Toggle sidebar

The Armchair Coaching Thread [MOD WARNING in OP]

Betamax*

Guest
dave babych returns said:
My point was actually that they had a higher rate of offensive zone starts in 2011-12 than they did in 2013.

So whatever happened within 2011-12, and you'll forgive me for going off the top of my head here and pointing out that many of Hodgson's offensive zone starts came at Ryan Kesler's expense (also you have split up Henrik's point production but provided no corresponding zone start data), none of it detracts from my point that the Sedins still started ~20% more shifts in the offensive zone that year than in 2013 with only a 5% bump in production.

And of course, none of this proves that the Sedins will be less able to contribute on the scoresheet when you add defensive assignments to their workload without subtracting offensive opportunities.

Nor does it prove that the Sedins will be any more likely to be injured in those defensive assignments than they are standing in front of shots, setting picks, taking hits, grinding in the corners in the offensive zone.
Click to expand...

I see your point but yeah ... if you know of the specific site that provides game by game defensive zone starts (without having to manually review the play by play game logs) ... that would be interesting to know.

Even if we exclude the Sedins and just focus on the Canucks proclamation that they "fattening" up of Cody Hodgson's offensive stats.

As stated earlier, even though the PPG didn't increase, during that practice, his goals per games did which would make him more marketable and hence tradeable. The Canucks' strategy seemed help him in January but in February ... his numbers slowed down quite a bit, so it seems to me that the "strategy" to help him was a bit overplayed.
 

dave babych returns

Registered User
Dec 2, 2011
4,977
1
Betamax said:
I see your point but yeah ... if you know of the specific site that provides game by game defensive zone starts (without having to manually review the play by play game logs) ... that would be interesting to know.

Even if we exclude the Sedins and just focus on the Canucks proclamation that they "fattening" up of Cody Hodgson's offensive stats.

As stated earlier, even though the PPG didn't increase, during that practice, his goals per games did which would make him more marketable and hence tradeable. The Canucks' strategy seemed help him in January but in February ... his numbers slowed down quite a bit, so it seems to me that the "strategy" to help him was a bit overplayed.
Click to expand...

I don't have it either which means it's not safe to make assumptions about. Also with regards to Hodgson it isn't just zone starts but also quality of competition that made his line effective, he even badly lost matchups against players like Darren Helm.

But I mean we are now two or three steps away from proving your original assertions about the Sedins usage (and getting further away) so I don't really feel like there is much else to say at this point.
 

Betamax*

Guest
dave babych returns said:
I don't have it either which means it's not safe to make assumptions about. Also with regards to Hodgson it isn't just zone starts but also quality of competition that made his line effective, he even badly lost matchups against players like Darren Helm.

But I mean we are now two or three steps away from proving your original assertions about the Sedins usage (and getting further away) so I don't really feel like there is much else to say at this point.
Click to expand...

Well, using the Hodgson example, the Canucks practiced a philosophy where they believed they could put him in situations that would maximize his offensive potential.

My point has been is that they should implement a similar strategy when it comes to their undisputed two top offensive players. I don't think putting them on the PK on a regular basis is condusive to that strategy. Situationally it makes sense (i.e. if there's a plethora of minors given to the Canucks i.e. you don't want them being bench warmers or they are trailing in the game and it's late in the third period, the potential offense they could provide over say some third liners like a Hansen or Higgins that would be the second unit option after the first unit option i.e. Kesler and Burrows.)
 

dave babych returns

Registered User
Dec 2, 2011
4,977
1
Putting them on the PK and putting them on in certain ES situations are mutually exclusive considerations, unless you feel like the Sedins are unlike other NHL first liners and cannot play ~20 MPG.
 

Betamax*

Guest
dave babych returns said:
Putting them on the PK and putting them on in certain ES situations are mutually exclusive considerations, unless you feel like the Sedins are unlike other NHL first liners and cannot play ~20 MPG.
Click to expand...

Look, I'd rather double shift them in an ES situation (where the chance to produce offense is higher) versus utilizing the extra minutes allocated to them for PK if they plan to play them ~20MPG. It's not like the fourth line, the way it's constituted right now is something Coach Torts or the supporters of the team (other than friends and family of the 4th line players) really want to see on the ice for a regular shift anyway!!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Betamax*

Guest
nuckfan insk said:
Doesn't seem as though torts was pissed with booth or kassian he played them a lot in the 3rd
Click to expand...

Well, both Booth and Kassian missed significant time during the pre-season, so they need to get ice time as they are going to be relied as top 9 players on the team.

It also helps that only about 1/4 of the team is playing to expectations, so he really doesn't have much options ... unless he wants to not double but triple shift the Sedins.
 

Tiranis

Registered User
Jun 10, 2009
23,097
28
Toronto, ON
vanuck

vanuck

Now with 100% less Benning!
Dec 28, 2009
16,801
4,019
YouppiKiYay said:
This morning on Hockey Night Online, at around the 7 min mark, Cassie Campbell made the point that Torts might have to change his system to suit the Canucks' personnel. She is not certain the Canucks are fast enough to play the way Torts wants them to:

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/hockey-night-online-hot-flames-lukewarm-canucks-1.2075027
Click to expand...

She's not even certain what the Canucks' strengths are, so how she can make that argument is strange to say the least.
 
BeardyCanuck03

BeardyCanuck03

@BeardyCanuck03
Jun 19, 2006
10,823
410
twitter.com

Drop the Sopel

Registered User
May 4, 2007
18,325
59
calgary
The Canucks forwards skate very well as a group, they're just not very big. An aggressive foecheck suits the personnel very well IMO. The only core player I see that might have trouble with it is Kassian.
 

Betamax*

Guest
In the original Armchair Coaching Thread, my first suggestion in that thread was to "Experiment with putting Kesler with the Sedins to load up the line during even strength situations."

But to be honest, I am a bit surprised that Coach Torts has been this aggressive in loading his three best forwards up on one line as the rule and not the exception, and playing them a ton of minutes ... especially with the knowledge that they are on an extended road trip, playing three in four nights and those in-game injuries.

Hard to argue against the results thus far, though!
 

Betamax*

Guest
Have to give credit to Coach Torts for putting the team's best players in a position to succeed. The Sedins (Henrik to a larger extent but Daniel is showing improvement), Kesler (after a slow start, the switch to load up the top line), the defense (Garrison, Edler, Bieksa) all playing at or above expectations ... only Hamhuis has had a slow start, and Bobby Lu has been managed well, he's doing above average what his normal Octobers have been in the past.

The main worry is that is playing and relying on his top players for several minutes more per game more than usual over the course of a condensed Olympics Year would lead to long-term burnout.
 
Scurr

Scurr

Registered User
Jun 25, 2009
12,115
12
Whalley
Betamax said:
Have to give credit to Coach Torts for putting the team's best players in a position to succeed. The Sedins (Henrik to a larger extent but Daniel is showing improvement), Kesler (after a slow start, the switch to load up the top line), the defense (Garrison, Edler, Bieksa) all playing at or above expectations ... only Hamhuis has had a slow start, and Bobby Lu has been managed well, he's doing above average what his normal Octobers have been in the past.

The main worry is that is playing and relying on his top players for several minutes more per game more than usual over the course of a condensed Olympics Year would lead to long-term burnout.
Click to expand...

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stat...+3+5+4+6+7+8+13+14+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63+67

I was hoping he was going to handle tougher minutes a little better.
 

Betamax*

Guest
Drop the Sopel said:
The Canucks forwards skate very well as a group, they're just not very big. An aggressive foecheck suits the personnel very well IMO. The only core player I see that might have trouble with it is Kassian.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think Kassian is a pretty good skater. The issue when it comes to the forecheck for him is that his reputation might get him penalties that someone that doesn't have his history gets a pass on and also when he doesn't have control of his stick ...
 
Barney Gumble

Barney Gumble

Registered User
Jan 2, 2007
22,711
1
YouppiKiYay said:
This morning on Hockey Night Online, at around the 7 min mark, Cassie Campbell made the point that Torts might have to change his system to suit the Canucks' personnel. She is not certain the Canucks are fast enough to play the way Torts wants them to:

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/hockey-night-online-hot-flames-lukewarm-canucks-1.2075027
Click to expand...

How about pre-season + less than a month of real hockey = not alot of time for a team to adjust to a new coach (and different style of hockey). Especially for a team that has played for *SAME coach* for umpteen years previously. All the injuries didn't help either.
 

Betamax*

Guest
Okay, since the Canucks' adopted the first suggestion I've made, here's another idea to change the fortune of their mis-firing PP.

Have a RHS - LHS at the point, to give the ability to fire one-timers from either side. On the Canucks, Kesler has the best RHS, so I'd put him at the point and pair him with either Edler or Garrison for the first unit, with the Sedins. I'd then put a big body like Kassian or Booth (when he is healthy) in front of the net to provide the screen.
 
Scurr

Scurr

Registered User
Jun 25, 2009
12,115
12
Whalley
Betamax said:
Okay, since the Canucks' adopted the first suggestion I've made, here's another idea to change the fortune of their mis-firing PP.

Have a RHS - LHS at the point, to give the ability to fire one-timers from either side. On the Canucks, Kesler has the best RHS, so I'd put him at the point and pair him with either Edler or Garrison for the first unit, with the Sedins. I'd then put a big body like Kassian or Booth (when he is healthy) in front of the net to provide the screen.
Click to expand...

I agree with you on the RHS at the point. Why can't Tanev get a look on the PP?

I disagree with moving Kesler from the front of the net. An underrated part of that job is the ability to retrieve pucks, Keslers combination of size, speed and tenacity make him great at it.
 

Betamax*

Guest
Scurr said:
I agree with you on the RHS at the point. Why can't Tanev get a look on the PP?
Click to expand...

Well, I think it's because they think Bieksa is a better option as a RHS for the second unit.

I disagree with moving Kesler from the front of the net. An underrated part of that job is the ability to retrieve pucks, Keslers combination of size, speed and tenacity make him great at it.
Click to expand...

With the PP stalling, I think they need to switch things up. Kesler is the best RHS player on the team so it's a trade off and it decreases wear and tear and injury risk by not putting him as the screen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom