The Deal With Geoff Ward

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by timbit

I don’t think we’re talking about the same guy.

Badger Bob? 1986?

[timbit]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Badger Bob? 1986?

He was very well liked and appreciated by most of the players.

Very positive and enthusiastic.

[looooob]

Originally Posted by timbit

He was very well liked and appreciated by most of the players.

Very positive and enthusiastic.

those were great times to be a fan too. honestly so fun. was not fun during the 11 game losing skid. I seem to remember a feller named Vernon helped moved that along


then came the Gary Suter game against the Oilers in April...need a 6 pointer from Valimaki soon

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by timbit

He was very well liked and appreciated by most of the players.

Very positive and enthusiastic.

The vets - Lanny and Pepper in particular - apparently absolutely did not like him personally. The rumour is they cracked a bottle when he left. And while he was positive and enthusiastic about hockey, he was single minded and kind of serious at the same time - he didn't appreciate jokes by the guys that detracted from his point). And he was tough on them about the way he wanted them to play. I think, in a way, he was too bubbly and nerdy for their liking. Some of them found his methods a little weird (like dressing a black kid in an oilers uni for practice so they’d get confident about scoring on Fuhr) . Now, of course, you won’t find that in any of those guys’ interviews. And I think they legit respected his coaching.

I think he softened a bit in Pittsburgh.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

This is wrong IMO. The breakouts are coached and CGY is going strong side of the ice and up the boards. It is problematic. They have to open up the break out and be more creative.

Good teams look flawless and effortless when breaking out and CGY look rushed and in some cases paniced (Leivo going up the right - head down put a short pass behind the centre. The answer is not Leivo is a bad player it's just too concentrated on one side players feel pressure). Many times it looks forced. It's easy to defend against that.

TOR in the latter part of game was able to easily breakout against CGY forecheck because they had 4 guys go back to retrieve (they are not clogging neutral zone). They are coached like that. TOR play compact and have confidence to make those short passes.

Now TOR is a confident team and expect to win. CGY got up and perhaps feeling a little fragile were kind of defensive so that may have factored in.

Not trying to take anything away from win last night but CGY breakout looks way different than TOR and of course skill is involved but it is coaching. If you watch how they move it is coaching, the routes etc. Once it's in the offensive zone yeah read and react (but coaching too).

How do you get creative when the opposition is on top of you the second you touch the puck? How can it possibly be more on the coach when the player has only has split seconds to react and make a play before he’s either hit or turns the puck over from pressure? These players don’t have time to think “what would the coach want me to do right now?” There aren’t many ways to be crazy here, they generally just have a small window of time to read and quickly react most of the time and I’m pretty sure an NHL coach like Ward, who has put decades into the game and who’s paid to only watch and think about hockey all day and everyday as his job, would probably know more then any of us armchair noobs about how to breakout of the zone.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

How do you get creative when the opposition is on top of you the second you touch the puck? How can it possibly be more on the coach when the player has only has split seconds to react and make a play before he’s either hit or turns the puck over from pressure? These players don’t have time to think “what would the coach want me to do right now?” There aren’t many ways to be crazy here, they generally just have a small window of time to read and quickly react most of the time and I’m pretty sure an NHL coach like Ward, who has put decades into the game and who’s paid to only watch and think about hockey all day and everyday as his job, would probably know more then any of us armchair noobs about how to breakout of the zone.

Dude, that’s the whole thing we have been talking about

As the player who gets the puck, you need to know where your teammates are expected to be

You hear commentators talking about play without the puck? That means something

If you are surprised by getting the puck and need to figure out where your buddies are, you should be in a beer league

Coaches actually do, you know, stuff.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Dude, that’s the whole thing we have been talking about

As the player who gets the puck, you need to know where your teammates are expected to be

You hear commentators talking about play without the puck? That means something

If you are surprised by getting the puck and need to figure out where your buddies are, you should be in a beer league

Coaches actually do, you know, stuff.

Yes and it has never really changed either, that’s my point. There really isn’t many more ways you can be “creative” here, the game has been played for over 100 years. Before you break out of your own zone, you were generally defending before hand, center helps out down low or protects the slot, watches his man. Wingers protect the points, drop down to cover once in a while and play along the boards for chips and retrievals. Even with dumps and chases from the defensive side, the defensemen have to deal with the pressure of a forecheck so their options are rather limited as well, so your breakouts should be limited as well.

There’s only so many ways you can make clean breakouts from these structures. The best teams probably have several players who can deal with pressure and make good individual plays to break up forechecks or cycles and etc to help break out cleaner, but I don’t think this is a Flames’ strength.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

How do you get creative when the opposition is on top of you the second you touch the puck? How can it possibly be more on the coach when the player has only has split seconds to react and make a play before he’s either hit or turns the puck over from pressure? These players don’t have time to think “what would the coach want me to do right now?” There aren’t many ways to be crazy here, they generally just have a small window of time to read and quickly react most of the time and I’m pretty sure an NHL coach like Ward, who has put decades into the game and who’s paid to only watch and think about hockey all day and everyday as his job, would probably know more then any of us armchair noobs about how to breakout of the zone.

Why is it the opposition on top of you so quickly? Are you just using half the ice? Yes that is easy to defend if you are just going up the wall. Pull up, use the weak side d to relieve pressure and get going up ice.

[Enoch Root]

Yeah, that's the whole fricking point: WHY is the opposition on top of them the second they have the puck?

Too predictable.

[GioforPM]

Well, any breakout needs options to deal with coverage, because no options = too predictable. And options means you need to read and react (the whole point of the bump back on a power play). And time to read and react needs execution.

The Flames were turning the puck up ice a lot quicker last game. I was watching for the D to D passes (excluding line changes) and there were not very many. A couple times I wish they had reset instead of pushing ahead with their initial plan. Especially early on there was a lot more middle of the ice.

Their breakout was more conservative protecting a lead, but that’s OK.

ETA - if you’re using weak side D to outlet in the case of pressure, you’d better execute that longer pass. It’s more dangerous to screw up.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

.

ETA - if you’re using weak side D to outlet in the case of pressure, you’d better execute that longer pass. It’s more dangerous to screw up.

Has to be hard and crisp for sure but this is the NHL and you see that all the time with good teams.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Dude, that’s the whole thing we have been talking about

As the player who gets the puck, you need to know where your teammates are expected to be

You hear commentators talking about play without the puck? That means something

If you are surprised by getting the puck and need to figure out where your buddies are, you should be in a beer league

Coaches actually do, you know, stuff.

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.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Why is it the opposition on top of you so quickly? Are you just using half the ice? Yes that is easy to defend if you are just going up the wall. Pull up, use the weak side d to relieve pressure and get going up ice.

Well as I’ve already established before, I don’t think the Flames are a very quick team, but it’s also compounded by the team being overly aggressive on the forecheck, slow on the backcheck, so the middle of the ice is wide open for teams to generate massive speed through the neutral zone. So the defensemen have to back up, give up the blue line and are instantly being pressured to make bad passes, bad clears, bad breakouts and yes, that leads to turnovers.

I don’t know what the appetite for this fanbase to start seeing more of the dreaded neutral zone trap, but for me, teams are using it effectively against the Flames so I have no problem giving it right back. Yeah games won’t be as exciting I guess, but I’d rather take a boring win then an infuriating loss.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Well, any breakout needs options to deal with coverage, because no options = too predictable. And options means you need to read and react (the whole point of the bump back on a power play). And time to read and react needs execution.

The Flames were turning the puck up ice a lot quicker last game. I was watching for the D to D passes (excluding line changes) and there were not very many. A couple times I wish they had reset instead of pushing ahead with their initial plan. Especially early on there was a lot more middle of the ice.

Their breakout was more conservative protecting a lead, but that’s OK.

ETA - if you’re using weak side D to outlet in the case of pressure, you’d better execute that longer pass. It’s more dangerous to screw up.

I think the last game worked just fine because Toronto is not a trap heavy team. They didn’t clog the middle of the ice like the Jets did, or the Canucks did or even Dave Tippett. They play a more aggressive style like the Flames, but they have the elite skill and elite centers to really pull off this style. They’re also playing with extreme confidence. The Flames on the other hand don’t have the same talent and this team hasn’t been work hard this season. Most nights they’ve mailed it in and that’s a recipe for disaster when being they’re being over aggressive.

[DeluxeMoustache]

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.

I think Wardo got to this post

[Enoch Root]

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.

All true.

Simple question: do you believe the coach makes a difference?

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

All true.

Simple question: do you believe the coach makes a difference?

Yes, in motivating them and instilling in them the absolute need to take great pride in their physical and mental preparation and ...making sure they correctly employ in game mental resets when they are dealing poorly with negative energy or performance.

Obviously , also relating and reinforcing positive feedback on good performance and/or action(s).


Defining and providing solutions to counteract the strengths and weaknesses of the opposition.

Trying to get the right players on the ice, situationally.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

All true.

Simple question: do you believe the coach makes a difference?

I'm sure timbit does, but I have an addendum question:

Would the 2010 Blackhawks have won the Stanley Cup had they kept Denis Savard?

Would the 2012 Kings have won the Stanley Cup had they kept Terry Murray?

Would the 2015 Lightning have made the Stanley Cup Final had they kept Guy Boucher?

Would the 2016 Penguins have won the Stanley Cup had they kept Mike Johnston?

Would the 2017 Senators have made the ECF had they kept Dave Cameron?

Would the 2019 Blues have won the Stanley Cup had they kept Mike Yeo?

My addendum question is:

Was the success of all these teams, among others, uncorrelated to their head coach?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

All true.

Simple question: do you believe the coach makes a difference?

I think it mostly makes a difference on the motivation level. Match-up and line construction as well.

I agree with Classic_Sniper though. The strategies and methods are old and well rehearsed. If the players can't apply them and don't know when to use them, I see that more of a personnel issue. A coach shouldn't have to tell players to skate fast to gain zone entry. It's not Ward telling them to not do that.

This team is SLOOOOOOW though. Some things just don't work with an overall slow team. It's easy to look at teams that have fast players and say "do that", but if they are unable or unwilling, that is an issue.

They are dangerous once they are in the offensive zone and maintaining pressure, but getting there is the issue. They are forced to dump it in more than optimal and lack the grittiness for effective retrieval down the line-up. Basically they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

I also tend to agree with those who said that playing the same teams over and over has exposed the weaknesses. Things that worked before for certain players aren't anymore. The players are predictable and we have a few one-trick ponies. I think Ward is well aware of this, hence why he has blended lines so often, which is a normal strategy for a coach.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I think it mostly makes a difference on the motivation level. Match-up and line construction as well.

I agree with Classic_Sniper though. The strategies and methods are old and well rehearsed. If the players can't apply them and don't know when to use them, I see that more of a personnel issue. A coach shouldn't have to tell players to skate fast to gain zone entry. It's not Ward telling them to not do that.

This team is SLOOOOOOW though. Some things just don't work with an overall slow team. It's easy to look at teams that have fast players and say "do that", but if they are unable or unwilling, that is an issue.

They are dangerous once they are in the offensive zone and maintaining pressure, but getting there is the issue. They are forced to dump it in more than optimal and lack the grittiness for effective retrieval down the line-up. Basically they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

I also tend to agree with those who said that playing the same teams over and over has exposed the weaknesses. Things that worked before for certain players isn't anymore. The players are predictable and we have a few one-trick ponies. I think Ward is well aware of this, hence why he has blended lines so often, which is a normal strategy for a coach.

Some of read and react is getting drills down so they are second nature and I wonder if they have had enough time this year.