Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM
My issue with Ward is mainly about getting his players to buy in. While one style or another may suit a particular player more, this team doesn’t really have one style of player. It’s not a team with horses to run and gun, but aside from that I think they could play any style. So I really don’t think any systems should inherently have more or less success (though I certainly don’t disagree he has a passive defensive system). I don’t think his offence is particularly exciting but that’s not his job.
But whatever his offensive and defensive systems are they would work better if the players executed them , and they are not - through focus, effort, unwillingness or whatever reason. Some have - I’d say Monahan has tried to change his play. Other’s haven’t - Tkachuk for example. And at the end of the day, while each player has a responsibility to do what he’s asked, the buck stops at Ward when they don’t.
I do think it’s funny when you get people calling for stretch passes when they hated them when Hartley was here, or saying Ward should be tough, but then say “I didn’t mean at Bennett”. Or when they complain the play is too conservative and then complain when passes up ice are blocked or intercepted.
|
No team has one style of player. However, most teams (or at least, many) have more success with, and are more comfortable with, one style over another.
Every team has to be able to play in all types of situations, but the idea is to impose your style on the game as much as you can.
And this iteration of the Flames have the most success with up-tempo, transitional hockey, and the least amount of success with tactical, 50/50 hockey.
Again, no team can dictate the style all of the time, and it doesn't mean you don't have to be able to play other styles. The NHL is VERY competitive, and the difference between winning and losing is very small. A 60% success rate puts you among the contending teams.
One of the more common complaints about Ward is the constant chipping it out and chipping it in. No coach is ever going to tell their team to do that all the time. Fast transition, and puck possession, are always preferred, if possible. The difference, from team to team, is: where is the line?
How quick are you to pull back, and play defensively?
How much are you focusing on playing safe?
And while none of us are in the room (or are NHL coaches), there is mounting evidence to support the view that this team looks for the safe play much of the time. It was how they played against Colorado, and it has permeated their play consistently ever since.
The more they struggle, the more they pull back to safe hockey. Which completely contradicts their makeup. From Hartley to Gulutzan to Peters to Ward, they have shown they are at their best with an uptempo game, and struggle the most with board battles, structure, and 50/50 hockey. Yet we see more and more of the latter. and the inevitable struggles with it are followed by the predictable calls for "attention to detail", "working harder", "better execution", and so on.
Ward seems incapable of pulling the right levers.
But I think it goes deeper than that. I have been a big supporter of Treliving for a long time - he does a lot of things the right way. But there seems to be a disconnect between the way the team is being built, and the way it is being run. I think the coach is a big problem here, but when the coach continues to be a big problem, it begs the next question.