HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Nashville Predators (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=33)
-   -   Thoughts/Frustrations from the Vancouver Game (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=25943)

gopreds98 11-06-2003 09:30 AM

Thoughts/Frustrations from the Vancouver Game
 
I have to say I was really frustrated with our performance last night. It's not that I don't feel like we put out the effort, but rather that I thought it was misdirected for most of the game.

Here's my beef: we're a young team, so having ups and downs is natural and to be expected. But one of the things that I think is really important when you have a young team (or really any team for that matter) is establishing your identity. I thought at the beginning of the season, we decided to establish our identity as a tough, gritty checking team, not afraid to back down. And I as recall, we've done REALLY well when we play that way. So what the heck was going on last night? Did we even finish a check in the first two periods? I can't remember one. I don't remember us getting the least bit physical until the 10 minute mark of the third period! And how stupid is that? The minute we start getting physical, Vancouver begins a steady stream into the penalty box. Imagine if we'd been doing that to them all night. I think the final score would have been a lot different.

Among my friends, I'm probably Barry Trotz's biggest fan. I think he's a great guy and a good coach. But after watching last night, and Barry's comments after the Dallas game of how he liked that we weren't just physical, I'm starting to think that maybe we do need a coaching change. Someone who can come in and forge an identity with these players. Someone to take the reins off Hartnell and the others and them out there mucking it up full steam all the time. This flip flopping between gritty vs. chess-like defense vs. quasi-skill team is confusing, and I don't think it's helping the development of our young players.

Rant over.

Enoch 11-06-2003 09:44 AM

I thought we played good in the first two periods. We dominated the game up to that point. Honestly, I think the officiating took us out of the game in the 3rd. Sure, they were penalties, but IMO they were mighty weak.

Oh well ;/.

gopreds98 11-06-2003 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch
I thought we played good in the first two periods. We dominated the game up to that point. Honestly, I think the officiating took us out of the game in the 3rd. Sure, they were penalties, but IMO they were mighty weak.

Oh well ;/.

Dominated in the first two periods? I don't think so. We were fortunate that Hartnell's unscreened shot beat Hedberg. And then we picked up a nice pp goal. But I don't feel that we dominated at all. If anything, it might just have been that Vancouver seemed to be playing at half power.

And I guess my frustration is this: it's true that we led by one goal for a great deal of the first and second periods. And it's like Trotz's attitude must have been, well, we're ahead, so we don't have to play a physical game. Then, when we fall behind, all of a sudden, time to play our game boys. I just don't care for that philosophy.

PredDave 11-06-2003 10:39 AM

I don't think we played all that bad with exception to finishing off a play. We still don't seem to know how to bury the puck when the net is empty or when the goalie is out of position.

Vancouver was practically giving us the game early on... honestly, we could have been up 5 - 1 after two periods. We just don't know how to consistently score. Once Vancouver woke up in the third, we were toast. Had they played a true Canuck-style game from start to finish, we would have lost 10 - 2. Oh well, better luck friday night!

Enoch 11-06-2003 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopreds98
Dominated in the first two periods? I don't think so. We were fortunate that Hartnell's unscreened shot beat Hedberg. And then we picked up a nice pp goal. But I don't feel that we dominated at all. If anything, it might just have been that Vancouver seemed to be playing at half power.

And I guess my frustration is this: it's true that we led by one goal for a great deal of the first and second periods. And it's like Trotz's attitude must have been, well, we're ahead, so we don't have to play a physical game. Then, when we fall behind, all of a sudden, time to play our game boys. I just don't care for that philosophy.

What I mean by dominated is we outshot, outchanced, and IMO played better hockey. We had quite a few great scoring oppurtunities that we failed to convert on. Your right, we weren't nearly physical enough as a team :(

Maybe I should have used played better, rather than dominate.

Jarnberg 11-06-2003 02:58 PM

I'm not gonna panic, but if the team struggles for a while longer, I'd do something to shake the team up a bit.

Olaf 11-06-2003 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gopreds98
Dominated in the first two periods? I don't think so. We were fortunate that Hartnell's unscreened shot beat Hedberg. And then we picked up a nice pp goal. But I don't feel that we dominated at all. If anything, it might just have been that Vancouver seemed to be playing at half power.

And I guess my frustration is this: it's true that we led by one goal for a great deal of the first and second periods. And it's like Trotz's attitude must have been, well, we're ahead, so we don't have to play a physical game. Then, when we fall behind, all of a sudden, time to play our game boys. I just don't care for that philosophy.

Maybe he didn't want to wake Vancouver up with some chippy play. I thought the nucks looked dead early on.. but every chance they got...give them credit because they buried them. Questionable penalties or not, you can't allow a team like that opportunities. Whether is be by Vokoun making poor decisions with the puck, or taking a swipe at the hands while on the pk. Good teams make you pay for that crap. We couldn't make Hedberg pay for his mistake out of the net.

Mr. Canucklehead 11-06-2003 08:18 PM

Just weighing in here; I think you guys have a great thing going in Nashville, and I have great respect for the team you're building. Scott Walker is one of my favorite players, and you have one of the most underrated netminders in the league in Vokoun. Legwand, Upshall, Tootoo, Hartnell, Orszagh, Timmonen, Zidlicky...you guys have a very strong team coming up. And Vancouver was very lucky to walk out with a win the other night. VERY lucky.

Just wanted to say that.

~Canucklehead~

hipcheck85 11-07-2003 04:29 AM

Man PredDave and I are on the same page again. We need some finishers. We can't expect to win games when we don't bury the chances other teams are giving us.

darth5 11-07-2003 05:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hipcheck85
Man PredDave and I are on the same page again. We need some finishers. We can't expect to win games when we don't bury the chances other teams are giving us.

Count me in that group, too. They expeced Arkhi to step up and be that guy. It isn't happening now, for whatever reason. Let's make a move.

PredsMan 11-07-2003 05:57 AM

I'm on the same page with most of you, but let me bring this up:

I was thinking the same thing regarding our lack of physical play. It was absent until the 3rd period. It baffled me that Trotz kept Tootoo/Upshall/Mckenzie on the bench most of the night.

Then, in his post-game press conference, he said (paraphrase) " We were controlling the play in the first 2 periods, and were matching up well with them. When we went down 3-2 I started using Upshall's group more, they gave us a spark"

That's what I don't understand. Trotz has been preaching about setting the tone..being pro-active, instead of reactive...but yet he makes them do that.

This is really the first time I have thought that Trotz judgement was poor.

gopreds98 11-07-2003 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PredsMan
I'm on the same page with most of you, but let me bring this up:

I was thinking the same thing regarding our lack of physical play. It was absent until the 3rd period. It baffled me that Trotz kept Tootoo/Upshall/Mckenzie on the bench most of the night.

Then, in his post-game press conference, he said (paraphrase) " We were controlling the play in the first 2 periods, and were matching up well with them. When we went down 3-2 I started using Upshall's group more, they gave us a spark"

That's what I don't understand. Trotz has been preaching about setting the tone..being pro-active, instead of reactive...but yet he makes them do that.

This is really the first time I have thought that Trotz judgement was poor.


Thank you....that is exactly what I was feeling.

And I do give credit to Vancouver. They're a great team, and one of my favorite teams to watch in the league.

But I'm still of the opinion that if we brought in all these new players to add a more physical dimension, then we ought to be playing that way every night. The idea that we don't want to wake up Vancouver with chippy play didn't work out too well for us, did it? But the minute we started getting physical, they started retaliating and getting sent to the box. I think we're WAY better when we're physical, and so should always play that way. Plus, it's more fun to watch.

When you're a young team, consistency is always going to be a problem. But how can you improve that when the coach isn't even keeping a consistent team identity. (We won't even get into the consistency of linemates.)

darth5 11-07-2003 01:30 PM

I can go with that. It is a gamble, playing chippy eery night. But if that is how your team is built, why wander from it?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:54 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.