Because his team was on a change and Polak didn't have the passing options Filipovic pretended there was.
Yeah, I see that and expanded on it below that post. It still doesn't make the caption any less funny.
Because his team was on a change and Polak didn't have the passing options Filipovic pretended there was.
Because his team was on a change and Polak didn't have the passing options Filipovic pretended there was.
Honestly, this exercise vastly overstates the importance of possession relative to in-zone defensive abilities in the playoffs. Roman Polak, for all his deficiencies leaving the zone, has been on the ice for a much lower rate of goals against than Brian Campbell, even just relative to other defensemen on each team.
When you have zero possession driving from your blueline like the Rangers do, sure, you pine for the fjords of Keith Yandle because your stay at home guys are reducing neither shots nor goals. But if you can get guys whose presence vastly reduces goal-based events regardless of shot counts - and those people exist for 2-4 year spans regardless of what possession-only nerds tell you - you prefer those to possession drivers who introduce additional goal-based-variance.
Because his team was on a change and Polak didn't have the passing options Filipovic pretended there was.
Really? I took it as an observation, not a blanket "you're a ****** playoff dman if you suck on the retrieval and breakout"...
Really? I took it as an observation, not a blanket "you're a ****** playoff dman if you suck on the retrieval and breakout"...
Or I've listened to him talk about this exact subject, at length, for pretty much this entire season on his podcast.It puts Fowler in a good light and that gets him very ornery.
Actually he did. He quite obviously could have reversed to his partner. Its a pretty basic play made by dmen in that situation. Thats option 2 btw. His partner (who was still near the net and not going to change yet in pic #1 and pic #2) would have easily read it as soon as the reverse took place and been there to receive the pass. Its d-partner support 101. With the Kings leaving the zone it leaves Polak's partner with the puck and Sharks in possession. They could then complete the change with zero worries.
As someone that grew up playing defense as well as coaching it later, I'm somewhat surprised how such a simple and obvious option is dismisses as not possible.
He also could have tried to skate it out more. He had a enough of a head start to get much closer to the blue line before shooting it out. Thats assuming he couldn't actually make it to the blue line. But based on the fact he pulled up into a stop in pic #2 as he chipped it out. He was just going to flip it out and those other options were never on his radar.
Eh, I still think Roman's too slow to gain the blueline cleanly, head-start or no. And the lane back to his partner is closed by the forechecker. Hard around the boards would put it into a position where his partner has to retrieve and attempt to make a play, perhaps an option but does the King in the slot contend it and continue to force the Shark line to stay on, extending further? I don't think this particular example is all that bad.
I also think getting too caught up with that one example is missing the forest for the trees. Tells me some didn't bother reading anything and just looked at the pictures.
I took the premise to be shedding light on yet another aspect of a dman that makes them important to success. If you have guys who excel in this area, it's a good thing for the team... Fairly simple.
Oh absolutely, I just viscerally hate the notion that Yandle's crappy defense doesn't cost you anything because he drives possession.
I agree he's probably too slow. But my point was more that he wasn't even going to try as evidence by his stopping as he flipped it out.
As for the pass on option #2 being taken away. It 100% is not. The pass (an indirect one) is made by running it back along the boards as the forechecker closes on him. Then his partner drops back below the goal line to get it. Its a basic d-support play thats made multiple times a game. I'm not talking about a direct pass to where his partner is currently standing. Just look at pic #2. He makes that back pass along the boards and no one is near his partner who easily picks it up. As I said previously, thats d-support 101 thats taught as part of reversing the puck in the zone. The dman in front is always reading for that. I'm somewhat shocked that this is even a debate.
Because the point of the article is to re-brand breakout skills vs in-zone defense as the primary attribute of a "safe" defenseman.All I got out of this article about Yandle is he helps the Rags transition and go on the attack better than the other Rags dmen. How does that translate into saying his defense doesn't cost you?
I agree he's probably too slow. But my point was more that he wasn't even going to try as evidence by his stopping as he flipped it out.
As for the pass on option #2 being taken away. It 100% is not. The pass (an indirect one) is made by running it back along the boards as the forechecker closes on him. Then his partner drops back below the goal line to get it. Its a basic d-support play thats made multiple times a game. I'm not talking about a direct pass to where his partner is currently standing. Just look at pic #2. He makes that back pass along the boards and no one is near his partner who easily picks it up. As I said previously, thats d-support 101 thats taught as part of reversing the puck in the zone. The dman in front is always reading for that. I'm somewhat shocked that this is even a debate.
I also think getting too caught up with that one example is missing the forest for the trees. Tells me some didn't bother reading anything and just looked at the pictures.
Actually he did. He quite obviously could have reversed to his partner. Its a pretty basic play made by dmen in that situation. Thats option 2 btw. His partner (who was still near the net and not going to change yet in pic #1 and pic #2) would have easily read it as soon as the reverse took place and been there to receive the pass. Its d-partner support 101. With the Kings leaving the zone it leaves Polak's partner with the puck and Sharks in possession. They could then complete the change with zero worries.
As someone that grew up playing defense as well as coaching it later, I'm somewhat surprised how such a simple and obvious option is dismisses as not possible.
He also could have tried to skate it out more. He had a enough of a head start to get much closer to the blue line before shooting it out. Thats assuming he couldn't actually make it to the blue line. But based on the fact he pulled up into a stop in pic #2 as he chipped it out. He was just going to flip it out and those other options were never on his radar.
I agree he's probably too slow. But my point was more that he wasn't even going to try as evidence by his stopping as he flipped it out.
As for the pass on option #2 being taken away. It 100% is not. The pass (an indirect one) is made by running it back along the boards as the forechecker closes on him. Then his partner drops back below the goal line to get it. Its a basic d-support play thats made multiple times a game. I'm not talking about a direct pass to where his partner is currently standing. Just look at pic #2. He makes that back pass along the boards and no one is near his partner who easily picks it up. As I said previously, thats d-support 101 thats taught as part of reversing the puck in the zone. The dman in front is always reading for that. I'm somewhat shocked that this is even a debate.
He doesn't have the feet to make Option 1 the best.
I so wish BUF can obtain (draft, acquire, develop-in-system) two different player equivalents of Andrej Sekera. A skill set like that is exactly what BUF needs for legit playoff push, and 2 of them for deep playoff runs.Carry it out.
It's 1:15 into the 3rd pd with a 2-0 lead, both teams making what was likely their 2nd line change (maybe, maybe, maybe their first change), so a chip-out was OK.
100% agree with jj that if he doesn't have the skating skill (or has tired legs in a later-game situation), advancing the puck a couple more strides before backing it around to his d-parter is the best option. Game situation makes the chip-out acceptable.
I so wish BUF can obtain (draft, acquire, develop-in-system) two different player equivalents of Andrej Sekera. A skill set like that is exactly what BUF needs for legit playoff push, and 2 of them for deep playoff runs.
Brodin/Fowler, #8OA, etc.,
What type of D-man would people project Guhle to be (ceiling and floor)?
I don't see Sekera-lite in McCabe.
Guhle is very much a mobile defender who makes good puck security decisions, if that's the sort of parallel to Sekera you were looking for.
Yeah, I understand all that and as someone who is dead slow and plays defense, I still think his best option in that particular scenario is exactly what he did: get it out without putting it at risk, get the change. The hard effort back along the dasher isn't as sure of a thing as the lob.
I also said "in this particular example". Maybe some don't bother reading.
Guhle is my favorite prospect for that reason. Eventually, and if he continues to develop, I think Guhle - Ristolainen is the first pair.
Because the point of the article is to re-brand breakout skills vs in-zone defense as the primary attribute of a "safe" defenseman.
When we get back to the playoffs, I sure hope our guys don't try doing things they aren't capable of... In their own zone
As for option 2, what's the game scenario on this play? Late lead? Puck reversals do lead to turnovers, and while the probability of the chip out leading to a turn of possession is high, a turnover on the reversal leads to quality scoring chances against, especially if your mates are going for a change.