Who Should Be On The Top PP, Risto or Samson?

[LTS]

On 2/1/2021 at 2:39 PM, pi2000 said:

Running it from behind the net where you can't score from is even dumber.    It's like killing a penalty in the neutral zone. 

Yeah, no one ever scored from Gretzky's office. 🙄

 

[IKnowPhysics]

On 2/1/2021 at 10:00 AM, LGR4GM said:

Sam Reinhart. Next Question.

I was sort of thinking this too.  But let's look.

If you define PP1 to be whichever PP line has Eichel on it (vs Staal), then you can uses WOWY with Eichel/Staal to examine PP1 success.

Eichel (no Staal) and Reinhart (no Ristolainen) - 29:07 - 10.3 GF/60 - 22.67 HDCF/60 - OnIceSH% 13.89

Eichel (no Staal) and RIstolainen (no Reinhart) - 4:31 - 26.57 GF/60 - 32.14 HDCF/60 - OnIceSH% 22.22

The sample sizes are small, but at face value, EIchel's PP1 line is measurably more productive with Risto on it than Sam with higher scoring rates, higher high danger Corsi for rates, and higher team shooting percentage.  Is it enough to not put Reinhart back on the PP? Nah, but it's interesting.

[LGR4GM]

16 hours ago, IKnowPhysics said:

I was sort of thinking this too.  But let's look.

If you define PP1 to be whichever PP line has Eichel on it (vs Staal), then you can uses WOWY with Eichel/Staal to examine PP1 success.

Eichel (no Staal) and Reinhart (no Ristolainen) - 29:07 - 10.3 GF/60 - 22.67 HDCF/60 - OnIceSH% 13.89

Eichel (no Staal) and RIstolainen (no Reinhart) - 4:31 - 26.57 GF/60 - 32.14 HDCF/60 - OnIceSH% 22.22

The sample sizes are small, but at face value, EIchel's PP1 line is measurably more productive with Risto on it than Sam with higher scoring rates, higher high danger Corsi for rates, and higher team shooting percentage.  Is it enough to not put Reinhart back on the PP? Nah, but it's interesting.

It isn't interesting at all. All 4:31 of that pp comes against 1 team in I think 1 game. That's like beating the Flyers 6-1 and saying your team has great goaltending. 

[Eleven]

I've been giving this some thought while not watching the Sabres not play.  I'm thinking of some of the diagrams I saw when the season first started -- a 1-3-1 formation--and I like that.  I'd like to see Ristolainen at the bottom of it with Eichel at the goal line and three forwards in the middle.  One, let's call him "Viktor," can be responsible for covering the point if necessary, one, let's call him "Taylor," can play the half wall, and the third, "Samson," does the traditional job of harassing the goaltender and generally making life difficult for the opposing defensemen.  I don't want the powerplay run by Ristolainen at the back; I want it run by Eichel at the top.

 

[LGR4GM]

24 minutes ago, Eleven said:

I've been giving this some thought while not watching the Sabres not play.  I'm thinking of some of the diagrams I saw when the season first started -- a 1-3-1 formation--and I like that.  I'd like to see Ristolainen at the bottom of it with Eichel at the goal line and three forwards in the middle.  One, let's call him "Viktor," can be responsible for covering the point if necessary, one, let's call him "Taylor," can play the half wall, and the third, "Samson," does the traditional job of harassing the goaltender and generally making life difficult for the opposing defensemen.  I don't want the powerplay run by Ristolainen at the back; I want it run by Eichel at the top.

 

Things I don't want, a pp fun from the point where Eichel is as far from the goal as possible. Run it from below the goal. 

[Eleven]

4 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Things I don't want, a pp fun from the point where Eichel is as far from the goal as possible. Run it from below the goal. 

I think we're saying the same thing but using different words.   Probably my bad.  I want Eichel near the goal, like where Briere used to camp out but maybe closer to longitudinal center.

Edited February 3, 2021 by Eleven

[pastajoe]

Put both on the top PP and let Hall drive the 2nd PP unit.

[IKnowPhysics]

PP1 has been 1-3-1, Dahlin at the top, Eichel on the left, Hall in the middle, Olofsson on the right, and Reinhart/Ristolainen screening.  Then the following occurs:

1. Zone entry.
2. Establish 1-3-1 positioning.
3. Establish possession at the point, working 3-on-2 or 3-on-1 at the top to evade the high defender(s).
4. Execute high danger chances, one of a couple options:
   1. Priority option: cross-ice passes among Dahlin/Eichel/Olofsson to generate perfect one timers.
      1. Eichel and Olofsson are positioned on their stick sides so as not to shoot across their bodies.
      2. This gets the goalie moving and gets open shot lanes.
      3. The screen is set.
      4. If the one-timer pass isn't *perfect* on the tape, the recipient simply collects the pass and checks options.  This selectivity is why we see lots of puck movement at the top and few shots.
   2. Secondary option: Pass to middle for one-timer.
      1. Same as above, but the pass looks for Hall (and on PP2 Cozens) for the one-timer.
      2. If Hall doesn't have good body/stick position for the shot, he can opt to redistribute to whom he has a good passing lane and is open, which is usually several options.
   3. Tertiary option: Work low.
      1. In this case, the puck is with Eichel or Olofsson on the side boards and there is intentionally or unintentionally two high defenders, usually one of which is preventing the pass to the point.
      2. This means that there is a 3-on-2 down low, created by the wing, the middle, and the screen on the two defensemen.
      3. The middle ties up or draws a defender high, now creating a 2-on-1 down low.
      4. The screen breaks off the crease to the back door expecting a pass or rebound.
      5. The wing closes the distance to the net and shoots or passes back door.

1-3-1 is effective because it's resilient to several types of common penalty kills (box, diamond), typically gives the puck carrier lots of pass options to maintain team possession under defender pressure, and lets the players be creative on on options.  It's better than 3-2 umbrella, because more pass lanes are open AND upon the instance of pass disruption (especially in the middle), you already have a player positioned to battle for the puck.

The shortcoming of 1-3-1 is that upon turn over, if a forward doesn't backcheck, you're usually pressured with an odd-man rush against your lone point man.  An effective way to defend 1-3-1 (besides disrupting zone entry) is to apply high pressure to the near side wing and the point to prevent the high 3-on-2 from getting established, BUT if the pressure fails, you expose the 3-on-2 against you down low.

PP2 has been operating the same way, but seems to have a harder time with zone entry and executing when pressured.

Edited February 3, 2021 by IKnowPhysics