Thanked the OP. I have wondered the same thing.
They are slow and look somewhat deliberate on the PP but frankly are not showing enough high end skill, or cohesion, to play a cerebral game.
Uptempo? Quick transition? Nope. That was the last coach.
The coach talks about 50-50 hockey. I believe that means to assess the play and basically if there is risk, back off. Seems to translate in to passivity.
If you look at momentum changes, they are not a team that you can say can be counted on to take over a game after a lacklustre start, but they sure can do the opposite, where one unfortunate event snowballs and the wheels fall off.
I see them winning the stats battle, but generating little in the way of sustained pressure with a high number of dangerous chances. (And I mean common sense, eye test danger, not using shot location as a proxy for danger)
They show flashes, but frankly the main theme is that they are inconsistent. Not a good identity to have.
Disappointing, I guess.
|