Quote:
Originally Posted by midniteowl
This really boggles my mind, what competent coach will start his 4th line at home?
|
Starting your 4th line isn't that crazy. The other team quite often starts their shutdown line on the road, so you throw out the 4th line to "waste" a shift of their top D pair and a solid defensive line, then you come right back with Gaudreau's line and the 3M line back to back and at least one of them gets a soft matchup on their first shift.
HOWEVER, this only works when your 4th line isn't a total tire fire. Last year we could rely on the 4th line to at least chip the puck out of the zone and forecheck hard. Guys like Bouma, Stajan, and Hathaway had some of the lowest shots and goals against on the team (and even league-wide) - better even than the 3M line (with the caveats of easier competition and no offense to speak of).
I think a more fair criticism here is how Gulutzan seems to deploy his lines based on how he thinks they
should play, rather than how they
actually are. He's mentioned in interviews before than he believes in giving a struggling player a chance to work through a cold streak rather than cutting their ice time. At some point, though, you have to realize that your idea of what they should be capable of is wrong, and adapt. GG seems to believe that we're a team that's 4 solid lines and 3 pairs deep, and any underperformance there is just a slump they need to play through.
The real elite coaches have a solid plan in the ideal scenario, but they also recognize the flaws of their team and adapt to compensate for them. Chicago's 3rd cup is a perfect example of this. Quenneville realized he only had 3 good D in Keith, Seabrook, Hjalmarsson. So he doubleshifted the big 3 and Keith ended up playing 30+ minutes a night for the whole run. No coach wants to do that, but great teams and great coaches find a way to work around their flaws.