TheFirstLine Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 With a dire need to score in this series versus Calgary I think if a situation Arises in game 6 where the Canucks are down by a goal in the third, Willie should try the 4 forwards 1 defenseman strategy. It has worked a few times in the past against good teams and I believe he should try this again atleast once if the team is struggling to get a goal in the 3rd. What do you guys think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaBamba Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 I think people should stop making a thread the second something comes to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hectic Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 ^ why so serious? he brought up a good point, and I think that if we're down in the 3rd that it's something the coach would consider Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zuongo Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 Maybe, doubt willie would do that though. Kinda tough to discuss a strategy when it's out of our control anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DollarAndADream Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 Definitely interesting, but all in all it's up to Willie to decide. I don't see that being something that Desjardins does, since he loves to have the D men be included in the offense, so two defensemen at the points is probably what he goes with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfstonker Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 I'm not sure it's even logical. Just because you put a 4th attacker on doesn't mean you spend more time in the offensive end. The trick is to find Ds that are offensively gifted, like Bieksa and Edler or even Weber. Maybe if/when Subban comes up??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuckleheadFan Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 Early on in the season, WD did use 4 forwards in some situation, never know what he'll do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFirstLine Posted April 25, 2015 Author Share Posted April 25, 2015 I think people should stop making a thread the second something comes to mind. I've been sitting on this thought for awhile now. That strategy has hemmed other teams in there zone almost every time it has been used. I mean if nothing else works then why not try it. Flames won't expect it and could very possibly work. Thanks for the bright input though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dura_mater Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 With a dire need to score in this series versus Calgary I think if a situation Arises in game 6 where the Canucks are down by a goal in the third, Willie should try the 4 forwards 1 defenseman strategy. It has worked a few times in the past against good teams and I believe he should try this again atleast once if the team is struggling to get a goal in the 3rd. What do you guys think? I think if a situation arises where the Canucks are having difficulty deciding what day to plan the Stanley Cup parade they should just plan it for an entire week and declare it a B.C. public holiday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 I think people should stop making a thread the second something comes to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dura_mater Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 I've been sitting on this thought for awhile now. That strategy has hemmed other teams in there zone almost every time it has been used. I mean if nothing else works then why not try it. Flames won't expect it and could very possibly work. Thanks for the bright input though. If this were the case, that almost every time it hems the other team in their zone, don't you think teams would ice 4 forwards and 1 defenseman for 60 minutes of the game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 If this were the case, that almost every time it hems the other team in their zone, don't you think teams would ice 4 forwards and 1 defenseman for 60 minutes of the game? It's a bit disorienting for those who are used to the conventional 3-2 format. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Cow Disease Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 If this were the case, that almost every time it hems the other team in their zone, don't you think teams would ice 4 forwards and 1 defenseman for 60 minutes of the game? Momentum and pressure matters, does it not? Just because it's a decent-odds risk in a short period of time at the end of a match doesn't mean it's a legitimate 60-minute strategy. Bear in mind that if the other team does get hemmed in a 6th man will replace the goalie, of course which increases the offensive-zone pressure. The boys can do it, I remember how effective it was in getting our tying goal in our OT win against NYR during the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyHatnDart Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 If you want to talk a solid strategy, take a look at the highlights from the Ottawa victory last night. They set up a triangle with 3 players (1 high, 2 wide) and 2 right in Price's kitchen. If anybody watched that game you could see it was highly effective. Price let in 5 goals and he could barely see any of them. Unfortunately, we don't have a defenceman of Karlsson's calibre to be the last man back obviously, but it was incredible to see how well it worked. Net presence will beat a hot goalie every time. I personally don't mind the Sedin's cycle game. It's been effective against Calgary. Trouble has been us getting shots through from the point. What I would like to see is different systems from different lines. It takes a lot of skill to be able to set up behind the net and still get goal scoring. You need precise passing and while our 1st line is more than capable of that, or secondary scoring needs to come off of crashing the net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zakm Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 Imagine this Sadin- Sadin- Vrbata- Horvat - Edler. Hmmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyBoy44 Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 Imagine this Sadin- Sadin- Vrbata- Horvat - Edler. Hmmmm Uh huh...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckylager Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 I'd rather not see this happen, we need to go into the third with a 2-3 goal lead. Playing 4 forwards on the PP has lead to a number of odd man rushes against and considering Burrows is our only forward that has D experience, I doubt that strategy is employed. Except for the klast minute, obv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 Uh, if we're down by a goal in the third and have to score, we'll be pulling the goalie and putting on an extra forward. That'd make it 4 forwards and 2 defencemen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOgRook Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 Imagine this Sadin- Sadin- Vrbata- Horvat - Edler. Hmmmm Really? This is the first post you decide to make? Welcome back BuretoMogilny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagorim Jarg Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 Instinct is to dismiss this but with the way some D have been playing maybe it would be good to send out all forwards and just tell the 2 in the back they're doing a reverse forecheck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.