Analytical Observations

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:



    Whichever one sang, "Sailing".

     

     



    That's just awful.  Awful, awful, awful.

     

    And now it is stuck in my head.

    Pure misery.

    I agree that creativity is severly lacking on this team.  Last night vs. the Panthers, I watched Nash a lot.  On one play, he was in the corner with (fill in bonehead playing D for Florida) on him.  He dished it to a close teammate, curled around the bonehead got the puck back and had a great chance.

    When was the last time you saw a Bruin curl and...do anything?



    In my head now as well. Stupid 70s music that takes me back to driving to the beach with my parents.  

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    Book, I completely agree with you that this team really looks one dimensional on offense; I said as much in the Seguin hockey-sense thread a while back and I remember you saying you we're thinking the same thing.

    I share your observation that's it's been made blatantly obvious by Jagr's addition what we were talking about. The guy understands how to to create space for himself in the offensive zone--how to pull defenders out of position through subtle movements and by just looking people off. Brad Marchand (and to some degree David Krejci and Patrice Bergeron) are the only other players on the Bruins roster that apparently have this ability. It's a huge problem, not just because so few bruins have this skill-set, but because they don't even seem to know how to play with someone who does.

    While Jagr is stickhandling and drawing defenders out of position, I don't see enough Bruins noticing this and making themselves available in dangerous areas that defenders have vacated. There isn't a sneaky player in the whole bunch. It's a waste of his talent to some degree because they are sitting there lead-footed waiting for lightning to strike. It's an infuriating brand of hockey to watch.

    These are the players I'm talking about:

    • Milan Lucic
    • Tyler Seguin
    • Rich Peverly
    • Chris Kelly
    • Nathan Horton
    • I'm excusing all the 4th liners because they are 4th liners. The defenders are also implicated on this, but it's less obvious because the opportunities to sneak up into the high slot are rare.

     

    That's most of the team!


    In my past years, I would have just called it coaching. I would have said Claude is responsible because he beats the creativity out of his players by his tyrannical emphasis on system. I would have pointed out that only Savard and Jagr we're allowed to experiment offensively and escaped the suffocating Claude indoctrination process that the rest have endured. But now, I think a fair amount of it is Peter Chiarelli's doing. I don't think your players change very much, and PC put this team together because he wanted a physical, responsible, 5v5 hockey team. It's a good strategy to win that way in the post-season, but it requires that your players are actually playing physical! By physical I don't meean by body checking necessarily, but by winning battles to loose pucks in the corners and wearing down the other team.

    In the last few weeks, the Bruins have looked inept because they are loafing, and unlike Alexander Semin who can loaf all day and still make you pay, there are several characters on the Bruins that do not have the hands, the vision, the hockey sense, or the goal scoring ability to be effective at 75% effort.

    It's possible that we will see them look different in the post-season... the stakes of the playoffs are a better motivator than any impotent Claude-benching tactic or locker-room speech. But if the Bruins are one-and-done and look as inept as they were in last years playoffs, I'm looking at PC not to put all his eggs in one basket again stocking the team with big-bodied clones, and acquire some skill with the puck.

    that means spooner should be centering the 3rd line, not kelly. Jagr should be resigned, Horton let go, and aquire someone... anyone with some damn hockey sense.

     

    With all that being said. Im fully expecting to see the bruins back to their physical ways again in the post-season. We'll just have to hope it once again covers up how one-dimensional this team is on offense.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from bostonfan191646. Show bostonfan191646's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    to all of those scoffing at me suggesting a transition 2 on 2 is no place for a criss cross, find me a video of this working. and by working i mean doing what the poster said the intent was, getting both defenders to cover one player, leaving one wide open. It never ever happens. A cut back to create space doesn't count. a criss cross to create a drop pass doesn't count, a criss cross on a three on two doesn't count (that's common place, trying to make a d man decide between two guys in one lane is easy, getting them to leave their lane to fill an occupied one is near impossible)

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to bostonfan191646's comment:

     

    to all of those scoffing at me suggesting a transition 2 on 2 is no place for a criss cross, find me a video of this working. and by working i mean doing what the poster said the intent was, getting both defenders to cover one player, leaving one wide open. It never ever happens. A cut back to create space doesn't count. a criss cross to create a drop pass doesn't count, a criss cross on a three on two doesn't count (that's common place, trying to make a d man decide between two guys in one lane is easy, getting them to leave their lane to fill an occupied one is near impossible)

     



    Sidney Crosby does it all the time. Mostly, you start on the outside and cut towards the middle (like you're trying to split the d). When you move into that space, you're hoping the d-man on the strong side comes with you and your partner then moves in behind. It's pretty common tactic.. but it's more of a principle. It's how you can use your body to create space for another player on the ice.

    lots of times you don't see it because a true 2 on 2 just isn't that common; the puck carrier is naturally looking for a trailer and if he's anywhere close, lots of times the forward leading th eplay will go hard to the net just to create space in the slot.

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from RichHillOntario. Show RichHillOntario's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    With the astute perceptions in this thread of the Bruins playing a linear pedestrian-style game right now I'd imagine the flip side is it might be more readily manageable for the other team to counter-strategize.  Presently I see a certain level of motion inconsistent in their game. 

    I think back to those blowout wins vs the Canucks in Boston in 2011 with primarily this same group of players when the Bruins were constantly advancing in their attack of Vancouver.  They played like frothing-at-the-mouth mad dogs pressuring them, hurrying them and the puck at almost every interval.  That element of the Bruin game has been largely erratic so far this year sometimes within the same game.  I'd like to see a return to this louder style of Bruin play asap.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from RichHillOntario. Show RichHillOntario's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:

    Secondly why would you criss cross on a two on two?

     

    Wow !



    Oh yes it can be stated, only on BDC.

     

     

    "Everybody, JUMP JUMP! Mack Daddy will make yah..."

    I'm gonna put my pants on backwards now.



    And your sports team jacket and jersey!

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from bostonfan191646. Show bostonfan191646's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to Olsonic's comment:

    In response to bostonfan191646's comment:

     

    to all of those scoffing at me suggesting a transition 2 on 2 is no place for a criss cross, find me a video of this working. and by working i mean doing what the poster said the intent was, getting both defenders to cover one player, leaving one wide open. It never ever happens. A cut back to create space doesn't count. a criss cross to create a drop pass doesn't count, a criss cross on a three on two doesn't count (that's common place, trying to make a d man decide between two guys in one lane is easy, getting them to leave their lane to fill an occupied one is near impossible)

     



    Sidney Crosby does it all the time. Mostly, you start on the outside and cut towards the middle (like you're trying to split the d). When you move into that space, you're hoping the d-man on the strong side comes with you and your partner then moves in behind. It's pretty common tactic.. but it's more of a principle. It's how you can use your body to create space for another player on the ice.

    lots of times you don't see it because a true 2 on 2 just isn't that common; the puck carrier is naturally looking for a trailer and if he's anywhere close, lots of times the forward leading th eplay will go hard to the net just to create space in the slot.

     



    sure. that's fine, and that does happen. it is rare because it can only happen if there is virtually no back check. however the intent is never to get both the defenders to go to one guy. the objective is to screw up their gap control, generate speed while the defenders are flat footed, and to create time and space for screened shots. not to have two d men lose their mind, stop communicating, forget they've ever played hockey and just skate towards the puck. 

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to bostonfan191646's comment:


    sure. that's fine, and that does happen. it is rare because it can only happen if there is virtually no back check. however the intent is never to get both the defenders to go to one guy. the objective is to screw up their gap control, generate speed while the defenders are flat footed, and to create time and space for screened shots. not to have two d men lose their mind, stop communicating, forget they've ever played hockey and just skate towards the puck. 

     



    Ever seen Mike Green play?  Do you remember Matt Hunwick?  Have you ever watched a Florida Panthers game when Gudbranson and Kulikov aren't on the ice?  Ever seen Boychuk or McQuaid out of position?

    Plenty of d-men do this. It's not that they've lost their minds, but that they make mistakes.  NHL defensemen are better than AHL defensemen (for the most part), but they are not perfect. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to islamorada's comment:

    Well Book, I will say this, the analysis is correct except Jagr is a load on skates, so when he goes east and west the ice tilts.  Seguin and Marchand are not the same type.  Though I sincerely dislike giving Fletch any thought of being correct, he is correct as well.  My only analytical response to his stance on meaningless games is when do the Bs start playing as a functioning team again?  Your analysis then takes precedent.  Back in the day the last ten games were the tune up for the playoffs.  I guess with the 48 game schedule it is rest by committee.  Oddly enough I am not worried about the other teams Boston plays, I am worried about how Boston plays ie. Shades of Washington circa 2012.  So excellent analysis, let us hope Fletch is correct. 



    Giving Fletcher credit for being right is is about the equivalent of giving Mao credit as the Humanitarian of the Year. An outrageous lack of judgment on the part of the Isla.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to islamorada's comment:

     

    Well Book, I will say this, the analysis is correct except Jagr is a load on skates, so when he goes east and west the ice tilts.  Seguin and Marchand are not the same type.  Though I sincerely dislike giving Fletch any thought of being correct, he is correct as well.  My only analytical response to his stance on meaningless games is when do the Bs start playing as a functioning team again?  Your analysis then takes precedent.  Back in the day the last ten games were the tune up for the playoffs.  I guess with the 48 game schedule it is rest by committee.  Oddly enough I am not worried about the other teams Boston plays, I am worried about how Boston plays ie. Shades of Washington circa 2012.  So excellent analysis, let us hope Fletch is correct. 

     



    Giving Fletcher credit for being right is is about the equivalent of giving Mao credit as the Humanitarian of the Year. An outrageous lack of judgment on the part of the Isla.

     



    How dare the both of you??

    Expect a witty response in the coming weeks that will paint you in an unfavorable manner...

    But again, the Bruins waking from their slump in the playoffs is less a prediction and more a note of personal hope.  I could see it happening.  I could also see it not happening.

    NAS, remember that Mao was nominated for the Masterton Award by the Pittsburgh writers...

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    I'm waiting for NAS's apology because his conscience is bothering him.  But then, according to Fletch, I am a moron.

    The other part of my original post that I didn't get to was trying to connect the straight-line rushes to the number of logos the Bruins have beaten the crap out of this month and a half.  Seems to me that a lot of these plays are tailor made to make the goalie look good.  If the puck-carrier shoots on the rush, with no east-west in his approach, he has a square goaltender to beat.  If he makes the pass across, the goalie is anticipating that pass enough that he has a better than average chance to move across unless the play is perfect.  If the puck-carrier moves east west, the goalie has to track; the guy off the puck can cross and create  a screen, take a pass fed through the defense, or change the passing lanes and hopefully make for an easier pass.

    Bostonfan - Marchand is one of the few who will stop up as often as he attacks the net, but it seems like he is far more often the off-man.  On the cross, a lot depends on how the D play it.  If they switch, you have a window for passes.  If they stick to the man, and the off-man is in front of the puck, there's a wake for the puck-carrier to then curl to the net among other options.  Lots of things happen when the puck-carrier takes the puck to the middle and the other guy reads off of him to cross diagonally, step in front and go to the net, or cross behind for the pass.  Surprising, too, how often this frustrates back pressure because the forward working hard to get back whip-cracks past the puck-carrier.

    As for the last time I saw a Bruin player other than Jagr curl a la Nash - Marchand did it to set up Bergeron vs. Philly.  Worked the puck past the D off the wall and curled in toward the net to make a two foot pass to Bergeron at the top of the paint.  Toe save Mason.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to shuperman's comment:

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

     

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:



    Whichever one sang, "Sailing".

    That's just awful.  Awful, awful, awful.

    And now it is stuck in my head.

    Pure misery.



    It's crazy, but it's true.

    At least you'd have to work hard to fit Lady in Red on a hockey foru...waitaminnit. 

     

    You will now hear Criss Cross every time red posts.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    Are NAS and I the only ones left around here who just like sitting down with a beer and watching a Bruins game? Half of you sound like you're going to slit your wrists after every loss. Perspective please.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to red75's comment:

    Are NAS and I the only ones left around here who just like sitting down with a beer and watching a Bruins game? Half of you sound like you're going to slit your wrists after every loss. Perspective please.



    You have beers with nas and watch the bruins games.  Why was i not invited.  

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to shuperman's comment:



    You have beers with nas and watch the bruins games.  Why was i not invited.  

     



    Look at your avatar. You're a skating clown. Why do you think NAS wouldn't invite you for a beer? Kinda self evident.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to red75's comment:

    In response to shuperman's comment:



    You have beers with nas and watch the bruins games.  Why was i not invited.  

     

     

     



    Look at your avatar. You're a skating clown. Why do you think NAS wouldn't invite you for a beer? Kinda self evident.

     



    You could invite though.  Just to make nas jealous.  

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to shuperman's comment:


    You could invite though.  Just to make nas jealous.  

     




    NAS buys - I don't want to tick him off. I never put in jeopardy the guarantee of free beer.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to red75's comment:

    In response to shuperman's comment:

     


    You could invite though.  Just to make nas jealous.  

     

     




    NAS buys - I don't want to tick him off. I never put in jeopardy the guarantee of free beer.

     



    Haha. Fair enough.  

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    I knew you'd understand. You're a drunk like me. ;)

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to red75's comment:



    NAS buys.

     



    Now I know you're lying.  Next you'll be telling me the two of you went to the Women's Worlds.

    Incidentally, what are you, the Candyman? I mention your name and bam! next post.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    ".....I do not see them having any fun or enjoyment from playing the game."  - 'Orrthebest'

     

    There it is.

     

    Contrary to what Claude Julien would have everyone believe; it ain't rocket science.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    1.  Shupe, you'll always be invited...unless I'm drinking with a chick who likes chicks, just in case enough booze will allow her (and her) to switch hit for the night.

    2.  Book, the Candyman statement cracked me right up.

    3.  Lady in Red...it's getting worse and worse here.

    4.  I'm a teetotaler, but would buy my friends here a beer without thinking twice.

    5.  Fire Julien, nite is off his rocker, ignore half the people, think twice about responding to people with under 100 posts, war sucks, never do your own laundry when a woman lives with you, Slap Shot 2 never should have been considered let alone made, gas prices are stupid, coffee is God's way of showing that he loves you ever day, NHL '13 is way more fun on rookie, insurance rates are too high, hunting to eat is okay but hunting for sport is not (fishing not included), and finally, without Shupe, Kel, Book, Chowda, Nite, Isla, San, Dez, Red, RHO, JMW, Bhab, BSL, 50below and a few others, this place wouldn't be nearly as fun, interesting, or knowledgable as it is.  (And don't be all bent out of shape if I didn't mention you there.  It was done quickly with my coffee cup half full.  If you think I should have included you, you're right.  Feel free to quote this very message and insert your name where Book's name is.  That was just a charity inclusion anyway.)

    6.  The season has been short and it's been full of a lot of ups and downs, but the boys are playoff bound again.  First round exit or Cup, all that's left is the watchin'.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    1.  Shupe, you'll always be invited...unless I'm drinking with a chick who likes chicks, just in case enough booze will allow her (and her) to switch hit for the night.

    2.  Book, the Candyman statement cracked me right up.

    3.  Lady in Red...it's getting worse and worse here.

    4.  I'm a teetotaler, but would buy my friends here a beer without thinking twice.

    5.  Fire Julien, nite is off his rocker, ignore half the people, think twice about responding to people with under 100 posts, war sucks, never do your own laundry when a woman lives with you, Slap Shot 2 never should have been considered let alone made, gas prices are stupid, coffee is God's way of showing that he loves you ever day, NHL '13 is way more fun on rookie, insurance rates are too high, hunting to eat is okay but hunting for sport is not (fishing not included), and finally, without Shupe, Kel, Book, Chowda, Nite, Isla, San, Dez, Red, RHO, JMW, Bhab, BSL, 50below and a few others, this place wouldn't be nearly as fun, interesting, or knowledgable as it is.  (And don't be all bent out of shape if I didn't mention you there.  It was done quickly with my coffee cup half full.  If you think I should have included you, you're right.  Feel free to quote this very message and insert your name where Book's name is.  That was just a charity inclusion anyway.)

    6.  The season has been short and it's been full of a lot of ups and downs, but the boys are playoff bound again.  First round exit or Cup, all that's left is the watchin'.



    You forgot RWTK for starters.  

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    Book, you're a genius.

    red, I wouldn't go to the movies with him if I were you.

    I think everyone is going to be be drinking next week to deal with the playoff anxitey.  I am planning to enjoy both the drinking and the playoff hockey and I invite everyone here to set aside your "loser-phobias" and join me.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Analytical Observations

    In response to red75's comment:

    Are NAS and I the only ones left around here who just like sitting down with a beer and watching a Bruins game? Half of you sound like you're going to slit your wrists after every loss. Perspective please. to pee?




     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share