|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 4, 2015 11:06:52 GMT -5
Mentioned it before but Sergei Gonchar seemed to know what he was doing ... don't know how he did it, but he always seemed to be open on the point and he generated a lot of chances ...
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on May 4, 2015 12:00:06 GMT -5
Mentioned it before but Sergei Gonchar seemed to know what he was doing ... don't know how he did it, but he always seemed to be open on the point and he generated a lot of chances ... Cheers. Might be a good time to slide him into the line up!!
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 4, 2015 12:07:22 GMT -5
Mentioned it before but Sergei Gonchar seemed to know what he was doing ... don't know how he did it, but he always seemed to be open on the point and he generated a lot of chances ... Cheers. Might be a good time to slide him into the line up!! As an outsider looking I don't see why they couldn't give it a go ... what have they got to lose ... other than the season ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on May 4, 2015 12:12:56 GMT -5
What's funny (sad?) is that people have been railing all year about the poor advanced stats, and yet in the playoffs we've actually been winning that battle more often then not. Quite dominant at times, in fact. We've wanted Therrien to implement a system where we outshoot other teams and maintain possession more than they do, and that's exactly what has happened in this series, and for large parts of the first round as well. And yet... Good point BC. I was actually thinking about that last night as well. The Habs won the possession game versus Ottawa and are doing the same versus the Bolts, but I guess it's all for naught if you're running on a 4% clip with your PP. If I'm not mistaken, it's Dan Lacroix who runs the special teams. If the PP doesn't turn itself around for the remainder of this series, then it'll be time in the offseason for Berg to ditch Lacroix and get a coach who excels at powerplays. If they end up cleaning house in St. Louis, Berg should try to bring in Muller as an assistant. I recall the Habs always having a strong PP while Muller was behind the bench. Either that or bring back Carbo to run special teams. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I'm pretty sure that when Carbo was assistant to Gainey, the Habs PP was consistently among the top 3 or 5 in the league. Ya but Carbo had Koivu, Kovalev and a Markov in his prime to work on the PP along with Souray with a relatively accurate cannon on the point.
|
|
|
Post by Forum Ghost on May 4, 2015 12:32:43 GMT -5
Good point BC. I was actually thinking about that last night as well. The Habs won the possession game versus Ottawa and are doing the same versus the Bolts, but I guess it's all for naught if you're running on a 4% clip with your PP. If I'm not mistaken, it's Dan Lacroix who runs the special teams. If the PP doesn't turn itself around for the remainder of this series, then it'll be time in the offseason for Berg to ditch Lacroix and get a coach who excels at powerplays. If they end up cleaning house in St. Louis, Berg should try to bring in Muller as an assistant. I recall the Habs always having a strong PP while Muller was behind the bench. Either that or bring back Carbo to run special teams. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I'm pretty sure that when Carbo was assistant to Gainey, the Habs PP was consistently among the top 3 or 5 in the league. Ya but Carbo had Koivu, Kovalev and a Markov in his prime to work on the PP along with Souray with a relatively accurate cannon on the point. In my opinion, I don't think we have a personnel issue - the players that we already have should be good enough to not have a 4% PP. However, there seems to be zero tactic or strategy to the PP and that's where coaching comes in. Now I'm not saying that our PP should be the best in the league with our current group of players, but at the same time a PP with Subban, Markov and Pacioretty should not be struggling like this. It's painful to watch this team 5 on 4 and it's pretty sad that we get better scoring chances short-handed than we do with the man advantage. I wish assistant coaches were able to have press conferences because the media would have their knives sharpened for Lacroix. This has got to be among the worst Habs powerplays that I've seen in all my years as a fan.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on May 4, 2015 13:27:27 GMT -5
Ya but Carbo had Koivu, Kovalev and a Markov in his prime to work on the PP along with Souray with a relatively accurate cannon on the point. In my opinion, I don't think we have a personnel issue - the players that we already have should be good enough to not have a 4% PP. However, there seems to be zero tactic or strategy to the PP and that's where coaching comes in. Now I'm not saying that our PP should be the best in the league with our current group of players, but at the same time a PP with Subban, Markov and Pacioretty should not be struggling like this. It's painful to watch this team 5 on 4 and it's pretty sad that we get better scoring chances short-handed than we do with the man advantage. I wish assistant coaches were able to have press conferences because the media would have their knives sharpened for Lacroix. This has got to be among the worst Habs powerplays that I've seen in all my years as a fan. I agree 100%, it should be better than 4%. Who ever designed the "Give the puck to PK all the time" powerplay should not be coaching. I also believe someone needs to sit PK down and explain to him that a wrist shot is often better than a slap shot. Further to what I said earlier though, we don't have someone who can worry a defenseman the way Kovalev could when he had the puck on the right side near the boards between the blueline and the goal line. I remember him having Chara not knowing what Kovalev was going to do. In t
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on May 4, 2015 13:28:11 GMT -5
I hang 75% of this on the coaching. You can do all sorts of studies of power plays, specifically where most goals come from. Ideally you want to get the puck quickly to areas in the slot that force the goalie to move laterally and open up more of the net. Point shots can be effective for screens and deflections but those are generally low percentage shots. I love watching PK load up a one-timer but that's not the #1 option on the PP.
So you work on quick passing, quick decisions, and finding the seams in the box. That's coaching. We have players good enough to execute, but we settle too often for the low percentage play.
Remember, we are talking about another 8-10 goals a year. We scored 40 PP goals this year for a success rate of 16.5% (23rd in the league). Another 8 PP goals would have given us a 20% success rate (in the top 10).
PP's can be prone to streaks, but right now they look lost. No confidence, no real plan.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 4, 2015 16:24:49 GMT -5
What's funny (sad?) is that people have been railing all year about the poor advanced stats, and yet in the playoffs we've actually been winning that battle more often then not. Quite dominant at times, in fact. We've wanted Therrien to implement a system where we outshoot other teams and maintain possession more than they do, and that's exactly what has happened in this series, and for large parts of the first round as well. And yet... And as I've said all year, the advanced stats are not all they are cracked up to be, All they do is measure the quantity of shots directed towards the net, (and sometimes on net, but not always depending on the form). There is absolutely no accounting for the quality, if it's a danger area, etc. what team would you rather be? The team that directs 80 shots toward the net, 50 of them go wide or are blocked, 28 from the perimeter hit the net, 2 are in close. Or, the team that directs 40 toward the net, and 20 of them are from 10-15 feet. The perimeter team wins the advanced stats battle, handily. But I'd rather be that team that knows what they are doing with the puck
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 4, 2015 16:33:05 GMT -5
Yep.....now to find the finish. Just heard a clip of Therrien....and he's not blaming the refs....he's saying Prust's behaviour was undisciplined and unacceptable. And he night be 100% correct. But if one of your player's goes off like that on the ref...and it's the truth....don't you support your player? I also heard that Prust did what he did because he was upset about a shot to the pills that went uncalled. (I don't recall that.) Wonder how this whole thing is going over in the room. Are the players with Therrien? If so, Prust will feel alienated. Are they with Prust in his tirade against Watson? If so, does that affect how they're called in Game 3? The officials are a brethren, too. One theory on Prust is that he went ballistic on purpose to deflect the attention off the team .... Maybe?
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on May 4, 2015 23:32:10 GMT -5
Yep.....now to find the finish. Just heard a clip of Therrien....and he's not blaming the refs....he's saying Prust's behaviour was undisciplined and unacceptable. And he night be 100% correct. But if one of your player's goes off like that on the ref...and it's the truth....don't you support your player? I also heard that Prust did what he did because he was upset about a shot to the pills that went uncalled. (I don't recall that.) Wonder how this whole thing is going over in the room. Are the players with Therrien? If so, Prust will feel alienated. Are they with Prust in his tirade against Watson? If so, does that affect how they're called in Game 3? The officials are a brethren, too. One theory on Prust is that he went ballistic on purpose to deflect the attention off the team .... Maybe? the theory might make sense as he seems pretty calm when he made the statements. Seemed somewhat calculated. My only problem is that the attention should be on the team. Time for all of them to step up!
|
|