|
Post by CentreHice on May 7, 2015 7:41:35 GMT -5
Babcock's system is the same as MT's. They play it the same way. The players, the bounces, make the difference. I'm ignorant of systems. How do you know that MT's is the same as Babcock's? And what exactly is that system?
|
|
|
Post by frozone on May 7, 2015 7:47:05 GMT -5
MT is a Jacques Lemaire disciple it's boring and un imaginative it has it's place at times but not all the time .... Great effort tonight but giving the puck away in those last few minutes cost you the game .... This team is built to have the puck not give it away all the time...anyways I'm wasting my breath MT is not going anywhere The thing is, that's not the way he has coached these playoffs, and certainly not this round. He's been pretty much everything some have been screaming for him to be; * Plekanec and Pacioretty have been playing together * Desharnais on the third line (and didn't even play one game) * Less dump ins (should have had at least one more last night) * We've been the better possession team * We've outshot them every game * We've had more offensive zone time than they have The advanced stats have been great. And yet we're down 3-0. If we lose this round it's certainly not just MT's fault. We're outplaying one of the best teams in the league and we have already eliminated the hottest team the league has seen in a long time. I'm more than happy with the effort this team has displayed (except for Pacioretty). MT is not perfect though, and the problems the Habs are facing now are problems that he could have predicted months ago. Giving up the first goal, the bad PP, indiscipline, no offensive game... although not necessarily MT's fault, he should be good enough of a coach to reverse these bad tendencies. Another area where MT could have been better is in making sure the team is physically and mentally peaking going into the playoffs. It might sound nitpicky, but Olympic coaches in other sports manage to do exactly that with their athletes. It seems to me that a number of guys on the team peaked too early... Price, Pacioretty, Markov, Subban, Plek, Galchenyuk...
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on May 7, 2015 8:23:26 GMT -5
Unlike the regular season, playoff success or failure can defy the fundamentals. Billy Beane famously said in Moneyball that "my sh!t doesn't work in the playoffs", meaning that the small sample size of games, puck luck, lucky bounces, can work for you or against you at the wrong time.
I agree with BC and others who have pointed out that we have done exactly what we wanted in this series. We have limited the shot totals for Tampa, we have controlled possession and shot attempts, Price has been solid, certainly good enough....and yet we are down 3-0. So it's hard to blame Therrien for what has transpired in this series. He learned from our regular season games against them and he learned from how Detroit played them. We just are not getting ANY of the breaks that generally even out over 82 games, but not necessarily over 7 games.
The difference comes down to Bishop playing at an extremely high level and a lack of finish. You can't hang that on the coaches, and you can't always hang it on the players. Pucks that went in during the season aren't going in now. Just ask the Rangers.
Which is why I have always put a lot of emphasis on regular season success. You need to build a good foundation for a team that can be successful over 82 games on a consistent basis..... and hope for the best in the playoffs. Sometimes it doesn't work out and it isn't anybody's fault. If you are really a contendder you will be knocking at the door the next year.
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on May 7, 2015 8:47:07 GMT -5
Babcock's system is the same as MT's. They play it the same way. The players, the bounces, make the difference. I'm ignorant of systems. How do you know that MT's is the same as Babcock's? And what exactly is that system? Red wings use a left wing trap, or a 2-1-2, depending on the score of the game. We pretty much do the same.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on May 7, 2015 8:51:10 GMT -5
So now it's all just bad luck?
The inability to score and the woeful PP have been nagging, if not pervasive, areas of concern all year long.
We were the lowest-scoring team entering the playoffs…and a poor PP contributed to that stat.
It's coming back to bite us.
That's how I see it.
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on May 7, 2015 8:54:31 GMT -5
They are giving everything they have....Tampa is just a notch better, or luckier than the Habs.
I'm hoping MB can see what we are seeing as weaknesses and addresses them this summer. However, I have a feeling that we will see them not sign or trade anyone of any significance, but rather have some of our prospects make the team ie, McCarron, Scherbak, Tinordi and maybe Thomas as a plug.
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on May 7, 2015 8:56:45 GMT -5
So now it's all just bad luck? The inability to score and the woeful PP have been nagging, if not pervasive, areas of concern all year long. We were the lowest-scoring team entering the playoffs…and a poor PP contributed to that stat. It's coming back to bite us. That's how I see it. Wonder if the Team as any interest in Adam Oats....not sure what his future in NJ is. He might make a good assistant until he's ready to go off to be a head coach somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on May 7, 2015 9:13:10 GMT -5
So now it's all just bad luck? The inability to score and the woeful PP have been nagging, if not pervasive, areas of concern all year long. We were the lowest-scoring team entering the playoffs…and a poor PP contributed to that stat. It's coming back to bite us. That's how I see it. I don't disagree. You don't score and you reduce your margin of error so any breaks that go agsinst you are costly. I think Bergevin has some major soul searching to do this summer to address those problems, but playoff success is a fickle thing.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 7, 2015 9:25:08 GMT -5
Babcock's system is the same as MT's. How do you figure that? What similarities do you see?
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 7, 2015 9:46:16 GMT -5
They are giving everything they have....Tampa is just a notch better, or luckier than the Habs. They haven't been better than us, on balance for two of the 3 games in this series and one could even say we weren't bad 5 on 5 in game 2 either, but the lack of discipline hurt us. What's been exaggerated in this series, and in the Ottawa one, is the lack of scoring. IMO, that's partly due to talent or lack thereof and partly due to our system, which has not been the best at coming out of our zone. If you don't build up speed or make quick transitions often enough, you don't create time and space. That means you don't score that much and then when you need scoring badly, you have no experience at seeing the puck go in and you are in uncharted territory. That may sound silly, but it's connected to visualization. You see enough of something and it becomes more natural. Killorn scored 15 goals last year. But he watched a lot of pucks go in. So when he gets a chance in last night's game, he makes the right play. The solutions are to try to improve our zone exits, to pick up or develop better natural scorers, and to improve the PP. None of those are going to happen in this series, so unless the hockey gods give us a break, we better start planning for next year.
|
|
|
Post by Douper on May 7, 2015 10:26:34 GMT -5
8 goals in 8 games. That is why we are down 0-3. We can't score.
|
|
|
Post by franko on May 7, 2015 12:34:12 GMT -5
. . . you don't score that much . . . this is MT's way, though. he wants 1-0 or 2-1 games and he coaches that way. heck, he'd handcuff Mario and Jagr . . . he's JM light . . . or JM with just a little bit of personality.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on May 7, 2015 13:14:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 7, 2015 15:28:09 GMT -5
MT is a Jacques Lemaire disciple it's boring and un imaginative it has it's place at times but not all the time .... Great effort tonight but giving the puck away in those last few minutes cost you the game .... This team is built to have the puck not give it away all the time...anyways I'm wasting my breath MT is not going anywhere The thing is, that's not the way he has coached these playoffs, and certainly not this round. He's been pretty much everything some have been screaming for him to be; * Plekanec and Pacioretty have been playing together * Desharnais on the third line (and didn't even play one game) * Less dump ins (should have had at least one more last night) * We've been the better possession team * We've outshot them every game * We've had more offensive zone time than they have The advanced stats have been great. And yet we're down 3-0. He has definitely not been doing what I've been screaming for .... These long shots on the PP and 5 on 5 have to stop. There is no sense winning the possession game if you are shooting from 40+ feet and your top players are not shooting from high scoring areas. I looked at the shot chart last night. We actually did a good job of containing Tampa's offense to the outside. And we did a good job of making sure the in close shots weren't by the high skill guys. But it's not Tampa's offense that concerns me, it's ours. We had 31 shots last night. Seventeen of those shots were from outside 40 feet. We managed to get 11 shots inside 25 feet, however only 4 of those shots came from the first line, and one of those was a weak backhand. Weise had 3 shots inside 25 feet. Petry, De La Rose, Prust, and Eller each had one. We just aren't getting into good scoring positions enough, and when we do we miss or its blocked. So, yes, we are winning the advanced stats, but it's from low scoring percentage shots ....
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 7, 2015 15:42:16 GMT -5
This series is a prime example of why the only stats that truly matter are W's, L's, GF, GA.
|
|
|
Post by Disp on May 7, 2015 16:46:21 GMT -5
Babcock's system is the same as MT's. How do you figure that? What similarities do you see? Babcock's system is the same as MT's. They play it the same way. The players, the bounces, make the difference. I'm ignorant of systems. How do you know that MT's is the same as Babcock's? And what exactly is that system? What? Really? I thought you guys had a handle on it. I mean, I read on here all the time about how MT's system is bad, or that it needs some adjustment. This is supposedly all that's holding us back from the promised land. I thought you guys had the answers. It couldn't be that everything else being somewhat equal, the players actually make the difference. This isn't the 80's, or even the 90's, there are minor variations, but everyone plays basically the same way. Some do it better, but if you don't bury your chances it doesn't matter. We've had enough chances to be winning this series 2-1. That is not a stretch at all. Puck in off the post instead of out, twice, and it's likely we're up.
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 7, 2015 17:04:32 GMT -5
I agree that the game plan has largely been adhered to. Whether you like that plan or not, is a different conversation. Regardless, I don't see MT going anywhere. I will admit I've seen some growth from him this year. He's been willing to change lines, and juggle, somewhat. He hasn't gone as far as I would like, but it's a start. Where I'm hopeful for change is with the assistants. They desperately need a power play coach. I can't beat that dead horse enough. After that, Berg has to find scoring.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 7, 2015 17:38:01 GMT -5
Wasn't the knock on Therrien the last time we had him that he juggled lines too much?
|
|
|
Post by Disp on May 7, 2015 17:41:36 GMT -5
Wasn't the knock on Therrien the last time we had him that he juggled lines too much? The only time he does anything right is when we win. Even then it's debatable.
|
|
|
Post by jerry_dog on May 7, 2015 18:14:58 GMT -5
Go Habs Go!!!
|
|