- Thread starter
- #1,941
i think the root of the problem the team has is a lack of talent. as a result, they play a fairly conservative offensive game to try not to expose the defense. compound that with the talent in the system is on defense and you can see why they play the way they do offensively. they try to gain the zone, set it up, get the dmen involved, cycle for a bit, and get point shots with traffic. and if you lose the puck, it's a 5 man shift to the defensive zone, rather than an odd man rush.
this could work great, if you have talent on the blueline to generate offense. which they don't really. Ghost and Provorov can, Streit is getting old and isn't as dynamic. Who knows what's going on with MDZ. And AMac and Gudas have one offensive weapon between them and it's Gudas' clapper from the red line. With Ghost struggling to adapt to the pressure he gets in year 2 compared to year 1, it leaves Provorv to try to generate that offense. So, aside from him, you're basically asking for luck to score goals and for consistent play to not expose the D. Problem is, they used up most of their luck for a 10 game win streak, and the D is still getting exposed because they turn the puck over too much.
however, all is not lost, because when Myers and Sanheim come up, Ghost starts to adapt better, and Provorov continues his stellar play, they do have the dynamics on the blueline for the offense to be generated from the point. add in Simmonds, and these days Schenn, being pretty good net front guys, plus Lindblom coming who is a fairly powerful guy who can win battles at the net, and you might have a pretty good recipe for consistent offensive production. On top of having more talent on defense that will hopefully turn the puck over less. i still think they need a dynamic scorer up front to help offset that and maybe score a couple goals on the rush, something they haven't been able to do since Carter left. That's what I wanted at the draft last year, and it's still what i want. I don't think you can rely on either scoring option solely (manufactured goals through the cycle, or scoring off the rush), you need both.
that being said, their reluctance as a team to get to the high scoring areas is so frustrating. it must be coach driven because every play shows reluctance to get there. and i disagree with that plan. high scoring areas are named for a reason. you have to get there with the puck, even if it means risking an offensive zone turnover sometimes.
this could work great, if you have talent on the blueline to generate offense. which they don't really. Ghost and Provorov can, Streit is getting old and isn't as dynamic. Who knows what's going on with MDZ. And AMac and Gudas have one offensive weapon between them and it's Gudas' clapper from the red line. With Ghost struggling to adapt to the pressure he gets in year 2 compared to year 1, it leaves Provorv to try to generate that offense. So, aside from him, you're basically asking for luck to score goals and for consistent play to not expose the D. Problem is, they used up most of their luck for a 10 game win streak, and the D is still getting exposed because they turn the puck over too much.
however, all is not lost, because when Myers and Sanheim come up, Ghost starts to adapt better, and Provorov continues his stellar play, they do have the dynamics on the blueline for the offense to be generated from the point. add in Simmonds, and these days Schenn, being pretty good net front guys, plus Lindblom coming who is a fairly powerful guy who can win battles at the net, and you might have a pretty good recipe for consistent offensive production. On top of having more talent on defense that will hopefully turn the puck over less. i still think they need a dynamic scorer up front to help offset that and maybe score a couple goals on the rush, something they haven't been able to do since Carter left. That's what I wanted at the draft last year, and it's still what i want. I don't think you can rely on either scoring option solely (manufactured goals through the cycle, or scoring off the rush), you need both.
that being said, their reluctance as a team to get to the high scoring areas is so frustrating. it must be coach driven because every play shows reluctance to get there. and i disagree with that plan. high scoring areas are named for a reason. you have to get there with the puck, even if it means risking an offensive zone turnover sometimes.