Quote:
Originally Posted by gvitaly
Here are some things I find better implemented this year compared to last:
1. There are less odd man rushes against, especially 2 on 1s.
2. The team plays much faster this year.
3. Huska rides the top guys, and/or whomever is going when we need a comeback. Compared to Sutter rolling 4 lines. This resulted in leading the NHL in comeback wins in the 3rd.
4. The opposition can't use the man on man D against us by making our D skate all the way to the blue-line, and then quickly passing the puck towards the net.
5. The zone defense really limits east to west passes through the slot.
6. There seem to be less deflections in front of the net.
7. The forwards are more effective in involving the D in the offense, by cycling the puck and finding the open man.
8. The overall shot selection in the O-zone is better. There's more creativity in the offense than simply shooting it from the outside.
9. The team actually practiced 3 on 3, and has 4 OT wins this season as a result.
10. This team's transition game is improved, largely thanks to the before mentioned speed, and better passing right after entering the zone.
I didn't check the numbers on them, I'm simply relying on my eye test, but all in all it's not all bad. I think that the 3rd pairing combined with the 4th line really hurt us in games.
It looked like we could win against any team on any given night before Pospisil went down, which in itself was a lot of fun for me as a fan. Then we combine it with the energy the kids bring, the comeback wins, the increase in pretty goals, and the fast-paced game to get a much more entertaining product(from my perspective) than last year under Sutter.
|
Thanks for taking the time to respond. My thoughts:
1. Not sure how true this is, but as of late I think the team has a real issue with giving up breakaways.
2. I disagree the team plays faster, with the exception of the breakout. Under Huska they move the puck up ice much faster with less regrouping and D to D passing. Of course this can be problematic when we play a hard forechecking team and our forwards are too far ahead of the D to offer support or clean outlets. I feel like we are slowing in all aspects of pressuring he other team when they have the puck.
3. Agree Huska plays the fourth line less than Sutter did, but I think he plays the 3rd d pairing the same amount, including with the 4th line frequently, which is an adventure.
4. Under man to man coverage a forward drops down to cover for the d-man going high, so it's not like this opens up a huge space...if done properly and if your players are quick enough (i.e not Lucic).
5. Fully agree. Feels like way fewer East/Wear passed in our end.
6. Don't have a feeling about this one way or another.
7. I think the D have more of a green light to come down low in the offensive zone, but Sutter used his D to generate shot volume, so they were quite involved.
8. I strongly disagree here. I agree think the forwards are holding onto the puck longer, and focused more on being creative, but they still don't regularly have players go to centre of the ice and try to get them the puck in good shooting positions. This is especially noticeable on the powerplay where we almost never pass the puck down low to a player in the bumper position and then into the slot. Offense is 100% driven by getting the puck to the high forward, usually from the d-man to skate in a take a peripheral shot through traffic.
9.100% agree. Not practicing 3 on 3 was one of the bizarre choices Sutter seemed to be making more and more frequently.
10. I find our transition is very hit or miss his year, and that we really struggle against aggressive forechecking teams. We rely very heavily on he defense to skate the puck and make good first pass. If they are being heavily forechecked and don't have an easy outlet to a forward things get messy. I also find we rely heavily on jamming the puck up the strong side board to try and simply chip the puck out instead of reversing the puck. This seems to be a conscious decision to favour quick outlets with a higher chance of turning the puck over vs. slower, more controlled outlets. I hink Huska needs to adjust our breakouts based on the team we are playing, and I don't think he does it.
I too enjoy watching young guys come in and bring something fresh to he team. But saying last year was not fun...i the Flames had even close to league average goaltending they would have been a 100 point team and we would have all loved it. But it is fair to say Sutters system is not fun at all when you lose, whereas Huska's losses have more in game excitement.
In the end W's are the goal, and Sutter's got quite a few more of them (assuming we finish off the year around .500). In he end I wanted Sutter gone, but t was not because of his system, it was other things he was doing.
