Hemsky on the top of one circle, Staios/Brew in the middle, York at the top of the other, Dvorak and Smyth down low. 2nd unit is Bergeron at the top of one, Staios/Brew in the middle, Reasoner on the other circle, Isbister and another winger down low, this unit would be more flexible, and not necessarily play the umbrella, because Bergeron is an excellent passer, but don't know if he should be the top guy.
Spread the puck, fast passes, only shoot one-timers, hard shots with both wingers ready, and clear goals. Back-door play open on both sides as well. Not sure why MacT is so against pulling out the ol' umbrella once in a while....
igor, you are great with numbers. Here is a question - is there a corellation between salary and power play success? Is there a correlation between age and powerplay succes? Does a successfull powerplay absolutely require a high scoring dman or is the relationship an effect instead of a cause?
IMO, if you ever did a study between pp/pk net goals in a year compared to team salary, it might be a pretty close correlation. As much as we all die a little death every time the oilers fail to get a shot on net during a pp, it may be as simple as we are getting exactly what we paid for.
What about Minnesota and Columbus? Didn't they have a decent pp last season? I don't recall them having an amazing payroll.
Columbus PP improved dramatically for two reasons. They acquired Cassels ... who is a perennially one of the league's points-per-minute leaders on the PP. (Terrible even-strength +/- guy though). That and they used a forward on the point a lot (67% I think). The addition of Whitney certainly helped too.
Minnesota's PP was worse than the Oilers ... and was absolutely dreadful when Gaborik wasn't on the ice.
Vancouver's powerplay was well below 10% when Naslund and Bertuzzi weren't on the ice. And dynamite when they were.
Anaheim is a team that had the biggest improvement in PP productio last year (a good thing too, they weren't a very good 5on5 team last year). The acquisition of Oates and the use of a forward on the point a staggering 85% of the time are the reasons.
...is there a corellation between salary and power play success?
Probably, there definitely IS a correlation between stick skills and powerplay success. Usually it hinges on a couple or three guys on each team.
... Does a successfull powerplay absolutely require a high scoring dman or is the relationship an effect instead of a cause?
Nope. Or at least there is very little evidence to support that idea.
The list of the most efficient PP point-getters (PP points relative to ice-time) reads like the all-star ballot ... and they are overwhelmingly forwards. (granted several of them often play the point on the PP).
The only Dmen to crack the top 30 --- Derek Morris and Mathieu Schneider.
The only other Dmen in the top 60 --- McInnis, Sydor, Lidstrom, Zubov, Tarnstrom.
IMHO it comes down to having the right talents for PP duty, and forwards typically possess more of those skills than defencemen do. And certainly some forwards more than others.
thanks igor.The salary = pp success will definately lower my blood level tonight when I scream to the TV " We decline the penalty"
This should help even more then ... these are the top points-per-minute PP guys in the league.
And it gets worse ... average it over two or three years and the list just gets more expensive (Mogilny, Sundin, Sakic, Jagr in ... some of the cheapre guys above get bumped out).
The only really affordable guy who just keeps putting up the PP points year after year is Igor Larionov. Though Oates and Cassels are pretty reasonably priced too. All 3 are poor 5on5 guys though IMO.
Have to update this ... for all my frustration on this issue, the Oilers changed strategy to the more conventional 4-forward system last night ... and they didn't abandon it immediately as soon as something went wrong either.
And even after Hemsky's brutal missed assignment on the Leetch goal late in the second ... MacT only gave him one or two more 5on5 shifts ... but he had him play virtually all of the next PP
Common sense has come home!
With Hemsky on the ice during the powerplay:
Scored 8 goals, allowed 1 SH goals against. (Net +7 goals)
Without Hemsky on the ice during the powerplay:
Scored 2 goals, allowed 3 SH goals against. (Net -1 goals)
And wiith a forward on the point (very limited ice-time at this).
Scored 3 goals, allowed 0 SH goals against. (Net +3 goals)
Time to keep harping on about my pet peeve with this team. :biggrin: ... I don't know if anyone still thinks that NHL powerplays are driven by coaching more than talent, but I thought I'd throw up these numbers on the Oilers PP so far anyways:
igor, I added a little colour emphasis to your appropriate choice of words ... hope you don't mind.
The PP although 1 for 4 last night at the Gardens, Edmonton's man advantage overall play continues to look stomach sick. :p Pukey PP execution really blows chunks because of uneven attack focus. A noticeable lack of intestinal fortitude exhibited on the dump-ins combined with a reticience to toss-the-cookie at the gaping twined bag has resulted in sickening numbers. Hurl the donut early with with a bellyfull of fire. Enough regurgitation of the puck with the extra skater, already, Copper & Blahhhh!
If the power play gets anymore retched it will really turn my stomach. This vomitus is brought-up because of unsettled entrails and a nervous gut feeling that a good conversion on the PP will be needed tonight in Boston if the Oilers are to have a chance to win. Hope this metaphoric spew doesn't spoil anybody's pre-game meal.