Petey, Brock, QH as PK'ers

[EddieVedder]

58 minutes ago, Alienhuggyflow said:

I don't think that's correct but at the same time those guys are often getting the tougher match-up and in Quinns case it's usually because he's pinching because we're trailing but in a pk role it's way different.

Qh is getting tougher mathchups?  What are you watching?  Its rare that qh is put out there to defend against the other teams too players.  Its oel and myers who get those matchups

[shiznak]

11 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

That's so meaningless, spend more time on the ice and there will be more chances at both ends.

 

Not sure where your figures are from but according to https://www.naturalstattrick.com/ EP and QH have 63 and 83 High Danger Chances against at 5v5 which makes them 8th and 1st respectively. Now devide by time on ice and times by 60 and you'll find Hughes has 10.77 and Petey 10.8 per 60mins. For reference a did the same with a couple of other players.

 

Miller 11.33

Poolman 11.03

Pearson 11.59

 

I can't be bothered to do more, but feel free. Personally I think most stats are pointless but bugs me when people use one stat in isolation to make a dumb point.

You’re looking at 5v5. I specifically said even strength.

 

Hughes plays a ton of minutes, but he does not get to match up against the opposition top lines. Out of his 500+ minutes, only 149 of them are against “elite” competition (according to puckiq). It’s pretty concerning that he gives up the most scoring chances against on the team, while playing against mid-low tier players.

Edited December 8, 2021 by shiznak

[Biff Tannen]

5 minutes ago, shiznak said:

You’re looking at 5v5. I specifically said even strength.

 

Hughes plays a ton of minutes, but he does not get to match up against the opposition top lines. Out of his 500+ minutes, only 149 of them are against “elite” competition (according to puckiq). It’s pretty concerning that he gives up the most scoring chances against, while playing against mid-low tier players.

Are yeah, fair point on that difference.

 

Okay let's look at two lists even strength

 

QH

OEL

Bo

Myers

Miller

Garland

Pearson

EP

Brock

Hogs

QH Myers OEL Bo Miller Pearson Hogs Garland EP Poolman   The first is in order of TOI the second is in order of SCA. Such a meaningless stat. If anyhing since both EP and Boeser drop on the second list I guess we should put them on PK?

[JayDangles]

I don't think BB actually intends to use our top guys on the PK very much. Maybe as the second unit PK so just the last 20-30 seconds.... 

 

What I really think is he is just testing the waters with our leadership group. Gauging their level of compete and desire to work hard. Willingness to step up. He is a very smart coach and this is a great tactic in getting guys engaged, but I don't think he truly plans on putting Boes or Petey on major pk duty 

[spook007]

26 minutes ago, J-23 said:

I doubt it will be long term. Feels like it’s going to be a short term thing to get our top guys competing again.

 

13 minutes ago, appleboy said:

The Sedins wanted to play on the PK.

Yep, and while decent at it, they were worn out by it...

Big call, but could be worth it... Think @J-23has called it as close as possible, when suggesting its probably more than anything to try and make them go again... 

Anything to get us moving....fast... 

[appleboy]

1 minute ago, spook007 said:

 

Yep, and while decent at it, they were worn out by it...

Big call, but could be worth it... Think @J-23has called it as close as possible, when suggesting its probably more than anything to try and make them go again... 

Anything to get us moving....fast... 

I agree that it is partly about getting everyone involve. Getting everyone back into a team spirit, invested in the outcome.

 

It is why Bruce is such a good motivator.   

[Alflives]

Hughes would be great on the PK as the D who pressures in the neutral zone and is on pucks below the red line in the D zone.  Petey would be great too.  These are very smart players, who have elite skills, and high compete.  Hogs and Pods would be excellent too.  

[shiznak]

20 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Are yeah, fair point on that difference.

 

Okay let's look at two lists even strength

 

QH

OEL

Bo

Myers

Miller

Garland

Pearson

EP

Brock

Hogs

QH Myers OEL Bo Miller Pearson Hogs Garland EP Poolman   The first is in order of TOI the second is in order of SCA. Such a meaningless stat. If anyhing since both EP and Boeser drop on the second list I guess we should put them on PK?

How it is a meaningless stat?

 

Do you know why Hughes gives up these scoring chances? If you pay close attention, you often see him out of position. He can barely win his puck battles along the boards or push guys out of the way in front of the net. Yet people think he can play on the PK. 

[BPA]

Would rather them not be on the PK but what do I know.

 

Originally wanted Virtanen on the PK cuz he had breakaway speed that could potentially be a threat.  I don't see that kind of speed from EP or Boeser. 

[BlakeQuinnAndEggs]

1 hour ago, JayDangles said:

I don't think BB actually intends to use our top guys on the PK very much. Maybe as the second unit PK so just the last 20-30 seconds.... 

 

What I really think is he is just testing the waters with our leadership group. Gauging their level of compete and desire to work hard. Willingness to step up. He is a very smart coach and this is a great tactic in getting guys engaged, but I don't think he truly plans on putting Boes or Petey on major pk duty 

I agree but I could see Petey thriving in it. He's very smart away from the puck, especially in his rookie year.  He had a lot of comparisons to Datsyuk, who won many Selkes.

 

Sergei Fedorov also won Selkes and he was pure offense. That's the difference a good coach makes. 

 

Hopefully Boudreau can have a Scotty Bowman type of effect on our young players.

[timberz21]

Honestly, PK shouldn't be a 4 forward jobs.  Everyone should be able to chip in regularly.  You can have your 4 main players that get regular shift, or key situation, but I'm ok with everyone chipping in regularly too.   You keep your top PK guys fresh, reduce the risk of injuries for them and gets everyone involved in that aspect of the game.  Comes in handy is your PK guys are injured or in the box, while you get that occasional SH goal from your skilled players.

 

[Gollumpus]

3 hours ago, spook007 said:

While it is brilliant to read that QH ad Petey both wants to PK, and that Boeser also will PK, am I the only one slightly concerned about it as well?

Its great to see they want to learn and be able to play and help the team in any situation, but I dunno about Petey throwing himself in front of slap shots or one times...

 

Both him and Boeser has had wrist problems, and the last thing we need is these players finding their mojo again, only to be sidelined for substantial time by injuries...?

I'm maybe putting too much into this, but wonder how you all feel about that?

I'm tempted to say no shifts given, however, as with most things (?), it's probably going to be situational. Situational, but not regular shifts. It's nice that they say they want to PK, but what player doesn't want TOI, regardless of the role?

 

Traditional(?) view, PK time gives the bottom-6 forwards a chance to get some TOI, and exert some energy so the top-6 can take a bit of a breather. If the game is tight, the team has a narrow lead and it's late in the 3rd period, I'm (probably) not starting Pettersson or Hughes in the defensive zone. 

 

On the other hand, if it's early in a game and the coach feels that a bit of energy being inserted into the game by some top-6 guys would be a good thing, then why not? If the faceoff is in the offensive zone, why wouldn't you have a couple of top-6 guys out there to try and score? This sort of risk could turn the game in your team's favour. 

 

And so on.

 

                                                  regards,  G.

[Biff Tannen]

55 minutes ago, shiznak said:

How it is a meaningless stat?

 

Do you know why Hughes gives up these scoring chances? If you pay close attention, you often see him out of position. He can barely win his puck battles along the boards or push guys out of the way in front of the net. Yet people think he can play on the PK. 

It's meaningless because it doesn't account for TOI. As I think I've pointed out the two correlate pretty closely across the entire roster so all it really tells you is how often they're on the ice. Even if you weight it like I did I still don't think it's that useful but when you do Hughes actually drops down the table quite a bit. I'm not convinced he should be PKing but mostly because he's already playing by far the most minutes.

 

The stat is completely irrelevant without context. Funnily enough 8 players with the lowest evenstrength scoring chances against are also the 8 with the lowest TOI.

Edited December 8, 2021 by Biff Tannen

[hockeygod77]

I LIKE IT YOU WANT PETEY TO SKATE FAST LIKE HE USE TO AND WHEN YOU HAVE GUYS THAT KILL PENALTIES ON THE POINTS THERE IS A THREAT OF SHORT HANDED GOAL ON BREAKAWAYS..MOTTE IS GOOD AT IT...NOW FOR BROCK HE CANT SKATE AS FAST IM NOT SURE HOW ID USE HIM ON THE PK BUT BRUCE WILL HAVE AN IDEA IM SURE..GARLND WOULD BE GOOD TOO I HINK

[hammertime]

I see them PKing as a way to get Pete and Brock going while they are slumping. A lil adrenaline to the system is probably good. But in the longer term they shouldn't be mainstays on the PK. 

[Devron]

I understand the concerns but I absolutely love what Bruce is doing here. This is Team Building. This is building confidence in our young struggling stars. Bruce plans on using 4 pairs on the PK. So their PK time should be minimal. What I loved last game was the pressure. LA’s PP looked like ours in the past. We had shorthanded shots.

 

Like Bruce said his motto is why do we play in the defensive zone ever. 
 

I don’t believe all 3 will be PKers permanently but I could see Hughes and Petey taking the odd shift on the PK 

[The Lock]

I think it would be more of a problem if we "bubble-wrapped" their bodies and only kept them at what they're good at rather than developing other parts of their game.

 

While I understand people's concern, let's not let paranoia get in the way of production here.

[Conscience]

Yes to petty not sure about BB and hughes plays enough minutes already.

 

Would like to see 3 units of forwards killing penalities to keep them fresh and allow them to be more aggressive.

[The Lock]

49 minutes ago, BPA said:

Would rather them not be on the PK but what do I know.

 

Originally wanted Virtanen on the PK cuz he had breakaway speed that could potentially be a threat.  I don't see that kind of speed from EP or Boeser. 

I think breakaway speed is way to specific of an attribute. The focus of a PK should be on having a good PK, not getting goals on the PK. If  you focus on the goals during a PK, that PK's going to lack.

[spook007]

35 minutes ago, Gollumpus said:

I'm tempted to say no shifts given, however, as with most things (?), it's probably going to be situational. Situational, but not regular shifts. It's nice that they say they want to PK, but what player doesn't want TOI, regardless of the role?

 

Traditional(?) view, PK time gives the bottom-6 forwards a chance to get some TOI, and exert some energy so the top-6 can take a bit of a breather. If the game is tight, the team has a narrow lead and it's late in the 3rd period, I'm (probably) not starting Pettersson or Hughes in the defensive zone. 

 

On the other hand, if it's early in a game and the coach feels that a bit of energy being inserted into the game by some top-6 guys would be a good thing, then why not? If the faceoff is in the offensive zone, why wouldn't you have a couple of top-6 guys out there to try and score? This sort of risk could turn the game in your team's favour. 

 

And so on.

 

                                                  regards,  G.

Good call.