Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
But once again their percentage of scoring chances says they are doing what you say they need to do more of more than most teams already.
|
I'm not saying scoring chances are not an important stat. But we have to both agree that all scoring chances are not equal. A scoring chance or rebound that crosses the royal road (center of the ice) is far more dangerous than a scoring chance where a shooter is on the strong side of defensive coverage shooting into the goalie trying to beat that goalie clean. The shot last night Hathaway set Gaudreau up for is not the same scoring chance that we get most nights, that was a scoring chance that crossed the royal road and we don't yet have all the data needed to evaluate that.
It's better to outchance the other team than not. But if you are being discouraged, passively or not, from utilizing dangerous areas of the ice like cross-ice passes in order to maximize the volume over the quality, you've gone too far past the fine line.
And the scoring chances can't identify set plays. They can result in more of them, but only if you're actively utilizing them. On paper, teams that get puck possession put themselves
in a better position to execute more set plays. But if you don't make an
emphasis on that, then it's not going to happen.
The scoring chances may say we are shooting from the home plate area, sure, but that is different from fully utilizing the high slot. The high slot is an important area because it is the area of the ice with the most options. If it results in a shot, there is more net open. If it results in a pass to the side, it is as close as you can get to a royal road crossing without being a true royal road crossing. And our offense simply discourages the high slot as a weapon.
Shooting anywhere from anywhere in the home plate on a goalie (not just right into them, which happens on plenty of scoring chances because the goalie doesn't have to move side to side) is considered a scoring chance. And it IS a scoring chance. But again, if you're not focusing on maximizing the quality of scoring chance, you can rack up the scoring chances all day.
Finally, I just think there is too much of a divide between forwards and defensemen in the way this team plays. This team has too much talent on the blue line, and too much money on the blue line, to be utilizing them as traditional defensemen. Scoring chance numbers can't identify who is getting a scoring chance (well iSC do, but I digress). But in my opinion it does matter who is getting a scoring chance, because keeping an eye on three forwards is easier for a goalie to do than keeping an eye on five skaters. It's simply a matter of chaos. Our team gets scoring chances, but rarely gets chaos. Look back to this goal, scored by Russell at the 7:35 mark:
And tell me the last time a Flames defenseman snuck into that area and the offense set them up for a shot. It's simply not happening in our offense. We might be getting shots from there, but if they're coming from forwards, then they're coming through tight checking and they're easier for goaltenders to track. They're more rushed, and the shooters probably don't have time to pick a corner.
Players are encouraged to be "direct" and shoot forward
instead of utilizing the full offensive zone, and while I'm sure some smartaleck will point out that I don't know what the coaching staff preaches, I think it's obvious to anyone who's been following the team since Gulutzan came on board. And it's resulting in defensemen shooting/recyclling too early in along the side walls, instead of walking the line and surveying the situation and pinching away from the puck. Those are details that are costing us goals and making every goal against a back breaker.
Don't mistake me for someone who thinks these stats aren't important. They are a baseline for success in my opinion. But they are not a
driver of success, they are a stepping stone.
Defensive Breakouts
sucked under Hartley. No one denied that. But that doesn't mean absolutely everything he did was
fundamentally wrong. Over a two year span (since Gaudreau came on board) we were a top offensive team, and while we gave up a lot of chances most of those were due to a passive defensive system rather than the overly aggressive offensive system (we actually backchecked very well). Now we're a team that is
happy to achieve two goals in a game because of our passive offensive system.
Is Gulutzan doing
some things right? yes.
Is Gulutzan doing the right things right for this team? That's where I'm not convinced, because this team is not built to score by overpowering guys through the hashmarks all game (even with Matthew Tkachuk). And as long as our offense plays the style Gulutzan preaches, we could get all the scoring chances in the world and still be at the mercy of lucky bounces.
Now, could you win playoff series by playing Gulutzan's style to perfection? Maybe a couple years ago, when good teams still couldn't break out that well. These days nearly everyone has six puck movers on their backend who can execute a clean first pass. You can't just suffocate teams, you have to out-execute them, and more possession is only half of that. Royal road crossings, utilizing the high slot, controlled deflections, and layers of traffic are what's been missing for over 100 games.