Quote:
Originally Posted by timbit
Yes, coaches know stuff.
They know that it is an act and react game. The team that makes the best decisions usually wins.
Eye contact, Receiving angles, width and depth, close support, somebody takes your ice you take theirs, staying underneath the puck, on ice talk etc...which are all taught in junior and younger ages, supposing that it is a good program determine breakout success The teams who are skilled enough , smart enough, who understand and thrive on these concepts and principles, are capable of ...and excel at breaking out of their own end at the NHL level.
The coaches, of course, reinforce these concepts and principles.
The defending team will 4v , aggressively, if it is possible to limit time . (2-1-2, 2-2-1) with D actively pinching. Oft times you will see the pressured D use a bump pass to the front of the net(support net D or C)
Passively, to take away space, if they are unable to be aggressive .(1-3-1, 1-2-2)
The players may , at times, use the stretch pass to back off pinching and or unaware D.
With the speed of the game, players need to work to be available and have awareness of where there teammates are....
The players without the puck make a huge impact on the success or failure of breakout situations.
It’s not Xs and Os....it’s simple concepts and principles and making sure you’ve done the preparatory work before the game to assure you are mentally ready, sharp and committed to do things right...with speed.
Rarely is the game static. Smart movement by skilled players with superior execution allows clean and good to great OZ exits.
Yes, there are very infrequent controlled breakouts....on shift changes ...as well as PP breakouts.
|
Great stuff timbit, and always appreciated. Some questions on your observations and thoughts on the coaching we've seen to date.
A big part of coaching is also game planning and preparation, yes? Does this team look like it is prepared to deal with the systems or strategies the other teams employ? If there is one weakness its that this team looks like a collective herd of deer in headlights the second the puck is dropped and not prepared for the defensive or offensive habits the other team relies upon. I appreciate individual preparation to execute their assigned responsibilities, but this team looks like they have not been given any game plan or expectations of what the other team may or may not do.
Systems are also the purview of the coaching staff, yes? Players are not given the latitude to sway from the system and freelance as they cause breakdowns and leave their team mates hanging. The players follow the system or they are disciplined. So when the players are getting their heads caved in and checked into submission using the same break out, should the coaching staff not have them prepared to use a different scheme? Should the coaching staff not make immediate adjustments when the team is hemmed into their own end for multiple shifts?
Sticking with the idea of systemic play, the players move the puck in ways that follow the system as everyone is on that same page, yes? So when the team displays certain behaviors in a very consistent way are we not to assume this is part of the overall systemic approach the coaching staff have drilled the players to employ?
You stated the players are supposed to do things at speed and that Ward believes in quick transition. I believe the players believe in this too, but it appears the first move of the puck is always against the grain and is designed to slow the play down. The defense will routinely pass back and forth between themselves to slow the play to snail's pace and give the opposition a chance to set up their defensive structure. This seems counter to the transition game. Now, this is a consistent behavior which is usually indicative of a team complying with the system, no? Is this not playing to the weakness of the Flames and to the strength of the opposition?
I do like how you explained that players are to use the open ice created by [layer and puck movement. Do you see this as the way the Flames are playing? Do you see this as part of their system? It seems to me they are content to allow the opposition to clog the neutral zone, stand up at the blueline, and force the Flames to use the open ice, which they obviously are not doing. This is consistent from line-to-line. So it this not another example of a systemic approach and a failure of that system?
I'll happily pin it on players when they make stupid plays, like skating into coverage or moving into the same space as one of their team mates, but it appears they are being told to attack in a given manner and there is little freedom to stray from that flawed plan. The solution seems to be for them to just work harder rather than working smarter and trying to create open ice. It seems the freedom to create is not there?