We went from having a dreadful PK and average PP under Crawford, to an ABOMINABLE PP and above average PK with Gulutzan.
Not sure which is better.
Edit: Looked it up. We're -16 on special teams so far this year (49 PPGA, 33 PPGF). We were dead even at 55 each last year. So special teams are worse.
Boston makes me think that the one under Gulutzan is better. Their PP% in the playoffs was sub 10% if I remember correctly.
I think those numbers look a little less ghastly too if you count all the shorties we gave up last year, not sure if those are factored into your differential.
Boston makes me think that the one under Gulutzan is better. Their PP% in the playoffs was sub 10% if I remember correctly.
I think those numbers look a little less ghastly too if you count all the shorties we gave up last year, not sure if those are factored into your differential.
yeah that number is factoring in short handed goals for and against.... our PP this year is worse than our PK was last year
Not sure why it matters if it was worse than last year's. They both sucked.
We need an assistant coach specializing in special teams. Whoever's doing it now sucks. The PK is fine, even though I think it could be a bit stronger (but then again, every unit can), but the stubbornness of whoever runs the PP is ridiculous.
Not sure why it matters if it was worse than last year's. They both sucked.
We need an assistant coach specializing in special teams. Whoever's doing it now sucks. The PK is fine, even though I think it could be a bit stronger (but then again, every unit can), but the stubbornness of whoever runs the PP is ridiculous.
I know it's been said Jerrard is controlling the PK now, and it's been excellent under his control. They've been one of the best PKs since he took over. IIRC, early on, Jerrard was sharing duties on the PK with Desjardins which seems like too many cooks. I'm no surprised that didn't work.
I'm pretty sure Desjardins has now taken over the PP from Gulutzen, but it's actually just become even worse. They just recently fell below PHX for the worst PP.
There is no logical explanation for why our best player by leaps and bounds wasnt on the 5-3 last night. Jamie Benn is a game changer and everyone knows it. I dont care what kind of powerplay your running from umbrella to shooting he is out there ! Dont give that crap that we need two units, this was a chance that we blew.
To be Gully's advocate here, when Ribeiro holds the puck for 1/4 of the PP, that's 30 seconds where the other team isn't getting shorthanded scoring chances.
To be Gully's advocate here, when Ribeiro holds the puck for 1/4 of the PP, that's 30 seconds where the other team isn't getting shorthanded scoring chances.
To be Gully's advocate here, when Ribeiro holds the puck for 1/4 of the PP, that's 30 seconds where the other team isn't getting shorthanded scoring chances.
And when we ice the puck so much, it's okay because they're not getting scoring chances, right?
The PP isn't meant to defend, it's meant to score.
To be Gully's advocate here, when Ribeiro holds the puck for 1/4 of the PP, that's 30 seconds where the other team isn't getting shorthanded scoring chances.
The Stars ranked near last in PP SoGs, SoG/2Min, PP%, etc of all teams in the past 5 years. Souray was our highest SOG leader with 39 over the season. Brad had over 100 last year.
Not surprising. The Stars don't shoot the puck in any situation really. On the PP the forwards are all guilty (not just Ribs) of wanting to make the perfect play. Meanwhile the defensemen (Larsen notwithstanding) are incapable of either getting their shot past the shot-blockers (Souray/Robidas/Goligoski) or getting it on net (Daley/Souray).
Wouldn't it make some sense to play 4 forwards on the 1st PP unit? Jamie Benn is the only one I can think of the 4 top forwards (Benn, Eriksson, Whitney, Jagr) that has played the point.
Does the mean Eriksson would be the net presence on the 1st PP?
So something like Whitney, Eriksson, and Jagr up front with Goligoski and Benn on the point. Benn still takes the draws.
2nd PP of Roy, Morrow, and Ryder with Morrow as the net presence. Larsen with Dillon on the point (I don't remember the exact interview, but GMJN mentioned Dillon's shot being useful on the PP).
Wouldn't it make some sense to play 4 forwards on the 1st PP unit? Jamie Benn is the only one I can think of the 4 top forwards (Benn, Eriksson, Whitney, Jagr) that has played the point.
Does the mean Eriksson would be the net presence on the 1st PP?
So something like Whitney, Eriksson, and Jagr up front with Goligoski and Benn on the point. Benn still takes the draws.
2nd PP of Roy, Morrow, and Ryder with Morrow as the net presence. Larsen with Dillon on the point (I don't remember the exact interview, but GMJN mentioned Dillon's shot being useful on the PP).
I think somebody here suggested Whitney at the point, but I don't know if that is something he has done in the past.
I think I would rather see Larsen and Goligoski together on the 1st unit.
How much of the PPs struggles were just getting the puck down the ice to the offensive zone? Goligoski hasn't shown enough of a take-charge mentality to have him be the only D out there. Sure you could just have Benn go independent contractor but is that really the best use of his energy? The idea of having a left shot D and a right shot D (who isn't Robidas) along the blueline is very tempting as well.
As posted in the Jagr thread, he needs to be on the right half-wall where Riberio used to set up. Whitney's a RH shot so he should be on the left wall. Benn in front?
We have the top 6 options now that I could see 2 PP units working again. Something like:
Whitney-Benn-Jagr
Goose-Larsen
Ryder-Roy-Loui
Daley-Robidas
Dunno, we'll see. Nice to have some dangerous PP options now. Ryder and Whitney both on the left side for one timers is dangerous, Benn/Loui in front of the net, Jagr and Whitney's playmaking, etc etc.
