Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

2022 Training Camp Thread

Rate this topic


-Vintage Canuck-
 Share

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, stawns said:

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

I literally just told you.  BB's system is much more aggressive in the neutral zone.  TG is a collapse into the defensive zone.  You lost count how many times the Canucks easily gave up that blueline.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Petey Castiglione said:

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.  ;)

Yup, forecheck is identical.  It's AFTER the puck is lost in the offensive zone that the defensive structure completely changes between BB and TG. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Wanless said:

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. 

Yup, I agree.  Like I mentioned above, the forecheck game was pretty much identical.  It's after the forecheck is lost where the structure is completely different.  It's that difference that made the Canucks much more effective defensively under BB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HKSR said:

I literally just told you.  BB's system is much more aggressive in the neutral zone.  TG is a collapse into the defensive zone.  You lost count how many times the Canucks easily gave up that blueline.

Interesting how this is even a debate tbh. The team did a clear cut 180 for 5 months the second the coaching changed happened. Not sure how anyone can think the two coaches just use the same anything lol

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know Bo wears the C, but Miller is the captain of this team. He says the right things, he walks the walk, and he's humble enough to know he needs to be better.

 

I'm excited to see what the Canucks can do this year, they sound very determined. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stawns said:

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

Sorry I have to say something. 

TG lost the room because his system sucked and was amateur at best. 

I can't believe you would say they play the same system. He played a system fit for grinders and ppl void of speed and talent. 

The Canucks mainly had 1 fore checker while deployed under TG. They played a much laid back game. They retreated and gave up the blue line wayyy too easily. 

When BB came, he upped the forecheck pressure and stepped up at the blue line. 

On transition, TGs system was so predictable. The defence rings it around to Brock at the hash marks who is standing stationary while the centre button hooks and goes up the middle. Brock's only option is then to pass to this centre or an ill advised low percentage pass to the streaking RW Cross ice. Brock is stationary so he wouldnt be able to skate it out. Defence then clogs up our blue line and takes away Horvats lane. Howany times have we then seen the forward at the hash marks just bang it off the boards and out and give up puck possession... 

 

Total bush league amateur.... 

 

As for the pk, I remember a passive box under Green where we collapsed and did not pressure the puck. Instead we stayed in our box and gave the PP unit all sorts of time and they would make us pay not only with shots from the point but by completing cross seam passes through our passive box. 

BB said something interesting regarding the PK. He said in this league, if you give skilled guys on the PP time, they will make the plays and score so we need to increase the pressure and take away time and space. I mean a passive box should at least prevent seam passes but it didn't under Green because PP had way too much time. No adjustments were made and he kept doing the same thing over and over. Pretty sure the defence enjoys not being a human shield in front of the net anymore... 

LOL same system... Not even close 

Edited by CanucksJay
  • Like 1
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

I know Bo wears the C, but Miller is the captain of this team. He says the right things, he walks the walk, and he's humble enough to know he needs to be better.

 

I'm excited to see what the Canucks can do this year, they sound very determined. 

The great thing is either one of them could carry the 'C' and lead this team well. The fact that we have 2 qualified captains just makes our leadership group stronger.

Apparently they're good friends off the ice as well making it easier to support each other on the ice and set the example.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Mustard Tiger said:

Interesting how this is even a debate tbh. The team did a clear cut 180 for 5 months the second the coaching changed happened. Not sure how anyone can think the two coaches just use the same anything lol

It's Stawns we're talking about here... he'll argue debate anything and everything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BlakeQuinnAndEggs said:

OEL likes the back end.

 

I know these are cookie cutter answers but it sounds like the team has a lot more confidence in the defense than the fans and media. From the top down, management, coaching and the players have all touted the defense as being good enough.

I broke it down and compared defensive zone stats against the Avalanche and the only difference really is that the Canucks gave up 1.2 more scoring chance shots against with everything else being extremely comparable with the canucks coming out on top in a few catagories

 

While I fully support the d group this season where things could get out of control is if 2 top four dmen went down at the same time for an extended period of time

 

Hopefully having a deeper forward squad will translate into the Canucks not chasing the play as much, which is where injuries often come from

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...