Quote:
Originally Posted by chedder
This begs the question though. Did the core disappear because of GG or in spite of him? I don't profess to know the system but, to me, it looks like a slow boring style of hockey that oppositing teams just devour. We can't get out of our own end and certainly can't get into the offensive zone with any certainty. Guys standing at the blue line seemingly not knowing what to do.
|
When I followed the team through California last weekend, I sat in our attacking end zone all three times. It was quite illuminating. What I saw in all games was as follows:
-Get wide at all costs. Every pass, while north-south, was also pushing to the boards. Defencemen skated to the boards, and so did the wingers. This created gaps up the middle. Big gaps. Ones the Kings especially drove oil tanker ships through.
- The centre was pretty much non-existent at this point of the breakout. One could criticize Monahan's play, but the system didn't really seem to care that we even have a centre.
- Left wing leads the rush, if possible. Coupled with the point above, this basically eliminated everything that makes Gaudreau work. He was asked to gain the line against multiple huge King and Duck opponents every time out and was frequently left without options.
- If we can't get even that far: long diagonal pass from LW to RW. Trivially easy to anticipate and pick-off. Then exploit the noted holes created by pushing everyone to the wall.
End result: If we fail to gain the zone, there are too many gaps for the opposition to exploit and turn into high percentage chances. Even if we managed to gain the zone, we pushed ourselves to the outside with little hope of getting the puck into the home plate area. Nothing to do but take the easy corsi event and try to get back on D.
Offensively, I think we're failing because of Gulutzan. The Gaudreau-Monahan-Hudler line worked because they could free wheel. Gulutzan's system stifles the creativity of Gaudreau, doesn't seem to care much about Monahan, and Treliving failed to find a RW that could work with them.
Defensively, I think it is a mixed bag. The coach's pairings have frequently been stupid. And while Engelland certainly deserves praise for his play thus far, the fact remains that when we see this guy in the top four or on the PK, the other defenceman has to compensate for him. Gio, for example, is going to look worse because he's trying to do his job and about 1/4th of his partner's.