HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

System

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-09-2009, 02:04 PM
  #76
claude boivin lives
flat out spectacular
 
claude boivin lives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 2,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
For me it's as simple as just looking at:
1) The number of people you can actually see on your TV when we are set up to break out. Before it was at max 2 (typically both D). Now we see minimum 2, probably 3, and maybe even 4. This gives us support, passing options, and simpler passes.

2) The number of passes that are actually happening. Before it was literally one pass to get out of our zone, often times to get right to the red line. Now we were seeing 2-4 quick simple passes just to get out of our zone. It's safe, it's effective and when there is a mistake the support is there.
But, you see, that's my point. I'm saying that what you're describing was often the method under Stevens. Yes, I do think the stretch pass was utilized often, but they were still breaking out the way you're describing with plenty of regularity. The number of guys you could see on your screen was not "max 2" under Stevens...at least not with regularity. That's a perfect example of what I'm talking about when I say people greatly exaggerated the way breakouts were done when he was coach.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
Regarding the breakout...

The initial stage isn't very different (if at all) from what the Flyers were doing under Stevens this season. One or two short passes to get the puck to a player (usually the centre) moving with speed in the middle of the ice. Where the breakout has struggled this year with Stevens is in the neutral zone.

The puck support from the defensemen under Lavi is noticeable and has helped prevent rush-ending turnovers that were common under Stevens. Hopefully it continues, as I expect it will, given Lavi's desire to have defensemen move up ice with the forwards, as opposed to trailing behind them like we've seen in the past.
Here we go...yes, yes. This is something that can be pointed to as a significant change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Inebriator View Post
I'm noticing much better passing moving the puck through the neutral zone. Haven't quite been able to tell what if any change is helping in this area but we have seen less turned over pucks in transition the last 2 games
I think it's fair to give a lot of the credit for that to what CF88 is saying above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
I'll disagree here...the forwards are noticeably deeper with consistency in where they pick up the pass from the D (through a couple games). There's been less D behind net, D in the corner/along halfboards, and forwards somewhere at or beyond the blue line...or forwards just taking off up ice without the puck.

We've also had two forwards in close proximity to one another with greater regularity thus far, which allows the quick release pass with greater consistency when the first check comes.

Basically, they've paid better attention to the gap...which is giving the defense easier/better passes to make within the defensive zone, and also allowing the defense to keep up and be a presence as they move through the neutral zone.
Haha, that's what he said. Your first two paragraphs, as I've noted, I don't think there's been a significant change there. In the two games(I'm trying to just forget about the Caps cluster****), it could be said that there's been more of the forwards getting down low, and less of the stretch passes...but it's not like they're doing something they entirely weren't before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
You might have something there; that'd certainly help with the consistency of a successful breakout.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Inebriator View Post
Bartulis only played about 12 minutes last night, everyone else including Parent was at 18+. I hope lavi likes him and gets him involved just a little bit more in the future (although, we did have to kill a lot of penalties last night), as I think he has been flat out fantastic. You very very rarely spot him making a mistake, and his shot from the point is actually pretty good and seems like it makes it on net more so than a lot of our other guys.
I agree, enough can't be said about Bartulis at the moment. It's not like the guy is an all-star out there, but how many guys step into their first games and play with the steadiness and composure that he has brought. And I don't think there's any question he has more offense in him...we'll be seeing some nice assists and goals from him in the future for sure. He's definitely been the nicest surprise of the season for me.

It's funny, he reminds me of Pitkanen a little bit. Not so much in his exact style of play, but more physically...in his actual stature and skating style. Even the expression he often has on his face when you see him in between whistles or on the bench or something...reminds me of that sort of lifeless, uncaring, emotionless look that Joni often had. Haha.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleary84 View Post
The first 1.5 periods of the MTL game and also the game last night were prime examples, mostly last night, of how hard he wants the boys to work on making smart and efficient plays.
Good points, and to comment on this in particular....I'd just like to clarify that with the changes and all that, I'm really only speaking about the MTL and NYI games. That Caps game was too much of a cluster****...blame it on whoever you want, but it was a big ****ing mess that doesn't have much of a place in this discussion.

Also, I've seen some people suggest in other threads that we finally turned things around last night....that we played much better and/or differently than the previous two games. Granted, we've turned things around from the Caps game, but for the most part, we played great against MTL. That's the game where these changes became worthy of discussing. The first 10 minutes of that game in particular were a beautiful thing. I was watching that with a hugeass smile on my face...mainly, just because seeing a systemic change(in this case, the activation of the D) become suddenly so apparent was just cool to watch. Oh, and the fact that we were dominating the game largely as a result of that also furthered my enjoyment.

claude boivin lives is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:10 PM
  #77
DUHockey9
Registered User
 
DUHockey9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hogwarts
Country: United States
Posts: 4,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by claude boivin lives View Post
Haha, that's what he said. Your first two paragraphs, as I've noted, I don't think there's been a significant change there. In the two games(I'm trying to just forget about the Caps cluster****), it could be said that there's been more of the forwards getting down low, and less of the stretch passes...but it's not like they're doing something they entirely weren't before.
I'm sorry, I just disagree. Having less stretch passes and smaller gaps (read: forwards back supporting the D) is something entirely different. It's vastly different, and a huge improvement.

I'd also just like to clarify my comments about "max 2" and the like, are for what I'll call...."planned" breakouts. I'm not talking about a turnover in our end that we quickly pounce on and get out. I'm referring to having posession, setting up behind the net, and running a legitimate breakout, nothing ad hoc.

DUHockey9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:16 PM
  #78
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by claude boivin lives View Post
Haha, that's what he said.
Not really, as noted by the follow up:

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
You might have something there; that'd certainly help with the consistency of a successful breakout.
The gap getting fixed is a MASSIVE issue with the "initial stage" of the breakout. That was the single biggest consistent problem for this team under Stevens. The gap was always huge between the forwards and the defense and it made breakouts difficult; stifled the ability for the D to help in the transition game through the neutral zone.

It's a big deal that the gap appears to be something Laviolette is correcting. Needs to continue.

Quote:
Your first two paragraphs, as I've noted, I don't think there's been a significant change there. In the two games(I'm trying to just forget about the Caps cluster****), it could be said that there's been more of the forwards getting down low, and less of the stretch passes...but it's not like they're doing something they entirely weren't before.
Define "significant," because it isn't like they're reinventing how you play the sport of hockey. There really aren't "significant" differences between what teams do in general, it's just nuance that has important ramifications.

The forwards getting down lower in the zone...is a significant alteration in that it means our D has easier, higher % passes to make. The fact that there is another forward--in the defensive zone often!--looking for the pass, is significant as it means there's another easy, high % pass to make.

Less stretch passes is significant because those passes often lead to icing/turnovers. That being said, Laviolette isn't really going to be anti-long pass...we've had more than a few icings already on the attempt.

It's all a work in progress...but if you're looking for some vast reinvention of how you get from point A to point B, you're going to be disappointed. However, as is so often the case...the devil is in the detail, and that's where the problems existed...and appear to be getting fixed.

All that being said...if you haven't noticed how often our D were back there with the puck twiddling their thumbs waiting for someone to help them out and get open, come back...anything, I don't know what to tell you. Our forwards were almost always out of the screen when our defense had the puck behind the net looking for a set breakout...and if it worked out, it could really push the puck and challenge the opposing defense, but it also led to a lot of turnovers and disjointed rushes.


Last edited by Jester: 12-09-2009 at 02:21 PM.
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:17 PM
  #79
stealthelephant
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 89
vCash: 500
The breakout has had hot/cold spots.

But that doesn't make up the fact we were not generating any good scoring chances from sustained cycling. Too much perimeter work, not enough throwing the puck on net and crashing.

PP goals, SH goals, end rush goals and pretty passes, these are all nice and fun to watch. But when you go against a good team with a good goalie, garbage goals are what win you the game. We need to get better at that. We know we have talent on the team. But talent isn't what wins you championships. Grinding in the other teams offensive zone for 60 minutes throwing pucks on net and battling isn't glorious, but it works, and it works against every team in the league.

stealthelephant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:21 PM
  #80
HoverCarle*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to HoverCarle*
Quote:
Originally Posted by stealthelephant View Post
The breakout has had hot/cold spots.

But that doesn't make up the fact we were not generating any good scoring chances from sustained cycling. Too much perimeter work, not enough throwing the puck on net and crashing.

PP goals, SH goals, end rush goals and pretty passes, these are all nice and fun to watch. But when you go against a good team with a good goalie, garbage goals are what win you the game. We need to get better at that. We know we have talent on the team. But talent isn't what wins you championships. Grinding in the other teams offensive zone for 60 minutes throwing pucks on net and battling isn't glorious, but it works, and it works against every team in the league.
With Lavy we are driving the net more

HoverCarle* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:24 PM
  #81
claude boivin lives
flat out spectacular
 
claude boivin lives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 2,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
I'm sorry, I just disagree. Having less stretch passes and smaller gaps (read: forwards back supporting the D) is something entirely different. It's vastly different, and a huge improvement.
Yes, keeping the gap smaller as they move up the ice is notable, but that's not what I was speaking to...I was speaking to what you said which was specifically about always seeing only 2 people on your screen before and always seeing one pass to get out of our zone. There were plenty of times where there were more 3 or 4 people on the screen, and plenty of times where they used 2-4 quick, simple passes to exit the zone. It's off base to suggest that they were never doing that previously.

I think a lot of people seemed to just focus on the negatives that sometimes came with the stretch passes, and ignored the more regular breakouts that were conducted with regularity...not to mention that the stretch passes are more of a difference from the norm of traditional hockey and therefore jump out more at most people who have been watching the game a long time. Which is understandable, as the more normal breakouts are such a matter-of-fact part of the game, and conducted in such similar fashion by so many teams, that it's easy to not be thinking about them so much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
I'd also just like to clarify my comments about "max 2" and the like, are for what I'll call...."planned" breakouts. I'm not talking about a turnover in our end that we quickly pounce on and get out. I'm referring to having posession, setting up behind the net, and running a legitimate breakout, nothing ad hoc.
Yeah, I gotcha.

claude boivin lives is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:26 PM
  #82
DUHockey9
Registered User
 
DUHockey9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hogwarts
Country: United States
Posts: 4,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Not really, as noted by the follow up:



The gap getting fixed is a MASSIVE issue with the "initial stage" of the breakout. That was the single biggest consistent problem for this team under Stevens. The gap was always huge between the forwards and the defense and it made breakouts difficult; stifled the ability for the D to help in the transition game through the neutral zone.

It's a big deal that the gap appears to be something Laviolette is correcting. Needs to continue.



Define "significant," because it isn't like they're reinventing how you play the sport of hockey. There really aren't "significant" differences between what teams do in general, it's just nuance that has important ramifications.

The forwards getting down lower in the zone...is a significant alteration in that it means our D has easier, higher % passes to make. The fact that there is another forward--in the defensive zone often!--looking for the pass, is significant as it means there's another easy, high % pass to make.

Less stretch passes is significant because those passes often lead to icing/turnovers. That being said, Laviolette isn't really going to be anti-long pass...we've had more than a few icings already on the attempt.

It's all a work in progress...but if you're looking for some vast reinvention of how you get from point A to point B, you're going to be disappointed. However, as is so often the case...the devil is in the detail, and that's where the problems existed...and appear to be getting fixed.

All that being said...if you haven't noticed how often our D were back there with the puck twiddling their thumbs waiting for someone to help them out and get open, come back...anything, I don't know what to tell you. Our forwards were almost always out of the screen when our defense had the puck behind the net looking for a set breakout...and if it worked out, it could really push the puck and challenge the opposing defense, but it also led to a lot of turnovers and disjointed rushes.
I'm 100% with you on this one Jester. Word.

DUHockey9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:32 PM
  #83
stealthelephant
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 89
vCash: 500
I always thought the breakouts got brought up when the team wasn't scoring or generating offense well.

Cause honestly, its frustrating to see breakout passes miss their mark and having it go the other way.

But still, even on bad nights we were getting the puck into the offensive zone. But we just weren't doing anything with it. If the team could provide consistent cycling pressure and actually manufacture goals this way when oddman rushes, pretty passes and great shots aren't getting it done...the breakout wouldn't be brought up.

I don't care if you have the perfect breakout and you get into the zone every time. If you can't sustain pressure and score from it, its worthless. Our cycle has been a bad perimeter cycle most of the season. It showed last playoff season, when Fluery wasn't giving up goals on first shots and we couldn't create traffic and bang in garbage goals off the cycle. You need to manufacture ugly goals to win close games and beat good teams.

stealthelephant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:39 PM
  #84
claude boivin lives
flat out spectacular
 
claude boivin lives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 2,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Not really, as noted by the follow up:
Well, CF88 can correct me if I'm wrong, but to me, he basically said, in so many words, what you said. And I took his "you might have something there" as tongue-in-cheek, as he had already touched on that.

He said, "The puck support from the defensemen under Lavi is noticeable and has helped prevent rush-ending turnovers that were common under Stevens." You closed your point with, "Basically, they've paid better attention to the gap..."

Puck support from the defenseman as the team moves up the ice, and closing the gap...you're essentially both talking about the same thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Define "significant," because it isn't like they're reinventing how you play the sport of hockey. There really aren't "significant" differences between what teams do in general, it's just nuance that has important ramifications.
Exactly, and while they might previously have generally been using a stretch pass to a normal breakout 40/60....it might now become closer to 20/80. Obviously, that's very loose...but generally, it's pretty much the same stuff, now being done with a little more or less frequency. And again, let's note that we're dealing with quite a small sample here...let's see how things shake out over the next few weeks.

claude boivin lives is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:46 PM
  #85
CanadianFlyer88
Moderator
Knublin' PPs
 
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 14,080
vCash: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by claude boivin lives View Post
Well, CF88 can correct me if I'm wrong, but to me, he basically said, in so many words, what you said. And I took his "you might have something there" as tongue-in-cheek, as he had already touched on that.

He said, "The puck support from the defensemen under Lavi is noticeable and has helped prevent rush-ending turnovers that were common under Stevens." You closed your point with, "Basically, they've paid better attention to the gap..."

Puck support from the defenseman as the team moves up the ice, and closing the gap...you're essentially both talking about the same thing.
Nah, CBL, that wasn't a wry remark; I was talking about the gap control as the Flyers move the puck up ice. Jester noted that there has been better gap control in the defensive zone... seems like the same thing, but a small difference that can affect a game on a large scale.

CanadianFlyer88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:47 PM
  #86
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stealthelephant View Post
I always thought the breakouts got brought up when the team wasn't scoring or generating offense well.

Cause honestly, its frustrating to see breakout passes miss their mark and having it go the other way.

But still, even on bad nights we were getting the puck into the offensive zone. But we just weren't doing anything with it. If the team could provide consistent cycling pressure and actually manufacture goals this way when oddman rushes, pretty passes and great shots aren't getting it done...the breakout wouldn't be brought up.
As a team... breakouts have been better this year, which I attribute mostly to Pronger and the emergence of Carle. Last year Timonen was pretty much our only D that could consistently manage the passing required from the D--which meant we only had one pairing that could consistently get it done--and this year we had two (even with their defensive struggles, Timonen and Coburn have been getting the puck up and out of the zone (if you don't believe me, check their respective point totals).

In all honesty--and as one of Stevens harshest critics--I think he had done a decent job of improving some of the things that irked me so much the last couple of years. Not enough, mind you, but there was notable improvement in puck possession and the like (how much of that is the product of the Pronger acquisition is worthy of discussion). If the special teams hadn't fallen apart, we wouldn't be having a discussion about Laviolette's system at the moment.

Quote:
I don't care if you have the perfect breakout and you get into the zone every time. If you can't sustain pressure and score from it, its worthless. Our cycle has been a bad perimeter cycle most of the season. It showed last playoff season, when Fluery wasn't giving up goals on first shots and we couldn't create traffic and bang in garbage goals off the cycle. You need to manufacture ugly goals to win close games and beat good teams.
A good breakout can lead to a good rush...a good rush can lead to a good scoring chance. Everything flows from the breakout in hockey. Sure, once you're established in the zone you need to turn the playbook to another set of tasks, but breakouts are really important because breakouts are what create transition offense...and we have a group of scoring forwards that are built to excel in a transition game. Look at our forwards...they're fast across the board. You want them moving through the zone with speed and putting pressure on defenses to back up and give them the line...Briere's best seasons were in a transition-game offense, the vision of guys like Richards and Giroux is ideal for making plays at speed through the zone. Hell, all Carter does is play at speed (he needs to slow down half the time).

You're right, though, they need to get a handle on their offense within the zone...and become better at finishing at even strength. However, this is a team that has a bit more of a shooting/playmaking element than a crash the net dynamic. If they can get the transition game going, it should aid them in even strength play as it works towards this group of forwards strengths a bit more than going for the "garbage goal" does. You certainly need to be able to crash the net and jam it in, but I think we have a bit more of a front of the net team as opposed to corner-behind out to the front group.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:56 PM
  #87
claude boivin lives
flat out spectacular
 
claude boivin lives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 2,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
Nah, CBL, that wasn't a wry remark; I was talking about the gap control as the Flyers move the puck up ice. Jester noted that there has been better gap control in the defensive zone... seems like the same thing, but a small difference that can affect a game on a large scale.
Ha, ok...well, as I've noted, a big change hasn't been noticeable to me in the defensive zone in these few games, but I'll be sure to look out for it more. I still think the forwards often got back plenty low in the D-zone under Stevens, yet it went largely overlooked as people focused more on what was more out of the norm, which was at times forwards floating out and looking for the stretch pass.

claude boivin lives is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:56 PM
  #88
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by claude boivin lives View Post
Exactly, and while they might previously have generally been using a stretch pass to a normal breakout 40/60....it might now become closer to 20/80. Obviously, that's very loose...but generally, it's pretty much the same stuff, now being done with a little more or less frequency. And again, let's note that we're dealing with quite a small sample here...let's see how things shake out over the next few weeks.
Yes, but I think you're ignoring scale a bit. As I noted, everyone in the NHL has a lot in common in terms of "system." There are nuances to each that are important to understand...it isn't like a team playing the left-wing lock as opposed to a 1-2-2 looks dramatically different, but the reality is that there is significant nuance of importance to what is taking place there.

By lowering the gap between the forwards and defense you're creating higher % passing plays in your own zone...what does higher % passing plays mean? Better puck possession rates off that pass. And it all accumulates if you do it effectively.

Laviolette isn't a vast alteration to what we were doing previously...if he was, this probably wouldn't work. We couldn't bring in some crazed defensive coach right now and expect a smooth transition...

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 03:06 PM
  #89
CanadianFlyer88
Moderator
Knublin' PPs
 
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 14,080
vCash: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by claude boivin lives View Post
Ha, ok...well, as I've noted, a big change hasn't been noticeable to me in the defensive zone in these few games, but I'll be sure to look out for it more. I still think the forwards often got back plenty low in the D-zone under Stevens, yet it went largely overlooked as people focused more on what was more out of the norm, which was at times forwards floating out and looking for the stretch pass.
Exiting the zone didn't look any different to me last night (from earlier this season), either, but the breakout will be more consistent if the forwards are closing the gap for that first pass. If they are coming back to help the defensemen, they're not blasting out of the zone looking for a stretch pass each time... so that'd certainly be an improvement.

The problem they need to address going forward is consistency. The breakout was excellent, in my opinion, until the game in Los Angeles when they were completely shut down for the first two periods. Ever since that game, the breakout looked erratic and uncontrolled, much like it has for the past couple of seasons. The hope is that Lavi gets, and keeps, all the players on the same page so we don't see stretches where the five skaters look like five individuals as has been common with the Flyers.

CanadianFlyer88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 03:09 PM
  #90
stealthelephant
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 89
vCash: 500
I hate making these comparisons, cause the memory still makes me ill.

Our team is a skill team no doubt. But you look out west, teams that may have only 1 or 2 legit scoring threats, those teams live and die by tight checking team oriented defense, goaltending, and grinding out ugly goals.

The ducks and flames immediately come to mind when I think of teams that don't have the firepower up front to expect to score 2+ goals a night from sheer skill. They go into games knowing every goal they get will be battled for.

There just aren't many real power forwards left. Guys who can create havoc just by standing in front of the goal. So I don't buy that excuse that our team doesn't have the size to score goals that way. Plenty of teams with less then we have up front generate goals this way. Even Knuble was more about timing and positioning then sheer size. Hartnell is fairly strong in the crease, but his reputation means he gets crosschecked/held/interfered with little help from the refs.

I distinctly remember Crosby banging a goal in on us last year in the playoffs as he went down. And as much as I hate him and that he scored, his little 5'11" 195lb frame did what he had to do, and went to the front of the net and banged in a fugy goal.

I don't care if we don't have a 6'3" 235lb forward on every line. Somebody drive that net, take your crosschecks to the back, and create problems. Our "skill guys" cycle through the crease alot. They wait for the perfect setup. Sometimes that perfect setup isn't coming. Sometimes you just gotta sit down on the bench, look over and let your linemates know, that if you are cycling next shift, and no good openings are coming, that when they see you drive the net, you will be staying there setting up shop expecting a shot coming and you're going to do everything you can to screen/bang it in.

I just feel this team doesn't have that do or die mentality. That when they're down 1 goal they think they can make something pretty happen with skill. But really, sometimes you just gotta grind it out. I wasn't alive in the 70's, but I'm pretty sure thats how we got our first 2 cups.

stealthelephant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 03:10 PM
  #91
claude boivin lives
flat out spectacular
 
claude boivin lives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 2,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Yes, but I think you're ignoring scale a bit. As I noted, everyone in the NHL has a lot in common in terms of "system." There are nuances to each that are important to understand...it isn't like a team playing the left-wing lock as opposed to a 1-2-2 looks dramatically different, but the reality is that there is significant nuance of importance to what is taking place there.

By lowering the gap between the forwards and defense you're creating higher % passing plays in your own zone...what does higher % passing plays mean? Better puck possession rates off that pass. And it all accumulates if you do it effectively.

Laviolette isn't a vast alteration to what we were doing previously...if he was, this probably wouldn't work. We couldn't bring in some crazed defensive coach right now and expect a smooth transition...
Hey, I know you like to come off like you're a prof teaching a student...but do me a favor and cut me a break. I understand what you're trying to say, even when you don't preface it with things I obviously already know, and even when you don't double whammy me with bold and italics.

I'm still sitting here saying the same thing...I don't think the change is about lowering the gap. The players kept the gap plenty low under Stevens plenty of the time. Sometimes though, they floated out and went for the homerun pass instead. These same things have been true so far with Lavi, just one and the other being done with more and less frequency.

I'm not ignoring anything. Rather, I find that you're ignoring how "low" the gap often was under Stevens.

claude boivin lives is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 03:13 PM
  #92
claude boivin lives
flat out spectacular
 
claude boivin lives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 2,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
Exiting the zone didn't look any different to me last night (from earlier this season), either, but the breakout will be more consistent if the forwards are closing the gap for that first pass. If they are coming back to help the defensemen, they're not blasting out of the zone looking for a stretch pass each time... so that'd certainly be an improvement.

The problem they need to address going forward is consistency. The breakout was excellent, in my opinion, until the game in Los Angeles when they were completely shut down for the first two periods. Ever since that game, the breakout looked erratic and uncontrolled, much like it has for the past couple of seasons. The hope is that Lavi gets, and keeps, all the players on the same page so we don't see stretches where the five skaters look like five individuals as has been common with the Flyers.
Word.

claude boivin lives is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 03:53 PM
  #93
Get Carter
Registered User
 
Get Carter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Bucks County, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 317
vCash: 500
Some quotes from Lavi regarding the system:

Quote:
On the defensive side of things, Laviolette noted that Philadelphia has given up just one odd-man rush in the last two games (resulting in a goal by Montreal’s Mike Cammalleri on Monday). The aggressive forechecking scheme should not be confused with a wide-open, pond-hockey style, he explained.

“I don’t want to go chance-for-chance, and I certainly don’t want to give up odd-man rushes. Will they happen? Sure they will. Everybody gives up odd-man rushes. But, so far, to this point in the two games where everything has been in place, there hasn’t been any, with the exception of the turnover.

“What [the system] does do is it just emphasizes puck pressure. If you get one guy puck-pressuring, [and] you get four guys backing up, you should still be in a safe, responsible place defensively.”
http://flyers.nhl.com/club/page.htm?id=35835

Get Carter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 04:10 PM
  #94
stealthelephant
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 89
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Get Carter View Post
Some quotes from Lavi regarding the system:



http://flyers.nhl.com/club/page.htm?id=35835
We won a bunch of games early in the season, weve won a bunch of games in the past 2 seasons.

The 1 consistent thing this team has done over the past 3 years with much of the same core, is not give 100% effort and play smart hockey at times.

This team is just as likely to take 2 stupid penalties and give up 2 goals in 5 minutes as it is score 2 beautiful goals in 5 minutes.

Do you remember that playoff series against the Habs 2 years ago, where we could not maintain a 3 goal lead? The caps took us 7 games because we could not hold leads. Lets not talk about game 6 last year.

This group of players is prone to fits of bad hockey. Its full of talent and scores goals in bunches when on. That will win you regular season games year after year.

But as soon as this Flyers team plays a good team with a good goaltender and those pretty passes, oddman rushes and lucky bounces stop happening, it cannot grind out close wins. When is that ever going to be addressed?

stealthelephant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 04:11 PM
  #95
v-man
Registered User
 
v-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Inebriator View Post
Bartulis only played about 12 minutes last night, everyone else including Parent was at 18+. I hope lavi likes him and gets him involved just a little bit more in the future (although, we did have to kill a lot of penalties last night), as I think he has been flat out fantastic. You very very rarely spot him making a mistake, and his shot from the point is actually pretty good and seems like it makes it on net more so than a lot of our other guys.
I think the twelve minutes simply has to do with the fact that they were either killing penalties or on the power play in the second period, which cut into his ice time (since they're only playing him even strength). In the 8-2 bloodbath Bart was second in ice time on the team, and +1, so I'd find it hard to think that Lavie could be anything but impressed so far.

v-man is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2009, 09:45 AM
  #96
Bob Clarke Fan Club
Registered User
 
Bob Clarke Fan Club's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,985
vCash: 500
Jester is pretty much bang on. The shorter passes also equal less reverse cycling behind our own net looking for the long swing pass.
It also means more support in the neutral zone on our side of the red line. Most of all it means opposing forwards should have a hard time generating speed approaching our blue line. We've had huge gap control issues for a while. Hopefully Lavi can help fix them.

Bob Clarke Fan Club is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2009, 11:23 AM
  #97
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Well, prevent defense does work in the NHL if you play it effectively as a team. There are various guises of it, but that's why the statistics fall so heavily in the favor of teams that get the first goal, lead after 2, etc.
While we agree that playing a very defensive system can be effective, I think the dramatic nature of those stats is as much a result of hockey being a low scoring game by it's nature (ergo, one score is a bigger margin, relatively speaking, than in other sports). I would also expound to say that passive, defense first systems are really only preferable on teams that don't really have the offensive talent to play it differently.

Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2009, 11:26 AM
  #98
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am The Mush View Post
While we agree that playing a very defensive system can be effective, I think the dramatic nature of those stats is as much a result of hockey being a low scoring game by it's nature (ergo, one score is a bigger margin, relatively speaking, than in other sports). I would also expound to say that passive, defense first systems are really only preferable on teams that don't really have the offensive talent to play it differently.
No, I would say it's a necessity for teams that don't have the offensive talent to play differently.

I mean, in all honesty, the Penguins should completely dissuade you of this belief. Two years ago they made the Cup Finals because they learned how to trap...last year they won. If you didn't notice, they trapped the hell out of teams when they had the lead (us included).

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2009, 01:18 PM
  #99
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
No, I would say it's a necessity for teams that don't have the offensive talent to play differently.
The essential element of our points is the same, we just differ in diction (you're wording it stronger than I am). I've noticed you manufacture a lot of arguments like that. This is the second post in as many recent responses, where you have agreed with me in essence, and then quibbled with me over my diction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
I mean, in all honesty, the Penguins should completely dissuade you of this belief. Two years ago they made the Cup Finals because they learned how to trap...last year they won. If you didn't notice, they trapped the hell out of teams when they had the lead (us included).
A valid observation, but there was a little more that went into it than that. I think the trap, as a tactic to use for a period when a team holds a lead, is more useful than as an overall strategy. The implimentation of the trap probably doesn't change a team's overall win percentage that much (versus a less conservative system played with equal competence). It mostly just makes the scores tighter (i.e. the appearance of a more competitive hockey game) and gives the team with a talent deficit a chance to get lucky or get a point out of the game. The trap doesn't just kill goals against, it kills goals for as well, which is really only useful once you have that lead.


Last edited by Giroux tha Damaja: 12-10-2009 at 01:40 PM.
Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2009, 01:52 PM
  #100
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am The Mush View Post
The essential element of our points is the same, we just differ in diction (you're wording it stronger than I am). I've noticed you manufacture a lot of arguments like that. This is the second post in as many recent responses, where you have agreed with me in essence, and then quibbled with me over my diction.
This isn't really a matter of "diction." There's a big difference between something being "necessary" and something being "preferable."

Even for high scoring teams, it's preferable that you be able to effectively play passive defense, because you can control the tempo of the game once you have the lead. You can still win based on your offense--like we have the last couple of years--but it's likely to cause you some problems (blowing leads). If you don't have a good offense, you've got no shot if you can't effectively play a passive defense.

The point isn't one of semantics.

Quote:
A valid observation, but there was a little more that went into their success than that. They got amazing individual performances from their two big guys, and while Fleury overall probably had a good-not-great play off, on certain nights (and in certain moments) he was spectacular. I think the trap, as a tactic to use for a period when a team holds a lead, is more useful than as an overall strategy.
Two years ago, we were beating the crap out of the Pens in the first half of the season. They learned how to trap, and Voila!, they were beating up on us (and everyone else). And, yeah, they were trapping almost from start to finish that year. Last year they did more of the fall back on the trap once they had the lead (the equivalent of a prevent defense in football, which was the original post's discussion point).

However, even very effective offensive teams do and should rely on passive defensive strategies with a lead, and have that ability in their repertoire. We haven't, and it has cost us in each of the last couple of seasons.

That being said, the belief that the trap cannot contribute to offense is a fallacy at that. The extremely good Devs teams trapped to holy hell and were extremely good offensively (goals off the counter attack). It's just boring to watch in the meantime.

Quote:
The implimentation of the trap probably doesn't change a team's overall win percentage that much (versus a less conservative system played with equal competance). It mostly just makes the scores tighter (i.e. the appearance of a more competitive hockey game) and gives the team with a talent deficit a chance to get lucky.
A weak offensive team that doesn't implement a strong passive defense is going to get slaughtered in this league. However, you can be very mediocre offensive, but extremely tight defensively and make a go of it: the Minnesota Wild the last few years. Your margin for error is going to be slim, but it will make you competitive...and if you have a good PP, make you dangerous.

A strong offensive team can live and die by the sword...we have been a case in point on this front. And it's how the Pens played prior to Therrien getting 'em to trap--I invite you to look at their record before Therrien instituted that stuff. Therrien isn't the greatest coach in the world, but Pens fans do owe him a big thanks for getting that group to buy into that stuff as it laid the groundwork of last year.

Developing passive defensive capability can have extremely important effects on the final standings...if it moves you 6 pts over the course of the schedule, that's a big deal.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:00 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.