Petey, Brock, QH as PK'ers

[King Heffy]

If we take a couple of penalties in short succession, we've effectively taken them out of the game for about 5 minutes if they don't do it.  There will likely be some growing pains but given how bad our pk was before, I can live with that.  Good to see everyone buying in.

[spook007]

34 minutes ago, hockeygod77 said:

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

Agree Motte is a prime PK'er... very good at it.

Thing is Motte has made a living out of blocking shots and do fantastic PK'ing... As I said earlier, I would be really concerned if Petey started to throw himself of shots as I don't believe he has the same technic as Motte to do so. If either goes down as a result of an injury sustained during PK, losing a well playing Petey would hurt the team more than Motte would, despite me being a huge Motte fan... If a new GM can find another 2-3 Motte types with a bit of beef (one a centre man) we could be in the money....provided we get a bit more the d-sorted as well.

[spook007]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

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.  

Hogs and Podz I fully expect eventually to both play PK and PP

[spook007]

43 minutes ago, The Lock said:

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.

Perfect comment actually...

Boudreau is doing anything to get them going again. And yes, you are only as good as your last game production wise....

[spook007]

16 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

I'm good with Elias on the PK because we need more centremen doing that work.  However, instead of Quinn and Brock, I'd rather see Conor and Nils doing some PK time.  They're both relentless on the puck/puck carrier, and are shifty enough to ensure the puck makes it to the other end.  

This.... 

Fully expect both to be part of our PK in the future..

[DefCon1]

4 hours ago, shiznak said:

I wouldn’t want two of our top guys (Hughes and Pettersson) who give up the most scoring chances against on our PK. 

They are way better than Dowling on PK. I never got why we always have the slowest guys on the PK when they are the ones usually hemmed in the D zone when they cant clear the puck 5 on 5.

[DefCon1]

5 minutes ago, spook007 said:

This.... 

Fully expect both to be part of our PK in the future..

Yeah I rather have those guys PK, will be like white on rice when opposition has the puck and they wont give them any space. Baumgartner usually puts the slowest D and forward on PK and tells them to stand still in the middle and block shots which always failed miserably. I like how the PK is much more aggressive, better gap control and making the opposition work hard just to enter our zone. With Baumgartner PK, everyone backed off to the D zone, allowing opposition very easy entry and our PK unit usually collapsed around Demko while not blocking any shots. This caused Demko to be screened for an easy goal.

[Strictly Bizness]

I think it's great having Petey and QH on the penalty kill.  It reminds me of the Canucks Vs Kings Playoff Series in 2010.  Kings were 9-16 on the powerplay and at one time had 6 straight powerplay goals.  The Canucks Penalty kill was a dismal 43.2%.  The Sedins asked Vigneault to be on the penalty kill.  That changed things around big time for the penalty kill and one of the factors in changing the series around.   Early in the Sedins tenure with the Canucks they also killed penalties.  People look to when the Sedins were under Tortorella and it not working.  However, by that point the Sedins had been in the league 13 years, they had lost a step, and there were many other things wrong with the Canucks.  As we all know doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is insanity.  This is refreshing and much needed.  As is changing the lines on the powerplay.

 

Article from 2010 regarding penalty kill:  Canucks can now put Kings on ropes - Sportsnet.ca

[DefCon1]

2 minutes ago, Strictly Bizness said:

I think it's great having Petey and QH on the penalty kill.  It reminds me of the Canucks Vs Kings Playoff Series in 2010.  Kings were 9-16 on the powerplay and at one time had 6 straight powerplay goals.  The Canucks Penalty kill was a dismal 43.2%.  The Sedins asked Vigneault to be on the penalty kill.  That changed things around big time for the penalty kill and one of the factors in changing the series around.   Early in the Sedins tenure with the Canucks they also killed penalties.  People look to when the Sedins were under Tortorella and it not working.  However, by that point the Sedins had been in the league 13 years, they had lost a step, and there were many other things wrong with the Canucks.  As we all know doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is insanity.  This is refreshing and much needed.  As is changing the lines on the powerplay.

 

Article from 2010 regarding penalty kill:  Canucks can now put Kings on ropes - Sportsnet.ca

That is what pissed me off about Baumgartner and Green, their stubborness to change when losing. Baumgartner made zero changes even when PK was worst in NHL history. I dont see them as good coaches since they cant make any changes or adjustments and stick to their plan til the very end.

[Ballisticsports.]

It is nothing to worry about or expect to stay

Bruce had individual meetings with players and asked what they would like to do more to contribute

His answer was if i put you in those positions and you don't succeed, do not come back to me

You can't be more fair than that

 

Not sure EP and Brock would ever block a shot (or you'd want them too) on the PK

Be disappointed if EP concentrated more on that and became a more expensive LE 2.0, than getting his offense back first

We will see how it goes, change can be good, keeping players engaged, happy and productive with opportunities is a good thing to have as well

[DefCon1]

5 minutes ago, ba;;isticsports said:

It is nothing to worry about or expect to stay

Bruce had individual meetings with players and asked what they would like to do more to contribute

His answer was if i put you in those positions and you don't succeed, do not come back to me

You can't be more fair than that

 

Not sure EP and Brock would ever block a shot (or you'd want them too) on the PK

Be disappointed if EP concentrated more on that and became a more expensive LE 2.0, than getting his offense back first

We will see how it goes, change can be good, keeping players engaged, happy and productive with opportunities is a good thing to have as well

I think Bruce will work on Petersson and Boeser shots by making them shoot 300 times a day after practice and just telling them to shoot more. I already notice Boeser in the first game shooting a bit more even when he doesnt have the angle. Petersson needs to stop hesitating and thinking and just shooting it. He was never hesitating when he played as a rookie and won the calder. His problem is 100% mental and that can be easily fixed, he just needs to stop hesitating on everything he does or at least stop thinking and play with his instinct.

[VegasCanuck]

6 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?

It's not about throwing himself in front of slap shots, it's about trying to play more possession and keep away and not be in a situation where someone has to throw himself in front of a slap shot.

 

Bure was a great penalty killer, he played high against their blueline and did a lot to neutralize their ability to move the puck. They were ALWAYS worried about his breakaway speed and ability to strip the puck; could close the gap with puck carrier, REALLY quickly.

 

Make it hard for teams to setup in our zone in the first place. 

[BPA]

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

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.

Of course focus on PK first.  But having that speed would be nice.  Having a slug on the PK guarantees no threat of giving up a short handed goal.

 

 

[Topcheeze86]

Well when the pk is that bad and your star players are highly competitive they probably know they can get the job done  

[Chickenspear]

1 hour ago, spook007 said:

Hogs and Podz I fully expect eventually to both play PK and PP

Podz had a PK shift last game as well, which was nice to see. 

[Hairy Kneel]

I just want all pk'ers to use old Sherwood lumber on the pk. So many bad stick breaks on our pk lately. 

Forget the 12 ounce micro fibre fancy shmancy sticks on the pk. Especially the defenseman. 

[Chickenspear]

3 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

I just want all pk'ers to use old Sherwood lumber on the pk. So many bad stick breaks on our pk lately. 

Forget the 12 ounce micro fibre fancy shmancy sticks on the pk. Especially the defenseman. 

The old lumber hurt a bit more too

[Coconuts]

I'm curious to see how they'll do on the PK, but I don't see them being mainstays. Maybe Hughes if he surprises, but I'm not expecting it. Realistically we should have more than 4-5 forwards chipping in on the PK, and having a D who doesn't play PK at all doesn't help. 

 

At the very least practicing PK gets the practicing defense, which absolutely can't hurt any of them at this point. 

 

 

[spook007]

1 hour ago, DefCon1 said:

Yeah I rather have those guys PK, will be like white on rice when opposition has the puck and they wont give them any space. Baumgartner usually puts the slowest D and forward on PK and tells them to stand still in the middle and block shots which always failed miserably. I like how the PK is much more aggressive, better gap control and making the opposition work hard just to enter our zone. With Baumgartner PK, everyone backed off to the D zone, allowing opposition very easy entry and our PK unit usually collapsed around Demko while not blocking any shots. This caused Demko to be screened for an easy goal.

Again agree 100%.

This was probably why most folks were complaining about Baumer... his unwillingness to change his way, and later Green, for not getting rid of Baumer, seeing that the system wasn't working.

[spook007]

1 hour ago, VegasCanuck said:

It's not about throwing himself in front of slap shots, it's about trying to play more possession and keep away and not be in a situation where someone has to throw himself in front of a slap shot.

 

Bure was a great penalty killer, he played high against their blueline and did a lot to neutralize their ability to move the puck. They were ALWAYS worried about his breakaway speed and ability to strip the puck; could close the gap with puck carrier, REALLY quickly.

 

Make it hard for teams to setup in our zone in the first place. 

Yes I get that Vegas, but on a PK there will be times, probably also lots of them, where they have to defend, and part of that is sacrifice...

I guess, we'll see soon enough.... Best part regardless is the change. Something had/has to change, so anything is better than nothing.