Ottosmagic13 Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 (edited) Nice post Randall, I've long been against dump and chase hockey. Dump-ins are definitely useful but not as a primary method of entering the zone. The only exception is on teams that have top4 cycling play in the league (hint: not the sabres). We have speed and guys with good hands (Eichel, Kane, Reinhart, Ennis, etc.) carry-in and stomp on the brakes and look for a trailer rather then dump if the outside isn't available. Edited February 27, 2017 by Ottosmagic13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 With how poor ROR/KO pairing has been, and this season being officially done, I really would like to go with this to end the year:O'Reilly - Eichel - Okposo Kane - Reinhart - Bailey Foligno - Girgensons - Gionta Carrier (please get healthy Will) - Rodrigues - Ennis/Baptiste (I prefer Baptiste). And give that fourth line decent ice time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 I really like that top line Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 O'Reilly: Ryan dumped the puck in 4 times, 3 of them by choice. His only successful attempt was by choice, and so he was successful 25% of the time with this. He tried 1 carry in and made a successful possession play. Moulson: Matt did nothing to enter the zone on his own. I also wanted to isolate a couple of my favourites from the post. I notice this about O'Reilly, too. He's pretty faithful about the dump-ins. Also, Moulson. Lulz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 I also wanted to isolate a couple of my favourites from the post. I notice this about O'Reilly, too. He's pretty faithful about the dump-ins. Also, Moulson. Lulz. I wonder if he did that in Colorado or if he's really just that committed to DD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 Great work Flagg. I would imagine the generally positive numbers have something to do with the opponent. I wonder if the poor numbers of the ROR line have anything to do with the opponent (read Ekman Larsson) and whether certain d men have a higher degree of success in forcing dump-ins. I also wonder if Dan is in his office right now blaming the loss on not enough dumps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 Hey Flagg. A housekeeping thought: Maybe start a thread for this sort of stuff? That assumes you're going to continue doing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 Hey Flagg. A housekeeping thought: Maybe start a thread for this sort of stuff? That assumes you're going to continue doing it. I'm thinking of copying that post over to the system thread. Great work Flagg. I would imagine the generally positive numbers have something to do with the opponent. I wonder if the poor numbers of the ROR line have anything to do with the opponent (read Ekman Larsson) and whether certain d men have a higher degree of success in forcing dump-ins. I also wonder if Dan is in his office right now blaming the loss on not enough dumps. I agree, we definitely looked a lot more dangerous off the rush than usual. I have ten more sheets scanned, because I'll be able to see about 12-15 of the remaining games from my house, and want a few games where I don't have to do that. But then we'll have a slightly larger sample size and will be able to see how things change with changing opponents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorner Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 With how poor ROR/KO pairing has been, and this season being officially done, I really would like to go with this to end the year: O'Reilly - Eichel - Okposo Kane - Reinhart - Bailey Foligno - Girgensons - Gionta Carrier (please get healthy Will) - Rodrigues - Ennis/Baptiste (I prefer Baptiste). And give that fourth line decent ice time. Lines look good. It's so simple........ They shan't be used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 Lines look good. It's so simple........ They shan't be used. What really kills me is the playoffs are dead. If there was ever a time where even a stubborn mule would experiment, this is it. But yea, not happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 small sample size, but doesn't that shoot a hole in the idea that DD is a dump and chase coach? It sounds more like ROR is a dump and chase player than DD is a dump and chase coach. Or am I missing something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 (edited) small sample size, but doesn't that shoot a hole in the idea that DD is a dump and chase coach? It sounds more like ROR is a dump and chase player than DD is a dump and chase coach. Or am I missing something? Your first three words are key. We have no idea what this team does over a long stretch, and how that compares to other teams around the league. I'm not doing this to draw hard conclusions about Dan's system or anything, I and others were just interested in seeing how often different zone entry methods were successful within a game. The fact that the game was against a terrible, terrible team should also be noted. Based on my own eye the last two years, I would classify Dan's system as much more of a "stretch pass, grinding forecheck" type of system than a "dump" system in the mold of LA. Edited February 27, 2017 by Randall Flagg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 small sample size, but doesn't that shoot a hole in the idea that DD is a dump and chase coach? It sounds more like ROR is a dump and chase player than DD is a dump and chase coach. Or am I missing something? I read it as O'Reilly following Dan to a T, perhaps to his own detriment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 small sample size, but doesn't that shoot a hole in the idea that DD is a dump and chase coach? It sounds more like ROR is a dump and chase player than DD is a dump and chase coach. Or am I missing something?It's one game against a bad team vs all of the reports of him in previous years Also, just because he doesn't dump as much as carry, doesn't mean he's not a dump and chase coach Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 I read it as O'Reilly following Dan to a T, perhaps to his own detriment. Assuption made with no idea what Dan is actually telling the players to do. It's one game against a bad team vs all of the reports of him in previous years Also, just because he doesn't dump as much as carry, doesn't mean he's not a dump and chase coach Yes, it is one game. It's also the only game we have actual facts for. I make the statement based on actual data. As for the bolded..... :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 Assuption made with no idea what Dan is actually telling the players to do. Yes, it is one game. It's also the only game we have actual facts for. I make the statement based on actual data. As for the bolded..... :blink: Well, the bolded in WC's case could certainly be true if Dan's system involved a dump/chip 40% of the time, and the league average was 30%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 (edited) Assuption made with no idea what Dan is actually telling the players to do. Yes, it is one game. It's also the only game we have actual facts for. I make the statement based on actual data. As for the bolded..... :blink: Batting .300 in baseball means you're a very good hitter. Still doesn't negate the fact that you don't get a hit more often than not I doubt there are many coaches that have more dumps than carries. DD especially because of PP entries and Eichel alone Well, the bolded in WC's case could certainly be true if Dan's system involved a dump/chip 40% of the time, and the league average was 30%. Exactly Edited February 27, 2017 by WildCard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 Assuption made with no idea what Dan is actually telling the players to do. Yes, it is one game. It's also the only game we have actual facts for. I make the statement based on actual data. As for the bolded..... :blink: We have data for other games. I've linked them. They've been discussed. In those games we dumped more than the other team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 We have data for other games. I've linked them. They've been discussed. In those games we dumped more than the other team. Yeah, I remember that. The tone here is that DD system entails more dumping than carrying. Just noting that the data here didn't say that. My responses aren't an endorsement of DD. They are simply an observation on the data collected. I wouldn't be surprised that it may change over time/opponent. I doubt there are many coaches that have more dumps than carries. DD especially because of PP entries and Eichel alone The bolded is key. The book on DD in the burgh was that he ran two systems. One for Crosby and Malkin's lines and one for the other two lines. Although last night's data doesn't exactly support that either. Unless I misread, the only line that dumped more than carried was the other line you'd expect to have the same system as the one Eichel is using (ROR's line). It's just interesting and comment worthy IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted February 27, 2017 Report Share Posted February 27, 2017 My concern with that We've is Eichel and Kane are the only ones carrying it in. ROR is not, Okposo is not, and really nobody else is. Combine that with Eichels dislike of the system and it seems more that Eichel is playing his game rather than Dan telling him his line an carry it in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) My concern with that We've is Eichel and Kane are the only ones carrying it in. ROR is not, Okposo is not, and really nobody else is. Combine that with Eichels dislike of the system and it seems more that Eichel is playing his game rather than Dan telling him his line an carry it in In fairness, you are talking about the two guys on the team with the skill to best pull that off. maybe the only two. If I am reading those stats right..... Eichel line - 23 carries/passes, 2 dumps or 23/25 not dumped ROR line - 3 carries, 7 passes, 9 dumps or 10/19 not dumped Girgensons line - 6 passes, 7 carries, 4 dumps or 13/17 not dumped ERod line - 2 carries, 5 passes, 4 dumps or 7/11 not dumped ROR line is the only line that seems focused on dumping the puck (and even then it is less than 50% of the time), so I don't believe it is just Eichel. And it may be that the ROR line is on the different system. Maybe with the harder minutes DD wants that line to be more conservative? I don't know. I don't see this particular game as supporting the DD preaches dump theory. I willingly concede that further games, especially against harder foes, may very well support that theory. I just find it interesting that this one doesn't. Edited February 28, 2017 by We've Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Every forward on this team outside of maybe 3 can and should be carrying the puck in. It's not that hard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 Every forward on this team outside of maybe 3 can and should be carrying the puck in. It's not that hard I guess you have a more optimistic assessment of that than I do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 My problem with D's system has nothing to do with preferring dumping over carrying. It's the lack of puck support for any puck carrier in any portion of the ice, abandoned in favor of a fevered sprint into the corners of the other end, the puck getting there via stretch pass that is usually missed and therefore chipped in behind the defense. There is no full team transition with structure, and it shows when we look worse at passing through transition than almost any team we play, ever. It's not how this team is told to get down the ice, it's not how they've spent the past 140 games and practices in between playing. And when we play against coaches and teams that know how to snuff out the puck carrier or the stretch option and transition the puck the other way, we predictably go 0-20 against them on the season, with no idea how to adjust. I'm still looking for the article, but when defensemen like Lovejoy had trouble with this in Pittsburgh, and Bylsma was asked about it, he literally responded with "The pass just needs to be made faster and with better accuracy, then." He's convinced what he does will work. And when our players "openly disrespect the coach" and ignore what he's saying, after doing this and scoring at historically bad rates for two months, and proceed to be 11th in scoring for a stretch, it just makes me laugh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted February 28, 2017 Report Share Posted February 28, 2017 My problem with D's system has nothing to do with preferring dumping over carrying. It's the lack of puck support for any puck carrier in any portion of the ice, abandoned in favor of a fevered sprint into the corners of the other end, the puck getting there via stretch pass that is usually missed and therefore chipped in behind the defense. There is no full team transition with structure, and it shows when we look worse at passing through transition than almost any team we play, ever. It's not how this team is told to get down the ice, it's not how they've spent the past 140 games and practices in between playing. And when we play against coaches and teams that know how to snuff out the puck carrier or the stretch option and transition the puck the other way, we predictably go 0-20 against them on the season, with no idea how to adjust. I'm still looking for the article, but when defensemen like Lovejoy had trouble with this in Pittsburgh, and Bylsma was asked about it, he literally responded with "The pass just needs to be made faster and with better accuracy, then." He's convinced what he does will work. And when our players "openly disrespect the coach" and ignore what he's saying, after doing this and scoring at historically bad rates for two months, and proceed to be 11th in scoring for a stretch, it just makes me laugh. What it looks like (though clearly it isn't the case) is that they run 1/2 ice practices. It almost looks like they don't know how to work through the neutral zone. Reinhart looks to pass to Eichel or Kane coming towards the red line to let one of those other 2 burners carry it in. But it seems rare to see anyone else make a pass to a player that is 20' or less ahead of him in the neutral zone. Not sure how much of it is reality & how much just perception & seeing what is expected; but that's what these eyes see. It also seems that Kulikov & Ristoleinen do try to join the rush & make it a 4 man breakout. And McCabe joined the rush on the 2nd goal. But due to working that preferred stretch pass, it isn't often that they can break out 4 across. Again, not sure how much of that is reality & how much of it was seeing what had been expected previously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.