Quote:
Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache
Agree to disagree
Hartley got a full year overachievement out of a team with a weak roster. Built a system to suit the team, had an identity. Won a playoff round. And, oh, Hartley also has a cup.
Peters had a half good year of high octane hockey, played worse down the stretch. Made the playoffs with a very good roster, got out coached in the playoffs, and the next year couldn’t get the team playing anywhere near their potential
Both guys wore thin on their teams pretty quickly.
Much better? I’d be interested in why / how
|
Just my opinion ...
But to me I have to see a tactical change and then a lack of counter or at least the assumption of not having an answer to think someone was out coached.
The Flames backed in on their goaltender and had forwards were blowing the zone early and not backchecking hard enough to put pressure on Avalanche players coming with speed.
So yeah if Peters was fine with both then you are 100% right and he was out coached.
I just can't see that though.
NHL coaches almost to a man talk gap control and pressure points on the ice. When the Avalanche were taking advantage it only makes sense to me that his message would have been to stop backing in as defensemen and trust the forwards are coming. To the forwards you'd be insisting on that back pressure or else.
I think the team wigged out and couldn't trust themselves to do the right thing out of fear of Avalanche speed and looking silly.
As I said though ... just my opinion from a distance.