|
Post by seventeen on Dec 1, 2014 1:12:43 GMT -5
Finally found some time to watch the game. The immediate observations are that Buffalo are not going to be top contenders for the McDavid derby. Their young defense is coming along and they are a better team than they were early in the season. Nolan is doing his job. Secondly, the hockey gods must have a real hate on for us. There were a lot of shots and passes that could have gone either way and went the Sabres way 80% of the time. On at early PP, Patches gets set up just like you would like, right faceoff circle with Enroth out of position and having to throw himself back to the left. There's one defenseman who might block the shot, if he's lucky. He's not only lucky, it hits his stick's shaft and drops right to his feet so he can ice it. That's like winning the lottery. It could have missed the stick and gone in the net, it could have deflected off his stick and gone in the net, it could have bounced back to Patches who would then have more people out of position. Nope, it does the one thing that's absolutely perfect for Buffalo. Even though it counted as a Habs goal, How often have you seen a shot that's going in, hit the shaft of the goalie's stick, while he's facing the other way and nearly stay out. That was a hair on the chinny chin chin goal. And it nearly didn't count. There were other examples as I was watching, but those were the two main ones that stood out.
Our lack of foot speed on defense stood out on the Stewart goal. If Beaulieu is dressed instead of Allen, Stewart doesn't get a sniff. Not that Allen played badly, but faster legs would have prevented that goal. Then there's the posts and the fact that so many shots directed at the net don't change direction and go in. They get blocked and turned over. Is that poor shooting or bad luck? And when are Galchy's shots going to go in, instead of wide or hitting the post?
In any case, thinking back, the Sabres had maybe three decent scoring chances. 100% percentage. Pretty good. Maybe they had more, but say even 50%. That's incredible and won't persist. Still, we only took 1 point out of 3 for the weekend against a team we should beat, may not handily, but beat nonetheless. Not good enough.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Dec 1, 2014 9:35:49 GMT -5
I'm back to Therrien bashing again.
The ONLY thing that looks good about this team is the record, which sounds silly to say, but on just about EVERY important metric we are a middling to average team at best. Goal differential, shot differential, goals scored, PP, Corsi, Fenwick....everything.
We had that great stretch run last year after we got Vanek and 2 playoff rounds, but the overall regression under Therrien is showing up, just like it has at every stop in his career. If we keep playing like we have been for the better part of the past 100 games, then our record will start to reflect that.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Dec 1, 2014 10:17:21 GMT -5
I'm back to Therrien bashing again. The ONLY thing that looks good about this team is the record, which sounds silly to say, but on just about EVERY important metric we are a middling to average team at best. Goal differential, shot differential, goals scored, PP, Corsi, Fenwick....everything. We had that great stretch run last year after we got Vanek and 2 playoff rounds, but the overall regression under Therrien is showing up, just like it has at every stop in his career. If we keep playing like we have been for the better part of the past 100 games, then our record will start to reflect that. 4 years. a four year extension. for all of MB's decent moves . . . that away power play record . . . good thing we banked points early in the season.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 1, 2014 11:34:36 GMT -5
I'm back to Therrien bashing again. The ONLY thing that looks good about this team is the record, which sounds silly to say, but on just about EVERY important metric we are a middling to average team at best. Goal differential, shot differential, goals scored, PP, Corsi, Fenwick....everything. We had that great stretch run last year after we got Vanek and 2 playoff rounds, but the overall regression under Therrien is showing up, just like it has at every stop in his career. If we keep playing like we have been for the better part of the past 100 games, then our record will start to reflect that. ...While I'm not a fan of Therrien's method I personnally feel he has that team playing way above its head. Waaaaay!! Our defense looks like an expansion team D-corp (Allen, Weaver, Gilbert Gonchar... really?!), we have no real #1 center and only 1 true scorer... The whole is much great greater so far than the sum of the parts IMO, and that usually testifies in favor of the coaching staff...
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 1, 2014 12:21:59 GMT -5
I'm back to Therrien bashing again. The ONLY thing that looks good about this team is the record, which sounds silly to say, but on just about EVERY important metric we are a middling to average team at best. Goal differential, shot differential, goals scored, PP, Corsi, Fenwick....everything. We had that great stretch run last year after we got Vanek and 2 playoff rounds, but the overall regression under Therrien is showing up, just like it has at every stop in his career. If we keep playing like we have been for the better part of the past 100 games, then our record will start to reflect that. ...While I'm not a fan of Therrien's method I personnally feel he has that team playing way above its head. Waaaaay!! Our defense looks like an expansion team D-corp (Allen, Weaver, Gilbert Gonchar... really?!), we have no real #1 center and only 1 true scorer... The whole is much great greater so far than the sum of the parts IMO, and that usually testifies in favor of the coaching staff... Two things: There are coaches that start off well and tail off. Keenan, Tortorella, Laviolette and it seems, Therrien. Are these guys all authoritarian types? I'm trying to find a common denominator and while I don't know Laviolette's style, I believe Keenan, Torts and Therrien are all 'in your face' types who like you to know who's boss. Secondly, the record can be distorted by good goaltending. I'm paying attention to Washington this season, because Trotz has always had really good goaltending in Nashville and not so much in Washington this year. Can his reputation as a great coach have come about because of goaltending? As a counter to that thinking, Rinne missed a lot of games last and Nashville used Carter Hutton and Marek Mazanec in 65 games and still finished with 88 points. Trotz is not an in your face coach. I fear exactly what BH is talking about.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Dec 1, 2014 12:53:47 GMT -5
I'm back to Therrien bashing again. The ONLY thing that looks good about this team is the record, which sounds silly to say, but on just about EVERY important metric we are a middling to average team at best. Goal differential, shot differential, goals scored, PP, Corsi, Fenwick....everything. We had that great stretch run last year after we got Vanek and 2 playoff rounds, but the overall regression under Therrien is showing up, just like it has at every stop in his career. If we keep playing like we have been for the better part of the past 100 games, then our record will start to reflect that. ...While I'm not a fan of Therrien's method I personnally feel he has that team playing way above its head. Waaaaay!! Our defense looks like an expansion team D-corp (Allen, Weaver, Gilbert Gonchar... really?!), we have no real #1 center and only 1 true scorer... The whole is much great greater so far than the sum of the parts IMO, and that usually testifies in favor of the coaching staff... An expansion team defence corps is a very good analogy, Doc ... I said earlier that I think we'd be a better team with Tinordi and/or Beaulieu in the lineup (only after watching our new-look defence for two games) ... Beau really has developed well and while he makes mistakes, the kid was earning NHL-level respect ... he was pretty much doing it all and I really wasn't expecting that ... as for Therrien, well, I think you're right insomuch as, he has buy-in from all of his player in the system he's using ... that aside, I also think HA has a good point about leadership ... Therrien might have a system, but he's no Sgt Lamb ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Dec 1, 2014 12:58:57 GMT -5
For now I'm going on the assumption that talent isn't the problem. I don't put us at the top of the conference with Pittsburgh and Boston (for now), but I would say that we are right there in the mix with the next group of teams along with Tampa for those top 4/5 playoff spots.
We have a lot of good pieces: a franchise goalie, a franchise dman, an elite goal scorer, a good mix of young and veteran talent up front and on the back end. You point out the back end? There are young and flawed dmen playing on good teams all over the league, like Torey Krug and Matt Bartkowski in Boston. But for some reason Beaulieu and Tinordi aren't good enough to develop on the fly under Therrien. Is that why we are looking at Allen and Gonchar? Beau and Tinordi just can't crack the lineup? Or does Therrien have deep mistrust and total lack of patience with young dmen? This was supposed to be the year that at least one of them established a role back there, but it feels like Allen is the second coming of Doug Murray. A guy who has no business on the ice, who is worse than Tinordi in just about every way imaginable, except he's a big veteran.
This is Year 3 of the MB/MT regime and this should be the best year so far. I don't want to let MT off the hook by saying well he doesn't have the horses to play, so we can't blame him for the overal poor play. I have high expectations for this team. THIS year. There are enough pieces to work with. We should be better, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Dec 1, 2014 13:11:11 GMT -5
For now I'm going on the assumption that talent isn't the problem. I don't put us at the top of the conference with Pittsburgh and Boston (for now), but I would say that we are right there in the mix with the next group of teams along with Tampa for those top 4/5 playoff spots. We have a lot of good pieces: a franchise goalie, a franchise dman, an elite goal scorer, a good mix of young and veteran talent up front and on the back end. You point out the back end? There are young and flawed dmen playing on good teams all over the league, like Torey Krug and Matt Bartkowski in Boston. But for some reason Beaulieu and Tinordi aren't good enough to develop on the fly under Therrien. Is that why we are looking at Allen and Gonchar? Beau and Tinordi just can't crack the lineup? Or does Therrien have deep mistrust and total lack of patience with young dmen? This was supposed to be the year that at least one of them established a role back there, but it feels like Allen is the second coming of Doug Murray. A guy who has no business on the ice, who is worse than Tinordi in just about every way imaginable, except he's a big veteran. This is Year 3 of the MB/MT regime and this should be the best year so far. I don't want to let MT off the hook by saying well he doesn't have the horses to play, so we can't blame him for the overal poor play. I have high expectations for this team. THIS year. There are enough pieces to work with. We should be better, IMO. I'm wondering if maybe all of these moves have affected the team not just on the ice, but in the dressing room as well ... we've hit the quarter-poll and we've already had three moves ... might be something to it, might not ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Dec 1, 2014 13:11:20 GMT -5
Plus, we have stud #1 centre in the making…and he's still playing wing.
Talk about a development problem.
Subban developed in spite of MT….that was obvious.
And Conor McKenna (TSN690) is worried that MT will coach the great puck possession game out of Sekac. Just dump and chase….get with the system.
I'm thinking that a coach can either come in with a system and have the players adapt to and stay within it…no outside the box.
OR….
he has systems in mind but he also has the acumen to augment those systems to the skills the players bring to the table.
Even on our weak PP, Therrien keeps going back to the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Dec 1, 2014 13:52:23 GMT -5
Plus, we have stud #1 centre in the making…and he's still playing wing. Talk about a development problem. Subban developed in spite of MT….that was obvious. And Conor McKenna (TSN690) is worried that MT will coach the great puck possession game out of Sekac. Just dump and chase….get with the system. I'm thinking that a coach can either come in with a system and have the players adapt to and stay within it…no outside the box. OR…. he has systems in mind but he also has the acumen to augment those systems to the skills the players bring to the table. Even on our weak PP, Therrien keeps going back to the same thing. As far as MT is concerned we are a grinding team... don't carry the puck into the offensive zone... dump it in.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Dec 1, 2014 13:53:26 GMT -5
Plus, we have stud #1 centre in the making…and he's still playing wing. Talk about a development problem. Subban developed in spite of MT….that was obvious. And Conor McKenna (TSN690) is worried that MT will coach the great puck possession game out of Sekac. Just dump and chase….get with the system. I'm thinking that a coach can either come in with a system and have the players adapt to and stay within it…no outside the box. OR…. he has systems in mind but he also has the acumen to augment those systems to the skills the players bring to the table. Even on our weak PP, Therrien keeps going back to the same thing. I know it might seem like a small thing but look at the SO. He went to the same guys. We knew what Desharnais, Eller & Parenteau were going to do before they left centre ice. The idea of trying an unknown that might stump your opponent isn't tried.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Dec 1, 2014 14:12:59 GMT -5
As far as MT is concerned we are a grinding team... don't carry the puck into the offensive zone... dump it in. then peel off for a line change. Doc, I think I understand what you are saying, and even agree with it up to a point. it's the not willing to change things up (PP for example) that gets me. the only good thing (I guess) is that he hasn't taken someone hot off a line to get another line going . . . of course, that's probably because there isn't a hot line!
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Dec 1, 2014 14:56:10 GMT -5
Plus, we have stud #1 centre in the making…and he's still playing wing. Talk about a development problem. Subban developed in spite of MT….that was obvious. And Conor McKenna (TSN690) is worried that MT will coach the great puck possession game out of Sekac. Just dump and chase….get with the system. I'm thinking that a coach can either come in with a system and have the players adapt to and stay within it…no outside the box. OR…. he has systems in mind but he also has the acumen to augment those systems to the skills the players bring to the table. Even on our weak PP, Therrien keeps going back to the same thing. I know it might seem like a small thing but look at the SO. He went to the same guys. We knew what Desharnais, Eller & Parenteau were going to do before they left centre ice. The idea of trying an unknown that might stump your opponent isn't tried. I know people are advocates of going with the hot hand in the shootout, but the shootout is the one part of the game where you should go with probabilities. Desharnais and Parenteau should always be in the shootout, even if they are sucking. They've proven in the past that even when off their games, they will come through in the shootout. The third shooter is up for debate, but I'd put out Galchenyuk/Eller/Sekac. The only reason I'd use Sekac (he has no shootout history) is based on his stickhandling abilities. I wouldnt be surprised if there is a you tube video floating around where he is making goalies look silly on breakaways.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Dec 1, 2014 15:08:35 GMT -5
I know it might seem like a small thing but look at the SO. He went to the same guys. We knew what Desharnais, Eller & Parenteau were going to do before they left centre ice. The idea of trying an unknown that might stump your opponent isn't tried. I know people are advocates of going with the hot hand in the shootout, but the shootout is the one part of the game where you should go with probabilities. Desharnais and Parenteau should always be in the shootout, even if they are sucking. They've proven in the past that even when off their games, they will come through in the shootout. The third shooter is up for debate, but I'd put out Galchenyuk/Eller/Sekac. The only reason I'd use Sekac (he has no shootout history) is based on his stickhandling abilities. I wouldnt be surprised if there is a you tube video floating around where he is making goalies look silly on breakaways. Didn't find any breakaway videos... found one below for previous season compilation
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Dec 1, 2014 16:22:54 GMT -5
And Conor McKenna (TSN690) is worried that MT will coach the great puck possession game out of Sekac. Just dump and chase….get with the system. Ouch! That is Sekac's value to the team. He has good speed and puck poise, enters the zone with possession and his first thought is always how do we maintain the puck? What is the best possession play? He makes really good decisions that almost always result in offensive zone time. But MT would probably prefer the "safe" play of dumping the puck deep and hoping to get it back through "hard work" and "commitment". The system should be dictated by the talent, not the coach. But that means less control from behind the bench and more control on the ice, more creativity, and yes more risks. To me the X's and O's should be on the defensive side, things like puck support, controlling gaps, backchecking, making sure the forwards don't cheat by playing too high in the defensive zone, etc. But offense should be a function of the talent and playing to the strengths of each individual player.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 1, 2014 16:49:55 GMT -5
I know it might seem like a small thing but look at the SO. He went to the same guys. We knew what Desharnais, Eller & Parenteau were going to do before they left centre ice. The idea of trying an unknown that might stump your opponent isn't tried. I know people are advocates of going with the hot hand in the shootout, but the shootout is the one part of the game where you should go with probabilities. Desharnais and Parenteau should always be in the shootout, even if they are sucking. They've proven in the past that even when off their games, they will come through in the shootout. The third shooter is up for debate, but I'd put out Galchenyuk/Eller/Sekac. The only reason I'd use Sekac (he has no shootout history) is based on his stickhandling abilities. I wouldnt be surprised if there is a you tube video floating around where he is making goalies look silly on breakaways. I agree in large part. Some guys are good at at the shootout and some guys aren't. I differentiate between shoot outs and breakaways because I think players react differently to them. They think a lot less on breakaways and make more instinctive plays. Regardless, some are better than others at it. Plekanec sucks at the shootout. Putting him in is conceding a goal. Parenteau has that one really good move and if he developed a second, which looks like the first but finishes differently, he'd really be dangerous. DD is good, period. He switches things up and he scores often enough. Same with Galchenyuk and I'd try Sekac just because he's different. I'd keep tossing out different guys who are smart. Markov is a perfect guy to take a shot every 3rd or 4th shootout. Not often enough for goalies to study and wise up, but smart enough to score with forehand or backhand and a great sneaky wrister. PK might be a good choice as well. I'd also ensure every guy has to go in with speed. Patrick Kane and Datsyuk are the only guys I know who can go in slow and succeed. It must be their puck control and fakes, but no one else can do it well. Go in with speed, that way even a mediocre move will throw the goalie enough to find space. But you need guys who can execute at speed. I wouldn't use Patches either. He's just not a good one on one scorer. There, we've solved Therrien's choices for him. I wonder if coaches don't treat the shootout lightly. I've seen them put out a guy who's not producing, "to get him kick-started" or they put out a guy who's had a good game, but freezes on breakaways. They're points you can't afford to lose, though.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Dec 1, 2014 17:20:50 GMT -5
They're points you can't afford to lose, though. bah, it's only 1 point, you';re already guaranteed one the other is a bonus should you get it.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 1, 2014 18:57:06 GMT -5
But if you don't that's a point your competitors can gain on you. Just because you've had dinner, you don't want dessert? I'd be disappointed in you, Franko.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 2, 2014 22:28:39 GMT -5
Sabres over Tampa 2-1 in a shootout. Sound familiar? Buffalo's a much better team now than their record.
|
|