Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJ1532
I disagree there slightly. I get that face-offs are important, but I can't imagine many teams have started 3-on-3 OT, won the face off and scored without giving up possession.
Besides, we could switch it up and start a centre alongside Gaudreau to take the face off. We don't have to start 2 D and 1 forward.
Why do so many want to change what is working so well? I don't get it.
If it aint broke....don't fix it.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to transplant99 For This Useful Post:
Yeah, I'm not sure how anyone can question Bob's OT strategy this season. In fact, I suspect most teams will be copying it by the end of the season.
I was watching the Vancouver-Dallas OT last week and it really stood out to me why the Canucks are so bad in OT: They treat it like it's 5-on-5 with 2 fewer players on the ice, rather than treating it as its own beast.
The Flames have gone to OT 9 times this season, they've won 6 in the five minutes of OT; they've lost once in OT; and 2 have gone to a shootout. Johnny has 5 points in OT, so I don't think you can say that Bob's strategy is holding him back.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
Last edited by getbak; 12-05-2015 at 05:01 PM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
I disagree there slightly. I get that face-offs are important, but I can't imagine many teams have started 3-on-3 OT, won the face off and scored without giving up possession.
Besides, we could switch it up and start a centre alongside Gaudreau to take the face off. We don't have to start 2 D and 1 forward.
But would you want to waste a shift defending if you don't win that first face-off?
I think the point of having Mony - Gio - Brodie to start is if we don't win that draw (which is a better than 50% chance), they can defend quite well AND still have a good chance of going the other way with those 3. Then if after 30 secs we have possession you throw Johnny over the board and switch up Hamilton and Wideman for all out offense. If no possession, throw out Backs.
There's quite a lot of strategy in terms of line changes in 3-on-3 depending which way the puck is going. You don't really want Johnny to spend too much time in his own zone.
Yeah, I'm not sure how anyone can question Bob's OT strategy this season. In fact, I suspect most teams will be copying it by the end of the season.
I was watching the Vancouver-Dallas OT last week and it really stood out to me why the Canucks are so bad in OT: They treat it like it's 5-on-5 with 2 fewer players on the ice, rather than treating it as its own beast.
The Flames have gone to OT 9 times this season, they've won 6 in the five minutes of OT; they've lost once in OT; and 2 have gone to a shootout. Johnny has 5 points in OT, so I don't think you can say that Bob's strategy is holding him back.
Johnny himself said that he has played a lot of 3 on 3 in the past so maybe he has input in some of the formations. The way the split the D with him coming up the middle had him all alone in the slot. I imagine it is easier for the coaches to work with fewer set of guys for 3 on 3 because some plays are structured. The fact we need wins badly gets Johnny on the ice as much as possible, Bennett will get his turn but I think its more due to the coaches process on 3 on 3.
Yeah, I'm not sure how anyone can question Bob's OT strategy this season. In fact, I suspect most teams will be copying it by the end of the season.
I was watching the Vancouver-Dallas OT last week and it really stood out to me why the Canucks are so bad in OT: They treat it like it's 5-on-5 with 2 fewer players on the ice, rather than treating it as its own beast.
The Flames have gone to OT 9 times this season, they've won 6 in the five minutes of OT; they've lost once in OT; and 2 have gone to a shootout. Johnny has 5 points in OT, so I don't think you can say that Bob's strategy is holding him back.
I think 3/4 is coaching, but Hartley is blessed with the personnel on the roster.
Monahan is clutch, and is a very solid 2-way player.
Gaudreau - well, his points in 3 on 3 speaks to that enough.
The HUGE advantage that the Flames have is in their defence.
Brodie - having a guy skate like that and being that good of a 2-way player.
Giordano - tough start to the season, but he has been superb in the 3 on 3 too.
Hamilton - another guy with really good skating ability and passing/shooting skills.
Even Russel and Wideman are both very capable of playing 2-way games. They can both skate with the puck, have good shots, can make good passes and have enough IQ to know what to do out there.
I was expecting Vancouver to be really good at 3 on 3, thinking the Sedins with their best 2-way defencemen. However, that would probably be Tanev (who I do think is decent), but he falls very short of the top 3 options the Flames have, and arguable (at best - I will say worse) than Russel and Wideman as 2-way, puck-carrying defencemen.
Wideman and Russel have both had their struggles this season (as Giordano has), but they are very good options to have on the 3on3.
The top 5 D on this team can all do a decent job of being forwards on the rush, and they are all (for the most part) smart and experienced enough to know when to retreat and play defence. Explains why Vancouver is so terrible at 3on3.
I haven't looked, but I will bet that Ottawa (Karlsson), Arizona (OEL), Nashville (take your pick) etc., are all pretty good at 3on3. Flames just have an embarrassment of riches in having so many puck-movers, and having a clutch Monahan and a clutch Gaudreau to send over the boards when they want. Again, without looking, I would guess Edmonton is terrible at 3on3, not because they don't lack for offensive forwards, but because they lack defencemen. I could be wrong, and everything I wrote may indeed be garbage
Hartley has in my opinion done a very good job of maximizing these assets. Just wait until Bennett starts producing a bit more and maturing his defensive game a bit, and he will be a very deadly option as well.
The Following User Says Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post:
A faceoff in OT is absolutely critical. Much more so than in regulation. Getting possession to start can be the difference between winning and losing the game.
I was all set to absolutely rail against this post because I think faceoffs are wildly overrated but I discovered something interesting.
In the broader sense, you're wrong: faceoffs are no more critical in OT than at any other time of the game. Of the 60 games that have been decided in OT this year, the team that has won the game has a 46.67% rate on the faceoff immediately preceding the goal. Relatively small sample size, but I'm willing to bet that over time it's not going to move all that much. The difference is small enough that I'll consider it noise and be content in my continuing conviction that winning faceoffs is overrated.
However, in the specific case of the Flames this season, we're 100% on the faceoff immediately preceding the goal in OT games we win, and we lost the faceoff before the goal against Arizona in the game we lost.
In fact, if you remove the Flames, game-winning teams drop to 42.59% on the faceoff before the goal.
The Flames' sample size is even smaller, and likely noise at this point. But it's interesting and doesn't allow me to entirely refute your point.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to driveway For This Useful Post:
I haven't looked, but I will bet that Ottawa (Karlsson), Arizona (OEL), Nashville (take your pick) etc., are all pretty good at 3on3. Flames just have an embarrassment of riches in having so many puck-movers, and having a clutch Monahan and a clutch Gaudreau to send over the boards when they want. Again, without looking, I would guess Edmonton is terrible at 3on3, not because they don't lack for offensive forwards, but because they lack defencemen. I could be wrong, and everything I wrote may indeed be garbage
It's still a small sample size, so I wouldn't say it's garbage, but for now Ottawa and Nashville are definitely not dominating OT, and Edmonton hasn't been bad in it...
OTT - OT: 2W/2L -- 6 SO
ARI - OT: 2W/1L -- 0 SO
NSH - OT: 0W/3L -- 3 SO
EDM - OT: 3W/2L -- 2 SO
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The Following User Says Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
I'm not a class 5 lip reader, but seems to me that exchange finished with "... little b*tch"
I am deaf in real life Became deaf overnight a few years ago I think the last thing I heard was at a Detroit, Calgary game back in 1984. Anyways I double checked "I have been wrong before" I still think he says "I might have to punch you." I think being from Boston there is chance off ice they are friends and he is joking with him.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to DazzlinDino For This Useful Post:
It's mystifying a few people have tried to argue that faceoffs aren't critical in OT.
You don't need to make a statistical case to point to. It's black and white. Possession kills in 3 on 3, and if you give it up off the bat, it's a bad thing. If you have it, it's a good thing.
On average, how many faceoffs are there 3-on-3 OT? Maybe two or three at the most?
Most times I've watched it's been back and forth with not a lot of stoppages in play. Faceoffs are important but being able to gain and hold puck possession long enough to generate high quality scoring chances is the key IMO.
Although now that I think of it, Johnny's goals have all come off of turnovers (VAN and CHI in the offensive zone, and Friday was in the defensive zone leading to an odd man rush).
Having Monahan out on one shift and Gaudreau the next is not a bad thing.
Backlund was on twice as well. Wasn't feeling that, that's for sure.
As for the penalty, probably should've been Monahan in the box. Started with him shoving Marchand as they were both changing, then as Marchand was going off, Gaudreau tapped him with the stick, and Marchand took a stride toward the Flames bench and lightly poked Gaudreau right between the numbers, Marchands stick in the Flames bench. He was then beaking at JG on the skate to the penalty box, the linesman having to restrain Marchand.
Like Johnny cares about Marchand. He hit Byfuglien, how many players have the physical edge on Byfuglien? Johnny is a beast, he probably smiles at him knowing Marchand will never catch him.
The fact Johnny didn't disappear but elevated his game after that altercation with Marchand is really telling about his character and intestinal fortitude. Part of Marchand's schtick is to try and intimidate skilled players to knock them off their game.
__________________
The Delhi police have announced the formation of a crack team dedicated to nabbing the elusive 'Monkey Man' and offered a reward for his -- or its -- capture.
Became deaf overnight a few years ago I think the last thing I heard was at a Detroit, Calgary game back in 1984. Anyways I double checked "I have been wrong before" 
I still think he says "I might have to punch you." I think being from Boston there is chance off ice they are friends and he is joking with him.
