HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Oilers Must Quit PPing on Themselves

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-12-2003, 11:07 AM
  #1
OYLer
Registered User
 
OYLer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Win Desperate & Mad!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,703
vCash: 500
Oilers Must Quit PPing on Themselves

"We like to shoot on our power play," said Lapointe. "Other teams like to move the puck and make these nice plays, but not us. Point shots aren't that bad." Bruins right-winger Sandy McCarthy got the winner late in the second period, an even-strength goal.(Matheson, Jim: Disaster in the making? Oilers penalty killing, power-play units in desperate need of repairs: coach, Edmonton Journal Online
http://www.canada.com/edmonton/sport...0-5C98E652AF72

Fifteen (15) games into the season, and now again one game (1) under .500, 3-5-2-0 in the last ten (10) played, Edmonton seems stalled in ninth (9th) place in the Western Conference. With Reasoner, Isbister, Salo, Laraque hampered by injuries and Comrie still a holdout, the lineup is getting a little thin. However, the big problems still reside with the specialty teams and with the defensive core on both bluelines. Edmonton's D-men are not standing up at their own blueline; they collapse too soon and are too soft defensively. In the offensive zone, they are too reluctant to shoot immediately and screen shots get closed off as their hestitation allows defenders to lessen the gap, close off shooting lanes, and block shots.

The supposed fast skating and forechecking styled Oilers seldom choose the dump and chase method of gaining entry and regaining puck possession when on the power play. Intent on maintaining puck control for the perfect offensive zone entry, the Oilers' power play perfectionists piddle away good scoring opportunities time and time again. Urgency still remains as the missing component when the Copper & Blue have the man advantage. Blueline support with the man advantage means keeping the puck in play and shooting on net every time the opportunity presents itself. Let's can cute, abandon the pretty-play, and just shoot the puck - please!

Getting the puck too the crease and paying the mucker's price to get the rubber burried into the twine seems to have become a payment method much discounted of late. At the new Smyth Horcoff & Company earning PP goals depends on passing the buck or maybe the boys on the backend have that "b" upside down. The righted "p" should stand for "pepper puck on goal" or "pull the trigger" or "please shoot" and if no shoot exists then "put puck deep in corner." Let the lowdown boys collapse play until point shots are opened again. Overloading, outmanning, and tiring out penalty killers, then going to the net on the PP is not rocket science. It does depend on systems and repetitively rehearsed assignment responsibility. Who will always be there when we do this. Let's not practice until perfect; let's practise down and dirty until our PP can get those ugly goals that dishearten defenders.

Isn't getting the puck in deep and making the opposition pay the price in the corners the hallmark of a forechecking team? When playing with the man advantage, why and how do the Oilers, so often, find themselves outmanned on the puck? Specialty team play and systems execution is a coaching responsibility. The time has come for all good coaches to stand up and be counted. To be depended upon to fix these systems problems. Press box perspective can and will get even uglier after the game should this intolerable situation continue. Some thoughts from the HinterLand - who out there in Hockey's Heartland agrees, disagrees and/or refutes these musings?

OYLer is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 12:57 PM
  #2
LawnDemon
Registered User
 
LawnDemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Danger Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,984
vCash: 500
the strangest part of the oilers inefficiencies is in the fact that craig simpson was supposed to solve these problems. i fully expected him to bring his style to the PP. he was a "take a beating, screen the goalie, tip the shot" kind of player and yet the oilers don't adopt that type of PP. why not?

it's even more confusing that the team record for PP goals was scored by a player very similar to simpson doing EXACTLY what OYler describes. how is Ryan Smyth supposed to work his magic in front of the net if there are no shots on goal? smyth is VERY good at distracting the goalie but you have to get shots on net for the distraction to be effective...

my theory is that the problem comes from the fact that the oilers are simply not a good puck possession team. their goals are almost all transition goals. frankly, they have very few players with good vision (watch the opposition collapse on hemsky!) - but they have lots of players who can drive to the net with speed. unfortunately, speed does not help the powerplay at all other than to be the first on the puck (it is frustrating that they are not). could this be the problem? are the oilers simply designed as a 5 on 5 or 4 on 4 club? heck, they almost score more shorthanded (in transition again) than on the powerplay!

so if this is the truth, that they simply do not have the type of talent to make an effective PP, then what can be done? is there a new PP style that could work for a fast team with limited talent?

LawnDemon is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 01:46 PM
  #3
igor*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LawnDemon
...
my theory is that the problem comes from the fact that the oilers are simply not a good puck possession team. their goals are almost all transition goals. frankly, they have very few players with good vision (watch the opposition collapse on hemsky!) - but they have lots of players who can drive to the net with speed. unfortunately, speed does not help the powerplay at all other than to be the first on the puck (it is frustrating that they are not). could this be the problem? are the oilers simply designed as a 5 on 5 or 4 on 4 club? heck, they almost score more shorthanded (in transition again) than on the powerplay!

so if this is the truth, that they simply do not have the type of talent to make an effective PP, then what can be done? is there a new PP style that could work for a fast team with limited talent?
Good post LD, and I agree a lot. And when you look through the numbers ... players who rely on speed a lot are often not very good PP guys (Amonte, Bure, Guerin, etc).

And the slow-footed crafty guys rely on the powerplay to get their numbers ... Oates, Larionov, Cassels, Perreault etc.

I've been thinking the same thing too, screw the set-up ... just attack the zone and go for the goal. Or at least do that more.

igor* is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 01:53 PM
  #4
LawnDemon
Registered User
 
LawnDemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Danger Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by igor
Good post LD, and I agree a lot. And when you look through the numbers ... players who rely on speed a lot are often not very good PP guys (Amonte, Bure, Guerin, etc).

And the slow-footed crafty guys rely on the powerplay to get their numbers ... Oates, Larionov, Cassels, Perreault etc.

I've been thinking the same thing too, screw the set-up ... just attack the zone and go for the goal. Or at least do that more.
speaking of perreault... rumor has it that he is available.

this discussion started in another thread but it may be applicable here as well. although i have to assume his contract is likely up at the end of the season leaving him unrestricted would he be worth the rental (at 2.8 million this year)?

he's arguable the best faceoff man in the league and a powerplay specialist (would look good with hemsky).

i proposed horcoff for perreault on the trade board. i'll likely get flamed by habs fans but what the heck. i think he us just what this team needs right now.

kills two birds with one stone.

LawnDemon is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 02:30 PM
  #5
Walsher
Registered User
 
Walsher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,339
vCash: 500
Just another note on the Oilers PP - is it just me or are the oiler defensemen absolutely horrendous at one-time shots. Semenov does once in a while, but Brewer, Smith, Staios, Cross, and the rest have a really difficult time with one time shots. They get no wood on them and rarely get them on net. Watch good pp units. No matter what the team it is a one time sutup at the point with a screen in front. This process accomplishes 2 things - 1. it gets the goalie moving laterally which is essential to scoring these days, and 2. the screen is an obvious necessity to getting pucks past even the most average of NHL goalies in this day and age. The Oilers move the puck around but are never in position to take the one time shot. When you accept the pass, settle the puck down, wait 10 seconds and fire the puck into the defenders shin pads the puck rarely goes where you want. To me they need to shoot - but not like how the fans yell at the games. get the puck moving and shoot it when a lane has been created not waiting until defenders move into position.

Walsher is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 04:20 PM
  #6
LawnDemon
Registered User
 
LawnDemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Danger Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walsher
Just another note on the Oilers PP - is it just me or are the oiler defensemen absolutely horrendous at one-time shots. Semenov does once in a while, but Brewer, Smith, Staios, Cross, and the rest have a really difficult time with one time shots. They get no wood on them and rarely get them on net. Watch good pp units. No matter what the team it is a one time sutup at the point with a screen in front. This process accomplishes 2 things - 1. it gets the goalie moving laterally which is essential to scoring these days, and 2. the screen is an obvious necessity to getting pucks past even the most average of NHL goalies in this day and age. The Oilers move the puck around but are never in position to take the one time shot. When you accept the pass, settle the puck down, wait 10 seconds and fire the puck into the defenders shin pads the puck rarely goes where you want. To me they need to shoot - but not like how the fans yell at the games. get the puck moving and shoot it when a lane has been created not waiting until defenders move into position.
that's a good point but i think somewhat misdirected. in order to pull off a one-timer you need to be on the receiving end of a good pass. i've noticed that the oilers are good puck carriers and decent shots but very few of them are good puck passers. again, another problem with the all around PP. if you don't make crisp passes then the other team has more time to pressure the guy with the puck (as he fumbles to gain control). good observation.

LawnDemon is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 05:04 PM
  #7
OYLer
Registered User
 
OYLer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Win Desperate & Mad!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LawnDemon
my theory is that the problem comes from the fact that the oilers are simply not a good puck possession team... so if this is the truth, that they simply do not have the type of talent to make an effective PP, then what can be done? is there a new PP style that could work for a fast team with limited talent?
Thank you for responding to my comments and except for these particular statements I agree with you totally!

I feel sure that the problem is not talent but systemic confusion. How best to harness the horses chaffing at the bit is the problem not the horses themselves. Reigning-in the confusion is key. The lock must be thrown open and then the combination changed. To apply systematic pressure the PP play must be simplified, and then pressured.

OYLer is offline  
Old
11-13-2003, 01:02 AM
  #8
Yanner39
Registered User
 
Yanner39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ottawa ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,334
vCash: 500
You know, I can live with a crappy PP. But they have to improve their PK. Stop the team from scoring on the PP and take care of the rest 5-5 and chip in a shorty once and awhile and they should be ok. As Matheson said in the article, the Oilers dominated 5-5 and lead the game 2-1. Chip in the Sh goal and they win 3-1. Not as easy as that but you get the picture.

Yanner39 is offline  
Old
11-13-2003, 05:43 AM
  #9
igor*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. van Nostrin
You know, I can live with a crappy PP. But they have to improve their PK. Stop the team from scoring on the PP and take care of the rest 5-5 and chip in a shorty once and awhile and they should be ok. As Matheson said in the article, the Oilers dominated 5-5 and lead the game 2-1. Chip in the Sh goal and they win 3-1. Not as easy as that but you get the picture.
What gane was Metheson watching? The Oilers were dominated in every facet of that game. Every Oiler line was outchanced by the opposition at 5on5 on this night. The score really flattered the Oil IMO.

igor* is offline  
Old
11-13-2003, 06:39 AM
  #10
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by igor
What gane was Metheson watching? The Oilers were dominated in every facet of that game. Every Oiler line was outchanced by the opposition at 5on5 on this night. The score really flattered the Oil IMO.
What game were you watching? The Oilers gave up about 80% of all scoring chances on the powerplay and they gave up 3/4 goals on the PP. If we kill with a 67% success rate (which is actually pretty bad too) then we win the game.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
11-13-2003, 06:49 AM
  #11
igor*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
What game were you watching? The Oilers gave up about 80% of all scoring chances on the powerplay and they gave up 3/4 goals on the PP. If we kill with a 67% success rate (which is actually pretty bad too) then we win the game.
If you have the game on tape or Tivo ... watch it again and count the scoring chances. Anyone who has coached will do this habitually when watching a game sometimes ... and its tedious as hell. But I guarantee you that EVERY Oiler line was outchanced during 5 on 5 play this night.

Over the long run the numbers tell the tale ... because luck and happenstance balances out. But for one game ... the Game Sheet stats don't mean much IMO. Not the published ones anyways ... the scoring chances, and who was responsible for them happening, and who was on the ice at the time, who took penalties and who forced them, with whom on the ice ... obvious these things really do matter, and ALL teams record that.

My two cents.

igor* is offline  
Old
11-13-2003, 07:07 AM
  #12
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
I see what your point is - but the Oilers only chances came on 5on5 - and they had quite a few chances AND shots (i know there is a BIG difference in the two). The Bruins dominated and produced about 70% of their scorin chances and 75% of their goals on the powerplay.

thome_26 is offline  
Closed Thread

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 10:35 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.