Gulutzan uses a very conservative philosophy with this team. On one hand it is understandable. If you're going to the blender too much, players get confused with what their roles are and the coach will eventually lose them.
On the other hand if the coach is too stubborn and results aren't there you get the same result.
But this conservatism is seen in his tactics as well with the 50/50 approach. The team is looking to get a one goal lead and nurse it to victory or at least a tie. In today's NHL, I believe you just can't do that. You have to play a fast and aggressive style.
Gulutzan's conservatism only gets increased when games are close.
When Gaudreau is getting called out by the coach and sometimes players for bad puck management in a tied game, that really disappoints me.
There is this take no chances mentality in the team - a play it safe ethos. It has manifested itself in 'lack of a killer instinct'. Calgary doesn't push to make 2-1 leads 3-1 or 4-1 leads. Also, they stick with PP personnel or deployments that clearly aren't giving the desired results yet the continue to 'stick with it'.
The league's best teams are always pushing for offence (goal differential.
This is also why I'm disappointed in Treliving - their plan was to shore up the defence and rely on the 2-1 approach. It's a failed philosophy IMO in todays NHL. Hamonic and Stone are not guys who help push the pace but guys that make their hay playing in their own end. That's not winning hockey.
If they stick to this philosophy it will continue to be a disaster. I'm not saying be so loose in your end that you're the Islanders but the mindset has to be more geared on offence, speed, creating those outnumbered chances, using the middle of the ice to attack - having players who can handle the puck with speed in the middle.
I was never of fan of the going all in because the forwards/offence was still missing the play drivers (only Gaudreau and Backlund can carry the puck, gain the blue with possession and create).
The team needs more players like this.
|