2022 Training Camp Thread

[JM_]

7 minutes ago, stawns said:

Yup, pretty much the same as BB

BB had the guys shooting more high danger chances, completely changed the PK, and playing more aggressively. Thats about as much as you could expect with a mid-season change. 

 

[stawns]

32 minutes ago, JM_ said:

how do you figure that?

In the ozone both coaches use a 2-1-2 press that emphasizes a hard forecheck to create turnovers and once they possession they like to move the puck around the perimeter with a "hinge" player for puck support.

 

Defensively both coaches employ a collapse system to clog up the slot and prevent shots from getting through.

 

On the PP,  both coaches use an umbrella formation with the ppqb at the top, a fwd at the halfwall on both sides, a fwd in the corner and a trigger man that follows the puck.  Both coaches also use the "drop" in the nzone on the pp breakout

 

On the pk, both coaches use the diamond with one player up high, two on the sides and one down low.

 

Obviously there's variations and differences, but their systems are the same at the core and their philosophy is pretty much the same as well.  The problem with TG last season was ex caution, not systemic

[JM_]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

In the ozone both coaches use a 2-1-2 press that emphasizes a hard forecheck to create turnovers and once they possession they like to move the puck around the perimeter with a "hinge" player for puck support.

 

Defensively both coaches employ a collapse system to clog up the slot and prevent shots from getting through.

 

On the PP,  both coaches use an umbrella formation with the ppqb at the top, a fwd at the halfwall on both sides, a fwd in the corner and a trigger man that follows the puck.  Both coaches also use the "drop" in the nzone on the pp breakout

 

On the pk, both coaches use the diamond with one player up high, two on the sides and one down low.

 

Obviously there's variations and differences, but their systems are the same at the core and their philosophy is pretty much the same as well.  The problem with TG last season was ex caution, not systemic

you could say this for 1/2 the league tho. 

 

It is the small variations and differences that changed how the team went from a passive, easy to beat team to the one we saw under Bruce executing far better. 

 

This is a pretty good review of the changes: https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/how-much-have-the-canucks-actually-improved-under-bruce-boudreau-4926557

 

 

[stawns]

28 minutes ago, JM_ said:

you could say this for 1/2 the league tho. 

 

It is the small variations and differences that changed how the team went from a passive, easy to beat team to the one we saw under Bruce executing far better. 

 

This is a pretty good review of the changes: https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/how-much-have-the-canucks-actually-improved-under-bruce-boudreau-4926557

 

 

agreed, the league has become homogenized, imo

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, stawns said:

agreed, the league has become homogenized, imo

I just keep coming back to that PK. How could it have been that bad? 

 

Camp should be really interesting this year, I do wonder what other tweaks BB and co want to try. If its the same and just better execution, thats fine too. 

 

[Gawdzukes]

17 hours ago, Angry Goose said:

honestly not a bad legacy 

For sure,

 

I mean it could of been, @Apricot do we really need her?

 

And the answer is, Yes, yes we do! 

[Mustard Tiger]

1 hour ago, stawns said:

Considering BB uses the same systems, I doubt that's the issue.  He just lost the room

We clearly watch two different teams.

[stawns]

56 minutes ago, JM_ said:

BB had the guys shooting more high danger chances, completely changed the PK, and playing more aggressively. Thats about as much as you could expect with a mid-season change. 

 

again, that's execution, not systemic.  TG lost the room, no one is arguing that

[HKSR]

56 minutes ago, stawns said:

In the ozone both coaches use a 2-1-2 press that emphasizes a hard forecheck to create turnovers and once they possession they like to move the puck around the perimeter with a "hinge" player for puck support.

 

Defensively both coaches employ a collapse system to clog up the slot and prevent shots from getting through.

 

On the PP,  both coaches use an umbrella formation with the ppqb at the top, a fwd at the halfwall on both sides, a fwd in the corner and a trigger man that follows the puck.  Both coaches also use the "drop" in the nzone on the pp breakout

 

On the pk, both coaches use the diamond with one player up high, two on the sides and one down low.

 

Obviously there's variations and differences, but their systems are the same at the core and their philosophy is pretty much the same as well.  The problem with TG last season was ex caution, not systemic

Lol, what a load of crap.  BB literally said defence starts at the opposition blueline.  You can see it deployed with a MUCH more aggressive hold in the neutral zone vs TG's attempt to hold at the Canucks blueline.  Completely different approaches

[nuck-lifer]

9 minutes ago, JM_ said:

I just keep coming back to that PK. How could it have been that bad? 

 

Camp should be really interesting this year, I do wonder what other tweaks BB and co want to try. If its the same and just better execution, thats fine too. 

 

They were absolutely fragile at the end of Greens time. Afraid to lose, afraid to take a penalty, afraid to be scored on, afraid of the media. Who didn't think OMG another penalty , another goal against, another loss.

BB was the perfect antidote for a spiraling team, and hopefully he can bring in more structure this year to push those pucks out of the D zone quicker than last year. 

[-Vintage Canuck-]

 

[stawns]

4 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Lol, what a load of crap.  BB literally said defence starts at the opposition blueline.  You can see it deployed with a MUCH more aggressive hold in the neutral zone vs TG's attempt to hold at the Canucks blueline.  Completely different approaches

can you explain how, using examples from TG's systems as well?

[Petey Castiglione]

58 minutes ago, JM_ said:

you could say this for 1/2 the league tho. 

 

It is the small variations and differences that changed how the team went from a passive, easy to beat team to the one we saw under Bruce executing far better. 

 

This is a pretty good review of the changes: https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/how-much-have-the-canucks-actually-improved-under-bruce-boudreau-4926557

 

 

Thanks for this, Jim.  Was always curious about systems and how they are deployed/executed.  Other than EA NHL, haven't had much to dabble in, systems wise.

[Chickenspear]

1 hour ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Green had a system?

Undoubtedly:

[Petey Castiglione]

6 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Lol, what a load of crap.  BB literally said defence starts at the opposition blueline.  You can see it deployed with a MUCH more aggressive hold in the neutral zone vs TG's attempt to hold at the Canucks blueline.  Completely different approaches

Hey, to be fair, if you read the article _JM posted it says that BB and TG employ the same forecheck when the puck is below the goal line. ie. 2-1-2. When the puck is past the goal line they revert to a 1-2-2.  You are correct in saying they are much more aggressive at our blue line/neutral zone which is where the difference really lies.  So in essence, you are both correct.  

[Mustard Tiger]

Hopefully they find a new home for Mike. Poor kid gets shafted for years now. I don't think he will amount to anything but damn just give him to a team who has room for opportunity 

[Wanless]

9 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Lol, what a load of crap.  BB literally said defence starts at the opposition blueline.  You can see it deployed with a MUCH more aggressive hold in the neutral zone vs TG's attempt to hold at the Canucks blueline.  Completely different approaches

For the most part the style of the systems were the same.

 

but there were definitely some key differences like you point out here with when the system changes from offensive to defensive or how under BB in the defensive zone the collapse wasnt as tight as with Green and the defenders were thus able to be more aggressive towards the puck carrier.

 

I think the biggest difference is BB has allowed the players the freedom to make mistakes and in turn has created a more respectful environment both ways. 

[-Vintage Canuck-]

 

[Gawdzukes]

17 hours ago, lmm said:

the thing I find interesting about moving Hughes over to the right is, that last season there was much talk about Myers being too offensive causing OEL to play too much defense

that what is needed is a defensive player to play with Hughes, and a defensive player to play with OEL to allow OEL freedom to get back to offense

While playing Hughes and OEL together give them both a high minute guy to play with,

it still doesn't free OEL up to roam

and I really don't see a viable 3-4 pairing

 

time will tell I guess 

Yeah, we could be dead in the water with our second pairing if QH is #1Rd. Imagining Myers without OEL makes me shudder.

 

9 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Yea Greens nonchalant attitude got really played. 
 

It’s like you can act that way if you have a track record of success and know that you can push the right buttons when the time comes. He did not and didn’t know how to get his team going consistently. 
 

Probably what bugged me the most about him. He had an arrogance of a much more accomplished coach. A little humility could have gone a long ways with him.
 

Unfortunately bad starts weren't unique to Green as that problem persisted right up to the end of the year with BB as well. Green is arrogant as hell though, part of the reason I hated him when he played in Toronto, also because he played in Toronto.  He's smug as a bug and has no clue how over-rated he was as a player either.

 

You can say what you want about him but he did have that untapped passion for coaching much like BB, if I recall how they got into it. Both students of the game who had never really originally planned on coaching, but showed an aptitude for the finer points of the game by the time they finished. I know we all hate him here but honestly I think you're right, he should have been an assistant first, and he still has decent potential as a coach in the right situation. Hate him or really hate him he's long gone now, thankfully.

 

16 minutes ago, JM_ said:

I just keep coming back to that PK. How could it have been that bad? 

 

Camp should be really interesting this year, I do wonder what other tweaks BB and co want to try. If its the same and just better execution, thats fine too. 

 

For me it comes back to Benning. Got rid of Beagle, Roussel, Player Ericksson. Then he lost Sutter, and replaced with Lammikko, and Dickinson, who were pretty horrible. Also lost Edler, and Tanev, and only got OEL. I think any coach would have struggled until they finally found a partial solution, like BB did. At the end of the year we were still 3rd last, 74.89%. I think the Mikeyhev signing is evidence that we were simply missing the right personnel.

[-Vintage Canuck-]