particularly keen to see what your Rinne puts together.
- Aug 13, 2007
- 35,471
- 15,736
Im hoping Weber is hearing his biological clock ticking as he turned 30 last month, and is pissed and angry because he knows if he'd been healthy we'd have beaten Chicago and then who know how far we would have gone. I just get the idea that Weber is burning for a Cup, and knowing he's stuck in Nashville for the rest of his career Im guessing he realizes he better get it in the next couple of years or it may not happen.
I hope he actually focuses more on scoring this year and considers dialing back the physicality a bit, if nothing else to try to make sure he's not too banged up when the playoffs do get here..
I also expect Jones and Ekholm to exert maximum effort to put up numbers since they are both in contract years.
Im like you I think we could have a huge year out of our defense from a goal scoring standpoint.
I could even imagine Weber with 20 or more, if he's healthy all year.
Last year they scored:
Weber - 15
Josi - 15
Ellis - 9
Jones - 8
Ekholm - 7
... so yeah, that's doable. Maybe a little optimistic, but in the realm of possibility for sure. Especially considering that Ellis missed a chunk of games last year so I could easily see him contributing 10-12 this year.
On the 3 on 3 matchups, I really wouldn't be surprised to see the team go with one forward and two defensemen. Josi would shine out there with all that skating room.
I haven't looked at the rules for OT this year. Is pulling your goalie allowed? Still the same and just lose your 1 point for getting to OT if you're scored on?
If so, I think I would pull the goalie the first chance I got, meaning, as soon as my team got the puck in the offensive zone. I think with our D we could control the puck well enough to have work in our favor more often than not.
If so, I think I would pull the goalie the first chance I got, meaning, as soon as my team got the puck in the offensive zone. I think with our D we could control the puck well enough to have work in our favor more often than not.
NSH615
...
- Feb 13, 2013
- 11,119
- 981
I believe I did read that, but why would a team want to risk losing a guaranteed 1 point?
Toward end of sesaon when 1 guaranteed point against an out-of-conf or out-of-contention opponent was useless? 2pts or bust?
I never feel good about our chances in a shootout so I'd rather risk the one point to get the extra in OT.
It would be a risk and in no way safe and conservative but I'd try it with a 4v3 match up. The amount of open ice, I believe, give us an advantage.
Mind you, I don't think an NHL coach would do this because it's not safe but I'd love to see someone try it. Especially a team with the caliber of D we have.
BigFatCat999
First Fubu and now Pred303. !@#$! you cancer
I'd rather think of the possibilities. 1 d man on the blue line firing at a goalie with a lot of clear ice?
Byrddog
Lifer
- Nov 23, 2007
- 7,482
- 826
What has happened that make you guys more hopeful in extra time?
Its the same team essentially that had the 24th best PP, and 17th best PK for 2015 open ice is not our friend right now. And will play a huge part if this team makes the playoffs or not. They were only 5 points from missing last year. I can't imagine any more critical area than finishing games in regulation now.
Its the same team essentially that had the 24th best PP, and 17th best PK for 2015 open ice is not our friend right now. And will play a huge part if this team makes the playoffs or not. They were only 5 points from missing last year. I can't imagine any more critical area than finishing games in regulation now.
BigFatCat999
First Fubu and now Pred303. !@#$! you cancer
We aren't you.
Fact is, I liked this team last year. I love this team this year. 3 on 3, I can see so many ways the team could take advantage.
Fisher or Gaustad on the offensive end face off.
Any speedster cherry picking on the defensive end.
Weber or Ellis firing heat sealers from the blue line with clear ice.
PREDS can skate 2 forwards without a reduction of offense.
Because of the two way style of the forwards, the PREDS have an advantage.
THAT is why I am hopeful
I went back and looked. The Preds went to OT 24 times last year.
OT W= 8
OT L= 4
SO W= 6
SO L= 6
So doing a little math assuming that they would win or lose in OT, never going to the shootout, and with a bump in winning percentage for having the man advantage it's fair to say that the point totals would be close to last year maybe one or two points lower. But we know that some games would still go to the shootout so really about the same. It sure would make for an entertaining OT though.
Everyone here always complained about not being aggressive enough anyway.
Byrddog
Lifer
- Nov 23, 2007
- 7,482
- 826
What you point out is true. And the exact reason the league is going to 3-3 to eliminate the shootout in most games. They now expect only 20% of the games that do not end in regulation to make it to shootout.
The 4 on 4 from last year is much different than the 3 on 3 is going to be. It is more close to the PP with the use of the open ice and gives advantage to playmakers and finishers, something we are still short on. It lessens the advantage the Preds have had for years on the PP the shots from Weber and others from the blue line with someone screening the goalie. Shots form the blueline are not going to easy stops 3 on 3 for most all NHL goalies.
Our friend from NY above suggests that the Preds have an advantage because of two way play of our forwards well that's a lil misleading. Honestly Fish, and to a point Wilson best fit that. Neal, Smith, Ribs, CoHo struggle defensively. Jarnkrok, and all the 4th line are offensively challenged leaving Arvidsson as my only question make on abilities. Our Friend from NY also thinks that cherrypicking might be a good option which IMO would be a complete disaster while that speedster is cherry picking that leaves the other team in our zone 3 on 2 something that usually does not end well.
Gaustad has long been a favorite of mine even before he came here I liked him in Buffalo but if we have to put him on the ice to win face offs 3 on 3 we are at a disadvantage. Goose does his job well but to expect him to be able to win that faceoff and keep up with the forwards that Chicago St Louis or others put out there we are fooling ourselves.
If the team wins 50% of the points in extra time I will be happy. But again this will be 3 on 3 not 4 on 4 like last year and the key yet again will be Rinne making incredible stops and stealing us some points.
Exactly why I say to make it 4v3.
And using the conservative approach you automatically "win" half of the points available in overtime.
Anyway, it's just a fun theoretical to ponder. How would that actually work out for a team to be that aggressive? I have no desire to be in a long winded conversation about it. Taint gonna happen no way.
wadesworld
Registered User
Pull our goalie in overtime to watch us pass it around the perimeter? No thanks.
Byrddog
Lifer
- Nov 23, 2007
- 7,482
- 826
Excellent example of this tonight Caps Bruins game the goaltender for Bruins pulled twice for the 4 on 3 Bruins poor results Holtby only had to make one dangerous stop.
Jeremy Smith had a good game for Bruins until the shootout and got schooled.
Pred303
Registered User
no reason to be all doom and gloom with the 3 on 3. we have good mobile defensemen, among the best in the league. that's an advantage still. and we have guys like neal, Forsberg, fisher, smith, Wilson, ribiero that are good offensive players in open ice. sure we will be outskilled against some teams, but we will outskill others and win our fair share of OT's.
- Aug 13, 2007
- 35,471
- 15,736
You didn't ask me but I personally could see it happening. However I don't know which center capable of winning faceoffs would be reliable enough to create offense as the only forward.
Pred303
Registered User
I just don't see it Andy. Puck possession is what will become so critical in these 3 on 3's and I can't imagine a scenario where we throw out 2 d-men except in extremely rare situations. most of these 3 on 3's shouldn't last more than a few minutes, and we have several strong puck possession type forwards. in my mind we have one center, one forward, and one d-man out every shift. we do have one thing that could also play a little to us in that we have several ex-centers (Wilson-smith-jarnkrok) among our forward corps that at least have chances to win draws if they get into that and a centerman gets tossed.
I do expect us to run a plays where we try to isolate a defenseman (josi, ellis, eckholm, jones) in a one on one situation against a forward when we get set in the offensive zone.
but in general expect free wheeling chaos. lol. will be nail biting excitement for sure.
Filip Forceberg
Registered User
Byrddog
Lifer
- Nov 23, 2007
- 7,482
- 826
Its not as much doom and gloom, rather like everyone I want to see us with some advantage. It is give and take of course, of the forwards you list only Fish and Wilson can play a lick of defense. And while that group should be able to win a few I see holes in it comparing to each ones abilities from the PP. The defensemen you must admit scored most of there PP goals from the blueline not from a rush. There were a few Weber I recall getting a couple pinching in but this removes one of the team strengths of scoring from the perimeter. Like I said before any NHL quality goalie is going to stop perimeter shots 3 on 3 even if it is comin in at 108mph.
I expect before its over in close games Fish will be held off the ice the last few minutes of regulation. The mere ability to win at the dot will force this. Unless they put Goose out and cycle the puck behind our goal in order to get him changed before starting the rush.
It would not be as much of a concern if the team will step up and have the ability to put there foot on the throat of opposing teams. But again this team is not drastically different than the teams of the past 3 or 4 years. The number of games where they take early leads only to piss them away into a close game in the 3rd and far too often going to OT.
As I said before if the team wins 50% of these OT games I will be happy, but that may be a little short of what they will need.
- Status
