First Unit Power Play

[lmm]

9 hours ago, khay said:

The injuries are the biggest factors. As you said, Edler gets criticized unfairly. He moves the puck well although his ability to get the shot through is not quite elite. Baer's role in the middle of the ice is critical in opening up a seam so that a pass can get through to Boeser or EP for one timers and Baer generally does a great job of relaying the puck. And of course, if Boeser is not injured, we have two elite level triggermen in EP and Boeser. More options mean harder PP to defend for the opposition.

 

With Boeser out, EP is our only triggerman. Therefore, our PP formulation should have the puck flow to EP for a one timer. It is much easier to defend this PP than the one where you have two triggermen. However, many teams are successful even with one triggerman: Washington with Ovi and Tampa with Stamkos. Granted, they have better personnel that can get the puck to these guys with relative ease.

 

Based on my limited understanding of the game, I don't know if the Canucks were doing the obvious thing of setting EP up for a shot... until, the game against Montreal as is evidenced by Hutty moving the puck to EP for two one timers, the second one leading to a goal.

 

In previous games, the players were trying to get EP the puck to get him to make plays from the left side. But other teams have clearly adapted and EP had to try to thread difficult passes to Goldy or Pouliot. The bigger problem seemed to me that, even when the puck did get to Pouliot or Goldy, it would only lead to a weak shot attempt or worse, turnovers. It was so stupid... you try so hard to get a pass across only to get a weak wrist shot attempt on net? What were the coaches thinking?

 

Hutton succeeded in setting up EP in just one game. But I don't know if this is because Hutty was good (it probably is the case based on your analysis) or because the coaches finally realized that it is best to run the PP from the right side to set EP up for a shot rather than run play from the left so the EP sets up Pouliot or Goldy for a weak wrist shot. 

 

I'd say the injuries are the biggest factors, followed by inability of the coaching staff to modify a PP followed by their inability to get the right personnel out.

 

With Gagner back, we should be able to improve our PP.

 

 

did anyone else get the feeling the coaching staff just quit coaching this last trip?
Except for Bachman playing one game after Marky looked pooped, the lineup did ot change the entire trip.

Then after the Montreal game Green says, and I mis-quote, overplaying Bo will be good for his long term developement, possibly at the expense of his offense.

 

It sounds to me like this trip was a test for the troops, more than it was an attempt to win games.

 

Gaunce did not draw in even though he is the best face off guy after Bo.

Biega did not draw in even though Del Z and Stech looked tired.

The lines were in a blender but the PP stayed the same

You can't say he didn't give Goldy and Pouliot a chance on the PP, he did..

 

Its almost like Green switched from being an AV like coach (looking for positive match ups) to a Torts like coach, (testing his troops to see who he goes to war with)

I don't have a problem  with this approach. They were tough games, on the road, no paying fans to disappoint, but it sure did not look like he was coaching to win. Then at the end he compares his deployment of Bo to what he will look forward to in a 7 game playoff series.It was a teaching road trip, that they just happened to win a couple of games. 

[oldnews]

On 11/18/2018 at 4:57 PM, JamesB said:

Who is worst on the team? This is not a surprise. It is Pouliot at an abysmal net goals for of 1.01 per 60 minutes. This is a case where the eye test and numbers match.

 

The question is why Green keeps sending him out there on PP. Reminds me of when Willie insisted on sending out Megna with the Sedins for long stretches.

 

Pouliot's on ice goals for on the powerplay is 2.9 per 60.   That's not great, but it's not as weak as attempting to cherry pick 'net'.

https://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/VAN/2019.html

 

And he leads the blueline in on ice goals for per 60 at 5 on 5 with 3.5 - second on the team to Pettersson.

 

I don't really care for the 'eye tests' of slanted viewers, but at least where statistics are concerned you could get a realistic perspective..

 

If you're bent on sandbagging Pouliot, his goal metrics are not really your best angle.

 

Likewise with your bizarre claim that he has the worst shot metrics on the team - one of the few Canucks with 50% corsi - while on the powerplay, Horvat, Boeser, and Goldobin all have worst relative corsi than Pouliot (and these micro attempts to extract 'meaning' are a case of the OP trying too hard wadr).

 

Flake news.

 

As for the question of what is limiting the powerplay's effectiveness, perhaps zone entries should be one of your "most important reasons".

 

[EdgarM]

The biggest problems on the PP are Pouliot and Goldobin. Their passing and zone entry are awful. Goldy can be an effective player but he is just too inconsistent. Plays great and then stinks up the place right after. Pouliot has been playing better of late but he just is not a top 4 dman.

With the addition of Gagner and Hutton on the PP, the zone entry and the passing in the Ozone has looked better.  

I agree on Bo too. Virtanen might be a better option for the net front presence.

[Duodenum]

Hutton has definitely been a noticeable improvement over Pouliot on the top PP unit. Doesn't fumble the puck and is able to get it over into Pete's wheelhouse much more often. 

[Toyotasfan]

Edler when he’s healthy gets more complaints from the fans for being on the PP than anyone. 

I find it funny he’s an option in the poll . 

I guess you don’t know what you got til it’s gone, or something like that.