View Single Post
03-08-2011, 12:11 PM
dialed in your mom
etherialone's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Ether
Country: United Nations
Posts: 12,990
vCash: 500
1. The 1975 Fliers had one of the worst power plays of all time but won the cup. The Oilers were so good 4 on 4 that the league changed the rules. Two opposite examples but in the past 15 years I can't think of any team that has won the cup with a terrible PP.

2. It depends on your specific definition of where the cycle fits in with every teams system. All teams use the cycle as a part of its offencive system. Unlike ours they don't typically rely on it almost exclusively to the point of where it becomes the point of the play and not a part of it. Cycling is a critical part of creating offence but it can become way to big a part of your offence like in our case in my opinion.

3. Leaving two of our top six players off of the list sort of stalls the question imo. Smyth is very slow and as such he causes the other players on his line (when he plays in our top 6) to do different things to buy time that will allow him to enter the play. I think that Penner is a comparable skater to the rest.

But I will say that I agree, we have the horses all through our line up.

4. I am split on 4. I think that either reason can be used to support either argument and that both are equally plausible.

5. Yes, poor or inefficient coaching.

6. Like our D, our goaltending is solid. That is to say that our defencemen are solid and at times our team defence is solid as well but it is so typically at the expense of any offencive play.

7. Both and more in my opinion. The players are doing what they are told but like anything in life when you come up against a system that doesn't support any visible means of success it becomes more and more difficult to find reasons to continue giving your best performance in trying to accomplish the goal that would be the cause of said system.

Breaking it down for myself in hockey terms I would say that there are very few things more frustrating than to be giving your all to something that simply doesn't work. When I first played in Bantams I was on a terrible team. I mean truly terrible but I was excited just to get the chance to be on the team so I played really hard. I was one of 4 new players that were brought in to an established line up for the sole purpose of changing attitudes.

At first just through sheer enthusiasm we started turning things around for the team. I am was a defenceman and my 3 new team mates were forwards and between us we went out and played the way that we knew how and had instant success.

After each period and after each game we began being "corrected" for our loose style of play and how while we were having success that eventually it would catch up to us and we will ruin the teams chances to winning it all.

Within about a month we were dead eyed zombies like the rest of my team mates and while we all gave it everything we had we just kept losing and fighting. We became a team nobody wanted to play because we fought an awful lot and that isn't hockey no matter how fun it is. (fighting imo is a critical part of the game but if your system is based on fighting that isn't right to me).

At the end of the season the coach was fired and I was sent to a different team. My former team made it through the second round of the playoffs with their new coach. I credit this mostly to the sheer happiness that the players must have felt with the new found freedom to play the game in a more effective manner.

The Penguins fired their coach and went on to success. There are dozens of examples where removing a coach and his system can be the difference between the cup and never lifting it. There are more examples of the same thing failing but, I would rather address our teams problems as soon as they are identified rather than wait and let it make for a bad locker room.

That isn't to say that each situation shouldn't be examined at the length and depth that it would warrant, it just means that I am not for us adopting the attitude of waiting until the offseason every year to address our problems.

I think that where we are today that we still have a couple of areas of need and as such are still putting everything together for what it takes to win the cup and as such having the stability of a coach and his system up to this point has been exceptionally beneficial.

However, the time to act at changing our coaching staff in my opinion is as soon as we find our replacement. If Tippet were fired today I would drop everything and be as close to DL as physically possible petitioning him to hire him.

There are a couple of other coaches who I would be equally happy for us to hire today. That's based on what I see of how DL is building a cup. DL likely see's things completely differently and likely has all of this sorted out already.

Our current coaching staff has done allot of good but they aren't the right group imo to get us the cup. I want to be very very wrong but that is how I see it.

We need a speed/sniper.

We need a D coach who allows a little bit more of green light for our uber talented pmds and doesn't treat them as if they don't have the skill to cover. At this stage they will never learn how or when to utilize their unique talents unless they are given the support and opportunity to do so.

That is the major difference between our current mediocre at best D coach and our last one.

Oh well.

etherialone is offline   Reply With Quote